correct me if I'm wrong, but none of the 9/11 bombers were in the country illegally, and would therefore have been granted ID cards. They'd have happily been accepted through airport security with those same ID cards. I'd be susprised if/when we find out who carried out the bombings in London if they were in London illegally, and if not then they'd have had ID cards too, and of course those same ID cards wouldn't have prevented them boarding the underground or the buses. In short, ID cards would have done nothing to prevent either attack. ID cards only deter those trying to pretend to be someone they are not, which in the case of suicide bombers would be a pointless exercise.
try being arab in the US now and going to the airport, totally different story than it was 5 years ago. Anyone who goes to flight school now and only wants to know how to turn it around is going on someone's watch list immediately. But yeah, as far as mass transit goes there's nothing stopping anyone from getting on there and blowing it up and to just not allow arabs into a country is just wrong
I was truely proud of England when I saw an immediate discussion on the BBC about ID cards following the attacks and most people sticking to their opinions that they are wrong and unnecessary, emphasising the fact that they would not have stopped the attacks (i.e. Spain currently has similar ID cards) and hence the attacks cannot be used as an excuse to introduce them. On a side note, unfortunately a similar thing did not happen in the US and the US PATRIOT Act was pushed through. I would point out that there are differences.
Give me the damn chip, with the personal info as well as bank and credit card charging ability. Would be nice to get rid of the wallet so my nice hinny would show . On a trolling note: Republicans would never want a national id card, they might have to actually hire a legal person at a decent wage to clean their house and do their landscaping and taxes would have to be raised to pay for such a system.
I haven't really checked into what biometric data will be stored and how it'll be recorded and used but I imagine that there will be iris, fingerprint and facial recognition data stored in an encrypted form which can be read by equipment in police stations and, possibly, in police cars although I'm not sure about that last bit. Even if a thief steals an ID card they wouldn't be able to change their face, fingerprint and iris data so, if they are stopped for whatever reason, the police would still be able to check who they are and thus what criminal record, etc. they may have. My daughter has just spent almost 3 months trying to open a bank account in the UK because she moved from one address staying at a friend's house to live with her current boyfriend in another part of the country. This is because of identity theft that is becoming more and more prevalent over here. ID cards would make that sort of thing very difficult.
Well, that was really my point about being able to challenge at least some of the data held. Like I said, I believe they've actually got a lot of this data anyway. I'd like the chance to say, 'Hey, that's wrong'.
Almost by definition the system requires some level of enforcement but, strictly speaking, that's only the same sort of thing as your national insurance number for paying taxes and receiving benefit. ... or corrupted. That's a justifiable concern but, like I've already said, I believe they've got a lot of the data anyway... and some of it's probably wrong. You're absolutely correct in saying that certain patterns of behaviour will be viewed as suspicious but I'm bound to say that the police and security services will be more inclined to view a Muslim who has lived in an area with a high preponderance of radical Islamic Mosques getting flying lessons and moving around with a number of other, unnatached Muslim men than whether you by a couple of bottles of Jack Daniels. In any event I don't think anyone's envisaging the data being released to commercial organisations unless it's under strict conditions and for specific purposes. You're right... the data is the important bit. The card is is simply the way for the data to be used more effectively.
I'm not entirely sure but I think you'll find that the Spanish ID card is very similiar to our driving license. It's not really comparable.
I don't think ID cards on their own will prevent anything. I think what they do achieve, (and I realise this argument cuts both ways), is to make surveillance of large numbers of people easier. To be frank I think most people are living in a bit of a fools paradise, thinking they're going about their lives without any checks or anyone keeping tabs on them and I very much doubt thats true. However, there's something else that has to be said and it's this. Why is it OK for Tescos, Sainsburys, British Gas, Barclays Bank, etc. etc. to know what I eat, drink, the magazines I read, how much I spend of my monthly budget on phone calls, etc. etc. but the government mustn't know anything about me. I mean, even if that were true... which it isn't - I think that most of the large data organisations also provide information to the government either deliberately or unwittingly. The point is, though, why should one be OK and not the other. It can be said, and it will be said, that one's interest is mendacious and controlling whereas the other is simply commercial but, to me, that reflects the same argument that we've had in the UK concerning petrol prices. If the government wants to put up the oil price escalator, (tax), that's bad and illicits huge protests from the RHA which are generally supported by the populus, but if the oil companies put the price of petrol up, 'Oh, that's the free market'.. 'Nothing to be done about it'... etc. etc. Well excuse me but one goes to the oil companies profit margin, (mostly foreign), whilst the other goes, at least partly, to pay for schools, hospitals, pensions, etc. Frankly I think there's a fair deal of muddled thinking here. It's also my view that most large commercial organisations are AT LEAST as mendacious as any probable British government and the important point is, I can't vote them out of office, can I.
They had that iris scan thing in minority report which i thought was really cool. Of course that was just a movie but even then they had criminals who would take peoples eyes and replace them with your own. But still I think it'd be a long time before they were able to do that for everyone but if they really had one of those thing in every store, bus, and train station stuff like what happened the other day could be prevented.
Yeah I figured you wouldn't, I wouldn't tell you mine either. So if someone wanted it for whatever reason and you wouldn't tell them they'd have to steal the number. Same with a credit card number Im assuming you wouldn't tell me either, I'd have to steal the number and then i could buy whatever I wanted and you'd still be paying for it. It's not like anyone cares about stealing your name or anything they'd want to steal stuff like your credit card and social security number.
Why the ruckus? You already carry a drivers license, so what's the big deal about another ID Card? You think the government can't find all that info on their own, anyway? Try not paying your taxes and find out what the gov't can find, and in a hurry. And the 9/11 attackers came here legally, yes, but their student visas were long expired when they carried out the attack. A national ID would help keep a little tighter rein on those who came here legally but have overstayed their welcome. We also need to bulid a 20 foot high concrete fence between the US and Mexico, but that's for another thread...
What he said. People already are getting themselves into crazy debt by carring five billion different credit cards with them, what's one extra card gonna do? Break the wallet?
Well, I don't carry a drivers' licence either - don't even know where mine is, to be honest. I carry a passport when - you know, when I need it. Other than that, why do I need an ID card? For a start, this card wouldn't be compulsory according to the current spiel - so why have one? "Can I see your ID card, Sir? - No, I don't have one. - Oh, OK, well can I see some other form of ID? - Yes officer, here's a credit card and here's my swipe card from work and here's my membership card for the Picton Library, will that do? - Yes son, it will. - Oh good - hey, I've just thought of a great way we could have saved £5bn worth of taxpayers money!" Another reason this scheme annoys me is because it so obviously falls into the "doing something to be seen doing something" field of policy making. And I've little or no patience for that at the best of times, but when the idea comes wrapped in a whole bundle of cost, liberty and pointlessness issues as well, I just have to give it a fat one of these: . It's just another instance of Blair and his pals doing something noisy for the benefit of Daily Mail readers.
I'm not having an ID card, f*** Mr Blair, and that they have the balls to suggest we pay for this **********e is the ultimate insult to our intelligence The only thing that will stop this is the spiralling costs, which will hopefully eventually make the scheme hopelessly unworkable. Naturally Mr Bliar will have spent a couple of hundred million quid to get to that point, but that's the usual way with these crack pot ideas. I would urge anyone with any sense to apply for a 10 year passport this year, that way the government won't be able to make you buy an ID card/passport the next time you want to go on holiday.
Obviously, we should be worried about the enormous erosion of privacy rights in the computer/internet age. In principle, I don't have a problem with a corporation or the government having information if it's used for a very narrow purpose and the information is never distributed to others, but that's rarely the case. It's a great time to be a hitman or a future Adolf Hitler.
That's a completely false assumption - and one that you can bet your arse will be trotted out by the government in defence of this scheme. Think about it. Identify fraud is not done with your fingerprints, your iris scan or your DNA, it's done with the credit card details you used to buy a book online or the gas bill you left in the bin outside your house. And the fact that under this scheme you will have a card with your DNA or a picture of your eye on it will not change that - for one simple reason: internet commerce relies on zero-barrier interaction. Which is an industry buzz-term for "easy and quick". How are Amazon (bad example because of peerless data security but you see my point) going to use ID cards to prevent identity theft based on financial details you commit to the ether? So forget that. The risk/profit and therefore the frequency of Identity theft is not going to be in any way, shape or form hampered by ID cards. Which leaves only the other reasons: fighting terrorism (roll them eyes), immigration (yawn) and, erm .... well, and nothing.
This scheme is just another "big brother" style march towards a one world government where we are watched all the time, and our freedomes are taken piece by piece YOU HAVE ALL BEEN WARNED
Aren't you pretty much watched all the time in London as it is? There's a camera every 20 feet, or so I've been told. And, did you just finish reading The Turner Diaries, Mr. McVeigh, or what?
Does your membership card for the Picton library carry iris and facial recognition data which can be transmitted to a central database by a policeman? As I've already mentioned the most important part of this would be the data itself. If you're stopped by the police you may say you haven't got a card or any form of identification but... you still look like you, don't you! Bluntly, the card is almost irelevant.It probably just makes it easier for people who are stopped by the police for whatever reason to carry on with less inconvenience.
Obviously banks and other financial institutions would have to have access to some of the data such as your accurate name and address. The statement that identity theft is not presently done with fingerprints, iris and facial recognition data is simply the position at the moment so that's, like, the whole point. The way I would imagine it would be structured would be something like this. 1. Your details are kept centrally. 2. It would up to you to inform the database if you move or any of the other details change in a secure form. This may mean having to go into some form of secure data centre. Note, you may not HAVE to but, if you don't and someone steals your identity, tough sh!t. However, this information could also used by banks and other financial institutions. See 4. below. 3. Police and other security organisations would have to have some form of confirming people's identity. For the bobby on the beat this could be something as simple as a combined radio/camera/card reader to capture and transmit in an encrypted form the picture of someone's face. If they've got an ID card, great, otherwise use the camera. 4. Banks and other financial institutions would have to be allowed to read some of this stuff such as the accurate name and address data and some of the biometrics, not for transactions but for opening accounts, etc. Thinking about they could probably also do the change of address stuff but maybe that's moving too far ahead. Just as a matter of interest have a look at the source I used when I was hiring out PC's. https://www.econsumer.equifax.co.uk/consumer/uk/sitepage.ehtml?forward=gb_products Any UK resident can get their credit status there. You can sign up for it, get your credit history data and then tell them to cancel the agreement. It doesn't cost a penny. Bear in mind that this is just the cut-down version of what's available to the major retailers. Also bear in mind that ALL that information, and a lot more, is presently available to any of the security services. Note... no investigation... no snooping... nothing.
Not quite but... http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery...s+surveillance&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&sbid=lc02a 'Amongst the western democracies, the United Kingdom is perhaps the country subject to the most surveillance' Sort of nice to know we're best at something I s'pose. Also... http://www.answers.com/topic/city-of-london-s-ring-of-steel