|
This appears to be the dilema: identity theft vs. potential for being targeted for persecution by identity. The claim is that identity theft is real, whereas potential persecution is not. The choice boils down to deciding which matters more.
How to decide?
Which I choose (from previous posts) is obvious. It is best expressed by a paraphrase from a man wiser than me: "Those who trade an increase in their security for their freedom will reap neither."
Earlier, I pointed out that Hilter's government rounded up all the guns, which was possible because they had the data of who owned guns. The rebuttal is that the people wanted their government killing their neighbors, so they did not need guns to defend themselves. That is not an acurate perception of the whole picture. It is true that in the beginning, people were pro-persecution, pro-security, anti-freedom. But as time went on, and the impact of one out of four germans dead changed peoples' minds. But what to do? How do you fight, after you have given up your ability to fight? Those who protested, ended up in the same place as the persecuted.
I think the problem of identity theft can be solved without adopting a national ID system. Local ID's, if checked, could be sufficient. That's the real problem causing identity theft: lack of bothering to check ID.
|