5/8: Robert Blake's Wife/Calif DMV

[Degrees]

I don't know if I can give you a logical reason a national ID system is dangerous; but I can point to historical fact. And the fact is: when the going got tough, people got weird. So weirded out by what was going on, they even listened to crazed leaders who declared that the solution to everybody's ills was to persecute the scapegoat of the day. That the Germany demanded that all guns be registered is a historical fact (1929 Berlin). That those guns be (voluntarily) relinquished to the government is a historical fact (1934). That a per house search (based on the public records of registered gun owners) confiscating all guns was executed by the German military is a fact (1939).

And in 1942, said the soldier to the Jew: "What are you going to do? bleed on me?"

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Should I start to elaborate on the trends in persecution here in the USA? Tobacco? Motorcyclists? Internet forum hate-mongers? ;-)

"Nazism - phoooey." Sounds like an emotional argument to me (the emotion of 'pride').

What I want to know is what has changed that will save us from repeating history?

[tw]

Originally posted by Tony Shepps
Tom, sometimes we're so in sync while at other times...

...I come across horror stories like the following:
----
A California woman lost her job, was forced into drug treatment, and lost custody of her children for three months after her newborn baby tested positive for the prescription drug Seconal, even though a doctor had provided the woman with the drug when she was in labor.

Which only proves we must be rid of all laws and government attempt to protect newborn.

The example demonstrates what happens when doctors fail to perform their jobs (Did the doctor suffer equal punishment? Doctors are rarely punished or lose their license)

Cited is one example of a doctor who caused good laws to be misapplied. Therefore we should get rid of all US Customs and passports because they too can be applied wrongly? The fear of a national ID confirmation system is equivalent to saying that all driver licenses must be eliminated because they to would be used improperly.

The reason you don't fear a driver's license - it already exists. Your fear of a national ID confirmation system - it does not exist. The facts are not the reason - it is a fear of the unknown that you fear.

Unfortunately that is common. Hundreds of people had to be murdered in the Johnstown Flood before we finally stopped fearing dam inspections.

Such blanket fears are the same reason so many also use ineffective, overpriced, overhyped, money wasting surge protectors. We assumed something is better than nothing rather than examine the details. We make blanket assumptions rather than examine the details.

DMV already have everyones picture. Government already has all information necessary to subvert the system. But the same information is not available to assist a reader to protect his own identity.

Identify theft is widespread and quite destructive. The Orange county woman's problem is rare, was easily corrected, and did not punish her years afterwards. IOW perspective is also important. The Orange County women's example only proves that all government is evil - not that we individually need protection. Furthermore fear of a national ID confirmation system is totally flawed since the government already has all that information.


[Edited by tw on 05-15-2001 at 07:03 PM]

[tw]

Originally posted by Degrees
... That the Germany demanded that all guns be registered is a historical fact (1929 Berlin). That those guns be (voluntarily) relinquished to the government is a historical fact (1934). That a per house search (based on the public records of registered gun owners) confiscating all guns was executed by the German military is a fact (1939).

Which is irrelevant since if everyone in Germany had guns, it still would make no difference. The people wanted Hilter and the people wanted all not Aryian races eliminated. Zero guns, 10 guns, or all guns in the hands of the public would have made 0 difference. IOW the fact hype an emotion - don't make a logical point.

But to summarize you general conclusion - we should elinimate all goverment laws because government laws and organizations can be subverted?

[Undertoad]

The whole point of the story was what can be done with your information, behind your back.

The example is as common as the error rate of all bureaucrats combined.

The severity of those errors are a measure of how much power government holds over our lives.

The guarantee that such systems will be abused is because it is human nature to do so. The evidence that pols can't be trusted is your own history of postings about W.

My information is mine. If the paper publishes my picture that it got/bought from the DMV, when I had an expectation and a trust that it wouldn't, I have been wronged. And I can't opt out of the DMV system without giving up my right to drive on the public roads.

In WWII, US Census records were used to simplify the effort of rounding up Japanese Americans to be held in camps. Now you want the Gov to have the ability not only to identify us by race -- enough of a losing idea to crush it -- but to have universal access to a literal ton of information about us.

[Degrees]

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.

[tw]

Originally posted by Degrees
...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.

The problem with current local ID systems - it's not working. In a bar in Avalon, they were reviewing the illegal licenses confiscated from the summer. One of the bouncers apparantly had memorized the manual for all 50 states. They easily had under 1000 IDs. As we looked, I could see nothing wrong with any of them. This is before ink jet printed IDs were possible. We know local IDs are so easily counterfeited that major license counterfeiting operation move from hotel to hotel without detection and do so much business.

Of course, even worse is the original point of this post. We depend on a system not intended to make it possible for you to prove who you are. The system is only intended for government to ID you. Because it is not intended for your own security, the above picture is easily available. We don't have a system necessary for you to protect your own privacy.

Once we examine the details, the concept of a national ID confirmation system takes on a completely different persective. A national ID confirmations system is not a threat by 'big brother' on your privacy since they already have all that information - regardless of the comparisons to Nazi Germany. What we don't have is national ID system that addresses our ability to protect our own privacy and indentity. We don't even have any system so that you can check that your privacy is secure. Will you send $50 every year to every credit rating agency to confirm you credit rating is intact? Currently that is what you must do. 20 years ago, the lady who ran US Passports for the Custom service noted the problem was serious and that US IDs were the world's hottest IDs. Today it is even worse - and expected to increase like spam as more systems must exist to ID you but no system exists to protect your ID.

[CharlieG]

Originally posted by tw


The problem with current local ID systems - it's not working. <snip>

Once we examine the details, the concept of a national ID confirmation system takes on a completely different persective. A national ID confirmations system is not a threat by 'big brother' on your privacy since they already have all that information - regardless of the comparisons to Nazi Germany. <snip>

Actually, I think the BEST way to get rid of identity theft is to realize that PEOPLE arent some dammed ID number given to us by some Government (Local or national). I'm ME - You can steal my SSN ID, only because the dammed ID exist.

Why not get rid of ALL government ID. Charge use fees, which are paid when you use something, band together with people who KNOW you to borrow things when you need it. Why do I need some ID to get on an airplane (I know - to prevent terrorism - yeah right). Why do you have to show ID to check into a hotel (Originally to capture Dillinger)

It's none of the governments dammed business, on the state, local OR national level

[tw]

As we discuss this (and as some assume identify theft is not a serious problem), ironically the state of PA is passing a bill to redo all driver's licenses with smart chips, fingerprints, etc becasues identity theft has become epidemic.

IOW all these little organizations (DMV, county records, voting bureau, SS, colleges, etc) must eventually create their own ID confirmations system - a morass of different ID systems - becasuse we don't have any reliable way for you to prove who you are. Do you have too many credit cards now. Watch the pile grow with all the other ID cards required.

Cited as an example of identity theft - a man whose driver's license was attached to numerous violations and vehicle crashes - also creating including an insurance problem for the victim - because identity theft is so easy. Another was simply using his driver's license information on phony ID which were easy to obtain before mass counterfeiting machines (ink jet printers) existed.

Of course since we don't have a stanard national system, then your fingerprints, iris-pattern, etc all will be easy theft as the above DMV picture - because only one of hundreds of ID systems will need be compromised.

We desperately need a comprehensive national ID confirmation system. We will never get one because, as this thread demonstrates, too many emotionally fear such a system rather than have a logical appreciation of the problem.

Its much like the "funeral mentality". We don't do something until enough people have died.

The NTSB accuses the FAA of operating this way. So many agree with the NTSB, but then endorse "FAA type" foot dragging by thinking the same way regarding a national ID confirmation system. So how many will first have to die?

[lisa]

Originally posted by tw
Of course since we don't have a stanard national system, then your fingerprints, iris-pattern, etc...

Hmmmm... now, an accessable iris-pattern database wouldn't bother me nearly as much because it'd be harder for that to be used against me. For example, no one leaves an iris-pattern behind at the scene of a crime, so it couldn't be used to "frame me."

The NTSB accuses the FAA of operating this way. So many agree with the NTSB, but then endorse "FAA type" foot dragging by thinking the same way regarding a national ID confirmation system. So how many will first have to die?

Actually, as a pilot, I think the FAA does a decent job balancing safety and cost/inconvienence. There are a MILLION things that they could do to increase airline safety. But ticket prices would quadruple and delays woul increase similarly. Everything has tradeoffs and everything is a judgement call .

I believe that what it comes down to is that you trust the government with all that information on yourself and Tony and I do not... We'd rather take other steps protecting "identity theft" and take our chances with the risk that remains. (Correct me if I am wrong, Tony)

[Undertoad]

We don't do anything until enough people have died? What an odd way of putting it.

Nobody can die from identity theft, but 100 million people died in the last century from over-reaching governments. The graphic here was under the title "killing in the 20th century". Most of the killing was not in wars, but in purges, "cultural revolutions", etc.

The so-called "problem" should be addressed, but not with government sponsoring the protection problems of the credit bureaus. If someone can't get a house because a credit bureau is falsely alleging that someone has a bad credit history when in fact they don't, that's slander; harm has been done, and I should think civil action is called for.

As a cookie on the old Cellar used to say, paraphrased, "The biggest question in government is how to prevent the government from going nuts and slaughtering its own citizens." If we are to err, given government's track record, we MUST err on the side of caution. When it become politically expedient for government officials to kill, they will do so.

You know that to be true; look at W.'s official take on the death penalty. "All of the people that have been executed were guilty," he says consistently. Yes, that's true; they were found guilty in a court of law. They might not have committed the crime, but they WERE found guilty; and thus, whether they did the crime or not, in a punishment-oriented society it is very politically expedient to kill them.

[Undertoad]

<i>We'd rather take other steps protecting "identity theft" and take our chances with the risk that remains. (Correct me if I am wrong, Tony)</i>

No, that's exactly right.

I don't think anything else can be done. Government doesn't have a very good track record of solving problems by throwing infrastructure at them.

Most of the time, government doesn't SOLVE problems, it just MANAGES them, which half the time is worse. Look at every other major Problem and see what the government response is. Housing? Drugs? Education? Poverty? Energy? All major Problems, for which visionary "solutions" were developed, multi-billion-dollar bureaucracies set up to work the "solutions", which then either worked only part way or failed outright.

Human activity is very complex indeed. Try to rigidly control it and most of the time you either just move the problem elsewhere or actually make the problem worse. The cheapest way to address the Identity problem is probably with fingerprints. I'm not an expert but already I see trouble. With finger molds I could recreate enough of anyone's finger to get past a scanning system. Now, instead of a system that doesn't work well, we have a highly *trusted* system that doesn't work perfectly. This raises a whole new set of issues.

Look at the OJ trial. We have DNA matching that proves identity to beyond the shadow of a doubt. We have blood at the scene containing that DNA. Here is an identity system that works 100% perfectly... right? So why is OJ playing golf?

[tw]

Originally posted by Tony Shepps
Look at the OJ trial. We have DNA matching that proves identity to beyond the shadow of a doubt. We have blood at the scene containing that DNA. Here is an identity system that works 100% perfectly... right? So why is OJ playing golf?

OJ trial is an example of an identity system that had no credibility (at least in the eyes of the jurors). It was not the DNA they doubted - it was the source of the DNA - the LA Police - that was disputed.

Which is what we have today - no trustworthy ID confirmation system.

[tw]

Originally posted by lisa
I believe that what it comes down to is that you trust the government with all that information on yourself and Tony and I do not... We'd rather take other steps protecting "identity theft" and take our chances with the risk that remains.

Which keeps bringing us right back to it - government already has all that information. A national ID confirmation system does not provide government any more information than they already have. It only gives you a tool to confirm who "you" are and protect your property - which you do not have. You don't have that protection which is why identity theft is so easy.

If you fear government having that information, then solve the problem by the only method left to you - shoot yourself. They already have all that information. They currently have all the benefits of that information. But YOU have neither the benefits NOR any access to confirm the information they are using is accurate NOR any accurate means to confirm you are YOU. Why do you fear giving government information that they already have ... in spades? That fear is completely illogical.

Government is not your greatest threat. It is those who steal from you - especially the most that have not yet learned how easy it is to steal from you.

Emotion says government is evil. Logic says you have far more to fear from white collar crime - except if you are a criminal type.

[tw]

Originally posted by tw
Its much like the "funeral mentality". We don't do something until enough people have died.

That is the point. Few people will die from identity theft. Therefore we will not establish a national confirmation system to the benefit of the people. Instead that information will be spread everywhere to be easier for anyone to steal from multiple sources. An ID confirmation system is inevitable. But since people will not die, it will exist in the hoodge-poodge system that already exists - with less benefits and with no privacy protection.

Those who fear for their ID should be banging down the doors demanding national ID confirmation. Instead, and especially because people will not be killed, we will have less privacy and more threats. The picture at the top is exactly what happens when the same data is deciminated everywhere instead of protected in a secure, universally known system intended only for personal ID confirmation.

Again, if you fear government having that information - then shoot yourself. They already have all that information ... in spades. Logic. They have the information but you don't have any benefits from that information.

Therefore we fear the government? Where is the logic in that? I can appreciate the emotional fear. Its just that I don't see a logical arguement - unless we forget that government already has all that information.

Is it an emotional fear of government - or just a myopic perspective of the facts? I could appreciate a good arguement against a National ID confirmation system - except the only arguement that comes close must repeatedly forget that the government already has all that information - and substancially more!

[elSicomoro]

I would imagine that many of you know about a current piece of legislation here in PA that would make us the first state to offer some sort of identity-theft protection (or something along those lines). It's based upon the gentleman from here in Philadelphia that had his identity stolen, causing him a ton of problems in getting another trucking job, insurance probs, etc.

Let's face it: The social security number IS our national ID, although it is not supposed to be used for that purpose. The first three digits of it tell either where you are from, or where you got your card. For example, I get strange looks when I give my SS# here in Philadelphia because mine starts with a 4 and not with a 1 like many folks here. Mine starts with a 4 because cards with numbers ranging from 486-500 mean that those cards have been issued to people in the state of Missouri. At one point, my SS# served as my drivers license number, my college ID number, and as a link to my credit report.

So, if we DID go to a "standard" national ID system, how would it work? Would I be number 200,123,418? What happens when people die, or move across state lines? How exactly would we ID people? By gender, race, or state of origin?