posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 01:34 PM
Mexico already has a form of national ID in place, though as has been pointed out it does not have total compliance with those who live in the outer
reaches. In this case, though, it includes an image of the person's iris along with thumbprint, signature, photo, and such. This is the first country
using this newer technology for improved personal identification.
QUESTIONS: Would this be more of an infringement against one's personal privacy than a thumbprint? Would such a more positive means of identification
have negative implications - other than for a person who was attempting for any reason to mask their true ID? Would there be a plus-side to having
improved identification techniques?
I tend to think people would be wary at first about having their iris photographed but don't feel it deprives a person of their privacy any more than
using another type of identifier, though this may be a more positive means of ID than older systems. I can see less reluctance after people find the
procedure itself is safe.
I am of the opinion this is only detrimental to someone who may be attempting to hide their true or actual ID and thwart the system - more difficult
to falsify, though not foolproof.
I can see a number of advantages to using this along with less liklihood of mistaken ID.
For countries who have no national ID in place there would most certainly be grander implications by starting one than merely adding a new technology
of ID into a system where personal ID already exists, for example when obtaining a driver's license.
edit on 24-1-2011 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)