It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NEWS: National ID to be Heard by House Judiciary Committee

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 22 2004 @ 11:56 PM
The proposed "national ID", which was hinted at by the 9/11 commission, will go before the House Judiciary Committee tomorrow. Those involved say that there must be a "consistent standard to ensure the integrity of both the document and the issuance process" (Com. Mbr. Jamie S. Gorelick).

Among those against the idea is Rep. Christopher B. Cannon, who accused the commission of "sneaking it in the back door".

The DMV also supports the national ID, citing the Driver's Licenses are simply that -- a license to drive -- and not an identification.
"We're simply saying take something that everyone accepts now and have it standardized in a way that it really identifies the people who are holding onto it," he told Mr. Cannon.
"What I hear you saying, Senator Gorton, is that you want a national ID," Mr. Cannon replied, but "you want to get through the back door by using something that everybody already accepts."

Mr. Gorton responded that there is an important difference between a compulsory ID document and one like a driver's license that "you voluntarily go out and get."
Rep. Melvin Watt, North Carolina Democrat, pointed out that there is nothing voluntary about a birth certificate. Mr. Gorton replied that both documents are accepted as proof of identity, even though neither is secure.

-- The Washington Times

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

It depends on your outlook on national identification.

Personally, I think that Driver Licenses are enough, but the easy way to fake DL-s calls for a more secure identification, and not everyone has passports.

I, however, believe that it shouldn't be a compulsory deal. If you want it, you can get it. Other than that, just like DL-es are not necessary (and neither are passports, for that matter), this shouldn't be necessary either.

Although in this day and age I can see this turning into a "if you're caught without your national identification you go to jail for x days and pay a hefty fine".

That is something I don't want but seems inevitable.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, most other countries have a national form of identification and they're doing well... so maybe it's for the better?

[edit on 23-8-2004 by John bull 1]

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 09:20 AM
I don't see what the major problem is here. The only people I see having a problem with this are the ACLU (no shock there) and the peabrained idiots that think they only get jury duty if they vote.

For all the privacy advocates out there against an ID card, think of it this way:

You are born, just like the rest of us. As a result you are issued a birth certificate and a social security number. Right or wrong?

You go to school, you're on record at the school, you enroll for college get on the record there as well.

You get a job, you have to file taxes, perhaps you have insurance, maybe a mortgage.

Maybe you get a driver's license as well.

Which part of "the government has you on record anyways" do people not understand.

A driver's license is a document stating you have passed the necessary requirements to operate a vehicle. I live in NYC. Many people don't drive here because of all the traffic and parking troubles. So, many of them don't have licenses. The only reason licenses are seen as THE ID card is because most states have made them pretty hard to fake as of late. Although a piece of chalk used the right way can trick most bouncers (I'm only 25, it wasn't that long ago!)

Passports? Great for people who travel, but there's a pretty damn big population in the United States that has never left the country, and doesn't plan on it either. Many of them dont have/dont need passports.

I don't think people should have to carry an ID card on them 24/7 but I would not find it to be a big deal for someone to have to present such a card to get on a plane, or into a government building and other things of that sort. Big deal, you think they don't know who you are already?

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 09:25 AM
This has been debated before on ATS I have always had the same stance...

What is the big deal?

Like the previous poster said, we got SSN, and even DLs. You can already be tracked, or whatever it is you are afraid of.

Until someone tells me why this is a bad idea, I have nothing against it.

Now, about the "You are going to jail if you dont have your ID" I dont believe that will happen either. Do you go to jail if you dont have your license? Actually I dont know the answer to that, but I think you just get a fine... which is what i would expect if you got caught without your NTL ID.

Sure, thats a pain too.

Perhaps they should just change the SSN Card to plastic instead of paper. Maybe that's all it is.

I'm not against it, nor do I push for it... I simply.. Dont care

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 01:06 PM
Tsk tsk, I'm never impressed by those who throw insults around instead of well argued retorts. Anyone who labels another as an idiot or "peabrained" is obviously lacking in a department or two themselves, if you catch my meaning... I oppose the ACLU at almost every turn yet I ALSO disagree with this national I.D. Also, I've never been confused about how jury duty works so you're zero for two so far Djarums. Most states DO require by law that you have some form of picture identification on you at ALL times. The big problem that a lot of people are having with this is the fact that if passed... these I.D.s will most likely have those super sneaky I.D. and tracking chips that everyone is trying to incorporate these days. They CANNOT track us like that with DLs or S.S. cards... not yet at least lol. If this proposition passes, then you CAN probably count on it being a requirement that you have it on you whenever in public or traveling, just as most states have made it with their DLs. Most states don't actually punish those caught without their I.D.s, however if the federal government issued an I.D. for the sake of "security" you can bet that they'd follow through with punishment (probably fines). Also, this signifies even further expansion of the federal government, which our founding fathers wanted to prevent.

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 01:29 PM
This is just the precurser to Verichip.

I see it going to fines if you don't have your card. Lots of people will be fined or jailed because they 'lost their card' or 'their card was stolen', and then there will be a ton of fraudulant cards made, and the government will somehow have to alleviate these problems.

So, they decide to make VeriChip a standard to prevent loss of cards and forgeries. Now we get stuck with implants (or severe reprecussions if you refuse the chip!)

So, yeah... lets get this National ID thing rolling! Just be warned that if there are more than just minimal fines imposed for not having your card, you can expect the VeriChip to be implemented. Tagged like sheep you are!

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 01:39 PM
Fortunate1, I have no idea who you are so I'm not going to take any of that personally.

My statement was intended to refer to people who think they're getting jury duty because they vote or drive or have a credit card and that otherwise "the man" wouldn't know about them. Those are the people I felt would have a problem with this. You said you have a problem with it as well. Fine. I don't see how that includes you in the group I was talking about.

So here's what I suggest:

Make a u-turn and go back to the point where you thought I was referring to you with that statement. Calculate in the fact that I was in no way referring to you, and I think you'll find yourself back on the road in no time.

I see no purpose in reading into people's words when they're typing in a conversational manner. It's a bit annoying and serves no purpose. Debate my points all you want, if my manner of speaking bothers you, skip over it I guess.

Don't know what else to tell you.

[edit on 8-23-2004 by Djarums]

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 01:55 PM
I didn't take PERSONAL offense to your statements Djarum lol. They were just vaguely and generally offensive, and I was merely commenting on the nature of your statements. I know quite a few mentally challenged types and I try not to refer to them as "peabrained" lol. I wasn't relating myself to your statements. I was simply using a bit or sarcasm to counter your statement about "The only people I see having a problem with this are..." I don't respond like that only when I'm offended but when I think others are being unfair in general. BTW, I was mostly being humorous lol... Ya know... a poke in the ribs to stir up trouble. As far as you not knowing me, I AM fairly new, but you'll be seeing more of me and my sense of humor. Sorry if I didn't make my intentions clearer lol.

[edit on 23-8-2004 by fortunate1]

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 02:09 PM

I AM fairly new, but you'll be seeing more of me and my sense of humor. Sorry if I didn't make my intentions clearer lol.

Understood. I try to be one of the more lighthearted posters here as well since many people take things way too seriously and blow things out of propotion. So, I look forward to seeing you on here more.

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 02:20 PM
Glad you understand Djarum
The last thing I want to do is make others mad. I live for debate and this wouldn't be the first time it's caused misunderstandings lol. I also look forward to seeing more of you and some of the other more enlightened members. Until then...

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 02:45 PM
There will be a day in this country when our identification cards will be scanned from great distances, right through our clothing. We will be scanned by law enforcement before we even know we are about to be questioned, even from aircraft, scanned simply out of curiosity on the part of undereducated police, (since criminal history information will be available on this card).

If we are found to be without this item on person we will be charged with a violation of federal law. Multiple offenders will be heavily fined and\or jailed.

If you would like to hear all of the details, give me some feedback.

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 05:50 PM
Well if the government was smart they'd make the damn thing a Proximity card.

Of course, that would bring whole new issues into perspective, and potentially open the door for it to be used in a massive commercial plot...

I can see it now... no need for business ID badges, DLes, or even credit cards or cash... just use your Federal ID and fingerprint (because no doubt you'll need to have yourself fingerprinted just for the ID) and your account will be automatically deducted!

There's a good side: You'll have a damn clean wallet!

The bad side: Everything you do will be logged in one place. Oopsie!

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 06:37 PM
If the cards are smart cards there would be numerous benefits to them.

Think of it from a medical perspective. You are an ambulance worker and you arrive at the scene to find 2 patients in a car that hit a tree. You pull out your medical card reader and discover one unconscious patient who has numerous lacerations is a hemopheliac. Holy crap huh?

Hypothetical I know. But I'd consider it more reliable than a medicalert bracelet that makes half the population's skin turn black.

I know that doesn't answer privacy advocates' concerns in the slightest bit, but I thought I'd bring up another possible use such things could have.

posted on Aug, 23 2004 @ 11:37 PM
The process I present is a gradual one; this card is not going to be much more than they say it will be. At first, it will be simply an ID. Then, there will be further proposals, favorable votes on Capitol Hill, and perceived conveniences on the part of the general citizenry. Then, further votes, etc., until the card will be the only item we will not afford to forget when we leave home in the morning.

One thought: when a civilian was approached by a Nazi the first query was, "Do you have your papers?" As I have said, there will come a day in the not-so-distant future when we will be scanned routinely from a distance. Frightened Americans will champion the cause for such a measure due to a fear of being victimized by criminals.

posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 02:08 AM
A National ID card is a great thing and should be made so....the only people who would fight it are illegals and criminals....I work in LE and most of the people I come into contact with DONT have ID cards of any type...half of which lie about their names, birthday...etc...If you have nothing to hide...this shouldnt be a problem....

posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 02:10 PM
The issue isn't whether a citizen has something to hide; the issue is the "Right To Privacy." Some people can shuffle along like robots, not even caring about one's own base human instincts, walking in shame of desires possessed inward. Sure, you're right, I was arrested for chatting with a prostitute when I was twenty. In the early stages of this card's inception this won't be a problem for me, but down the road rookie cops (some who will have to take summer classes to graduate from high school on time) will be able to scan everyone without probable cause (and without the individual even knowing he\she is being scanned).

Those of you who are elderly won't live to see it, however some of us are concerned for the future of our freedom as mandated by The Bill Of Rights, the U.S. Constitution, for the love of god.

posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 02:40 PM
I cannot see someone being scanned for criminal info with reasonalbe suspicion...Law Enforcement does have the commonlaw right in inquiery...with that said only the basic should be allowed on an ID card (name, DOB, address)...anything more then that could become a big privacy issue...

posted on Aug, 24 2004 @ 03:21 PM

Originally posted by BasementAddix
I cannot see someone being scanned for criminal info with reasonalbe suspicion...Law Enforcement does have the commonlaw right in inquiery...with that said only the basic should be allowed on an ID card (name, DOB, address)...anything more then that could become a big privacy issue...

I agree. This is my point exactly. I have no qualms with a federal ID.

(I suppose I move too far into the future for some).

new topics

top topics


log in