well, before this thread is sent to the farm...

The bill passed through the senate today 100-0.

We as a people should assert our rights to be individuals within the society as a whole. When a society does exist there must be rules and order, no doubt. But those rules and that order must be approved or denied by the society as a group, with just recognition for the individual as well. Here are two links which outline a few of the problems and the out-right injustice which the implementation of an identification system such as being proposed could and will eventually lead to.

http://www.idtheftcenter.org/html/national-id.htm

http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm

You see, the way I look at it is, where DOES it stop? I would just as soon it doesn't start. I can protect myself and if someone does commit some injustice against me as a group or as an individual there is nothing that a totalitarian government can do to stop it every time. Myself, I am not willing to sacrifice this or that to try to prevent some insignificant thing that MAY happen.

I love the little GS, I love my country (not necessarily the direction it is headed), and I love this forum.

C........

 

I do not have a problem with making it harder for people to get an ID. I do not have a problem with a National ID system. I believe that something like that will be implimented anyways and if done correctly, would be a good thing.

What I don't like is how this is being done. The way that they are passing this off as an anti-terrorism measure and tacking it onto an "emergengy" funding bill becuase it didn't pass the senate last time may be the way politics work, but that doesn't make it right.

Who is going to pay for this? The feds aren't. There was no funding allocated with this bill, just a mandate that the states upgrade their ID systems and link them together within 3 years. Where are the states going to get the money from?

What scares me are the things that come with this. The department of Homeland Security can now revoke peoples' right to due process, and circumvent ANY law which they deem neccisary when it involves the borders of the US. How far are we willing to go in the name of fighting terrorism? Isn't this exactly what the terrorists want; to have us running scared shitless? To have us spend millions to "make our skies safer" by profiling and harrassing its citizens, to ban zippo lighters and nail trimmers from airplanes and all the useless crap that has been passed in the name of fighting terror? What has it done? Are we really any safer than we were before 9/11? I, for one don't believe that we are.

What if we took all the extra money that is being spent on airline security and the "war on terror" and spent it on feeding, clothing and educating the people who wouldn't otherwise have these things? I realize that I am young, and possibly a bit naive but I see that as a bit more productive than sacrificing peoples lives to "uphold an ideal" (assuming that IS the motivation, but that is another debate entirely) however likely success may be.

No, you are not naive Goat. You are an exception to the rule of young people not being able to see past their nose. And Ed, just wait, I'm sure some kind of legislation to take our guns is in the works; it just has to be...how did the wicked witch of the west put it? "delicately my dear, delicately". I am troubled by the times of our world, even though I love the Baby GS (may I get to ride for many years), I love the Earth (polluted and convoluted as we have made it), and I love this forum.

C........

we tried that in Somalia remember? the feeding thing dosn't work.

goat i see your point, but we need to feed clothe (sp?), and educate our own people before we worry about the rest of the worlds we've got un-educated, poorly clothed, hungry people here, yet we concern ourselves with other countries probs firsthand, theyve got probs but yet so do we :dunno:

Quote from: yamahonkawazukigoat i see your point, but we need to feed clothe (sp?), and educate our own people before we worry about the rest of the worlds we've got un-educated, poorly clothed, hungry people here, yet we concern ourselves with other countries probs firsthand, theyve got probs but yet so do we :dunno:

I did say people without. I meant people within the US and outside. Seriously, how many people could you feed, clothe and educate with $83 billion?

Quote from: davipuwe tried that in Somalia remember? the feeding thing dosn't work.

I don't consider myself an expert on that area, but I thought that was becuase the food wasn't getting to the people that needed it. The warlords would intercept the food and sell it to raise money for guns.

Quote from: goatWho is going to pay for this?

As in every single thing the government does, we will pay for it.  Doesn't matter if it's state or federal or local, it all comes out of our paychecks.

And I normally agree with Ed on most things, but I have to disagree here.  We can refuse them both.  We just have to quit electing morons.  Oh well, makes me glad I voted for Badnarik.  OK now, tell me how I wasted my vote just like all my conservative friends who voted for Bush.    

I for one don't don't want to give up any liberties for perceived security, which is what the majority of the post 9/11 security measures have been, including this one.  Why don't we spend money on some REAL security, like patrolling the borders and making sure we're not letting terrorists into our country to begin with, then we won't have to worry about them getting fake IDs.

Ah, screw it.  Eventually, whether I like it or not, the government is going to know exactly where I am at all times.  They will know who I am standing near and who I call (so they know who I see and speak to).  They will know if I've been into a barber shop or a strip joint or a gun store (the one essential freedom that is left for me).  They will realize from the speed of my movements that I may be a threat to others who are slowers and weaker.  They'll likely burden me with locked steel chains and sand bags so that I am easier to track and monitor.  They may damage my voice and eyes so that I can no longer see that I have lost what the founders of this nation would call freedom, or yell to complain.  They will leave me, struggling against my restraints like Harrison Burgeron, blind and dumb, left with only my ears, so that I may hear them coddle me over and over, "Shhh. . . shhhh. . . We did this for you.  We did this for you."  

Just kidding.  I actually don't think it is that big of a deal.

Quote from: Jake DAh, screw it.  Eventually, whether I like it or not, the government is going to know exactly where I am at all times.  

Dude, don't worry about the government. They can be held accountable *on occasion* . Retail organizations already watch your every move with this "teknolujee".

You guys all are arguing about politics and overlooking that this crap has permeated our lives already. You don't have privacy in 2005. You have bits and bites - some of them are protected.

Yes we have Big Brother - he wants to know what you want on your pizza.

I guess I'm just not smart enough to understand "teknolujee".

I'll leave the heavy thinkin' to you guys and continue on down my slippery slope.

Identify the proposition P being refuted and identify the final event in the series of events. Then show that this final event need not occur as a consequence of P.

Need not occur or show that it may possibly flow from the occurrence of P?

Clarify.  

[As an aside: I got an idea that you some of you might not like.  Why not put chips in hand guns, rifles, and automatic weapons that will track its location at all times?  And why stop there?  Why not put a device in it that will scan the user's finger print prior to it's operation?  Without a confirmation of its user, it will not fire.  Is that a bad idea?]

In order to show that a proposition P is unacceptable, a sequence of increasingly unacceptable events is shown to follow from P. A slippery slope is an illegitimate use of the "if-then" operator.

With chips - you'll only need one. The back end is where tracking decisions will be made.

No jake, it's not what did you do to deserve, it's what have you done to allow? What have WE done to allow? Jake D for President 2008. Love the little bike, Somalia (tough nut to crack), and this forum.

C.......

Oh no, you've not offended Jake, because a truth is not an offense. But the ringing in my ears is 50,000,000 sheep bleating...baaah baaah baaah. Jake D for President 2008. Love the twin, Straights of Magellan (10 crapper doors now sitting at the bottom), and this forum.

C........

:lol:  

You're the man, C.  

10 crapper doors!