Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Administration Wants To Scale Back Real ID Law

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the square-root-of-minus-identity dept.

Privacy 317

The Washington Post is running a story on the Obama Administration's attempt to get a scaled-back version of Bush's Real ID program passed and implemented. We've been discussing the Real ID program from its earliest days up through the states' resistance to its "unfunded mandate." "Yielding to a rebellion by states that refused to pay for it, the Obama administration is moving to scale back a federal law passed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that was designed to tighten security requirements for driver's licenses... Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano wants to repeal and replace the controversial, $4 billion domestic security initiative known as Real ID... The new proposal, called Pass ID, would be cheaper, less rigorous, and partly funded by federal grants, according to draft legislation that Napolitano's Senate allies plan to introduce as early as tomorrow. ...the Bush administration struggled to implement the 2005 [Real ID] law, delaying the program repeatedly as states called it an unfunded mandate and privacy advocates warned it would create a de facto national ID."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

DMV (1)

qpawn (1507885) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333773)

I just went into the DMV to renew my license and it was expensive and rigorous.

Re:DMV (4, Informative)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333903)

I just went into the DMV to renew my license and it was expensive and rigorous.

I went last month - it cost $24 to renew my license. I had to wait around 20 minutes before it was my turn, and getting my identification in order was a snap since I already had a Passport..

Hardly expensive or rigorous.

Me too. (3, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335033)

My license had been expired for six months. Renewal, pay a late fee and they hand it over. Easy. It's funny but on that day I heard on the radio some
Republican senator saying: "If we have national health insurance, we will have healthcare like the DMV."

Now I'm a right wing kind of guy, but I couldn't help but immediately think:

"I wish my health care was as good as my DMV". I would say Republicans should shy away from DMV arguments, because right now health care is so screwed up that
making it like the DMV would be an improvement. Imagine an emergency room where they had different lines for different ailments, actually gave out numbers like the DMV does, had friendly people and a nice building... and only cost $50.

Re:DMV (4, Interesting)

bconway (63464) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333931)

Interesting. Mine was done two weeks ago through an online form [mass.gov] that didn't require me leaving my chair and used only the minimum amount of personally identifying information.

Re:DMV (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334329)

I need a photo, so I'm going to have to visit the DMV for a new license soon. It can also be a PITA in California, but mostly because you have to wait. If you have the old one, getting a new one is easy, otherwise you need a genuine BC (no photocopies naturally) and maybe a social card too.

Re:DMV (1)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334647)

Even as backwards as SC is, you can do everything but get the photo changed on your licence from home, including reprints, renewals, change of address, and more, and it;s between $10 and $24 depending on the service.

Afro-American Racism Against Whites and Asians (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334729)

During the election, about 95% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin. See the exit-polling data [cnn.com] by CNN.

Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc. These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks. Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority. So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern. Only about 65% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama. In other words, a maximum of 65% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable.

If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65% of them would have supported Obama. At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.

At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals. That claim is an outright lie. Look at the exit-polling data [cnn.com] for the Democratic primaries. Consider the case of North Carolina. Again, about 95% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton. Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical. Yet, 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton. Why? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.

Here is the bottom line. Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America. He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.

African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100% acceptable. Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior. Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color. Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American. You need not defend your actions in any way. Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today's moral values.

Re:DMV (4, Insightful)

gruntled (107194) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333935)

The real problem with ID issuance in the United States is everything -- everything, including a passport -- goes back to a birth certificate, and not all difficult to obtain a phony birth certificate. I'm not sure this problem really has a short term solution.

Re:DMV (2, Interesting)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334413)

It isn't that big a problem. Lots of people put too much stock in the cards that people are carrying around, but most of those people are also worrying more about that person's 'identity' than they need to.

I put identity in quotes there because it is such a conflated concept. At some level, I'm whoever I say I am; all government documents do is establish that they agree to some extent (the reliability of the documents is going to roughly correlate with the rigor of the processes at the issuing entity).

Re:DMV (3, Informative)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334733)

A hospitol birth certificate isn't hard to obtain, but an authorized state certificate, which keep in mind is also back-ended and validated by information maintained by the SSA and serveral other databases, is nearly impossible to obtain.

My wife lost hers and we needed it to go on our honeymoon to get a passport. It was a nasty process as they wanted to validate things like the name of the hospital she was born in just to get a COPY of her birth certificate. When I went to get a replacement SS card a couple of years ago and I brough my original certificate, it wasn't a current certified state version, and they made a dozen phone calls to validate my certificate was in fact valid, and then suggested in the future I might want to get an updated certified copy and keep the original for posterity...

Making a fake is not hard at all, but as soon as they might try to enter that information in their system, if the record in the computer can't be found or is inaccurate, you have to go through an appeals process and several ID validations before they'll issue a licences. They do NOT take for granted what's on the piece of paper you hand them. This isn't the 70's.

Geting a valid ID created using phony information is very hard... VERY hard. Not to mention the mathing SS card, valid SS record, validated proof of address from utility companies, proof of insurance in that fake name, vehicle registration, and more....

Re:DMV (1)

gruntled (107194) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334931)

You are correct in that getting a valid copy of your own birth certificate can be quite difficult, but this depends entirely on the jurisdiction you were born in (as in the case of your wife). It's actually quite easy to get a birth certificate from certain areas, whether it's yours or not.

Re:DMV (1)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335171)

Getting one, not to hard, proving you're the person who's record it is, a bit harder... That level of identity theft requires a lot of validated personal tidbits, not the least of which includes having a copy of a utility bill in that name that was mailed to the address you're trying to get a drivers license for, and also ensuring the insurance card and vehicle redistration also reflect the same...

Re:DMV (4, Insightful)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334753)

Why does there have to be a solution?

More efficient commerce isn't an acceptable answer.

A free people don't have to verify themselves to their government and the government has no intrinsic right to demand that of a person.

Re:DMV (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335043)

What they do in Australia for getting various forms of ID (including passports) is require you to take some passport size photos and have them signed by someone who is vouching that you are who you say you are and that they have known you in some capacity for at least a certain amount of time.

There are rules about what sort of person is allowed to do this also, it has to be someone from a specific list of jobs that are supposedly in good standing in the community (I dont know of the specific list but I know it includes people like university professors)

The real problem in the US is that its too easy to get and use all sorts of things (including credit cards and prepaid mobile phones) with very little ID checking.

Re:DMV (1)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335175)

The real problem in the US is that its too easy to get and use all sorts of things (including credit cards and prepaid mobile phones) with very little ID checking.

I'm here in Aus too mate, and the last prepaid phone I bought...from the grocery store...didn't require any ID what so ever.

And why the hell would it?

Re:DMV (1)

idiotnot (302133) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334017)

Ditto. I went Saturday. Virginia's new licensing process has been well-publicized, and it's a PITA. I probably won't actually get my real license for a few weeks. Until then, I have my old one (doesn't expire until August), and a piece of paper that has the new one's expiration date.

All that said, the Virginia DMV has gotten a lot better. I got there about 20 minutes after opening, and was out in about 1:15. I can remember getting it renewed ten years ago, and having it take almost four hours.

And when I first got my license in Mississippi, it was an all-day affair -- about six hours, total. (mid-90s)

Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333783)

Translation: We know that for the past 8 years this has been pushed to prevent homeland terrorism but you know there hasn't really been any major events without it since 9/11. Also, we've got a lot of other shit to worry about that actually does affect your life more than having to present papers whenever you cross any political boundary inside the United States. You know, like the economy and jobs. We're getting Real ID watered down as best we can and hopefully it'll just kind of deflate and go away but there's some asshole Republicans left like Lamar Smith in Texas and Sensenbrenner in Wisconsin that like to say things like:

We go right back to where we were on Sept. 10, 2001. Maybe governors should have been in the Capitol when we knew a plane was on its way to Washington wanting to kill a few thousand more people.

You hear that? The lawmakers that take us to war were actually in danger of physical harm themselves! Imagine that! But their voice, urgency and argument are getting pretty pathetic now that it's been eight years and no such thing has reoccurred. The fear card isn't so strong these days. "You might lose your house and/or job" seems to worry people more than "the odds are 1:10,000,000 that a terrorist may kill you in an extremely contrived scenario!"

Remember any sort of compromise or rational thought is bad because Sensenbrenner says doing so instantly brings us back to pre-9/11 danger. Beware of this sort of mentality. Beware the men that play with your emotions and speak in absolutes for the world is shades of grey.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28333817)

Will anyone please accept that maybe all of the money spent for Homeland Security has actually helped prevent post 9/11 homeland terrorism from occurring? Instead of shoving it all to the side as republican war profiteering?

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333843)

Will anyone please accept that maybe all of the money spent for Homeland Security has actually helped prevent post 9/11 homeland terrorism from occurring? Instead of shoving it all to the side as republican war profiteering?

You may very well be right. Nowhere in my post did I say that it didn't. What I said was that we have gotten along for 8 years just fine without a Real ID. However painful it is for me to say this, TSA & DHS are here to stay. If they or the NSA wiretapping or whatever encroachments on our rights and privacy condoned have prevented homeland terrorism then good for them. I don't like all of those things but I cannot say one way or the other that they haven't worked.

But that's not what this is about. This is about people trying to push it even further. Do you just write them a blank check in the name of security? Do you just offer up all your rights on the spot and roll over for them? Let me quote the article:

Supporters saw a slimmer measure as better than nothing. But critics said the changes gut the law, weakening tools to fight fraud and learn whether bad drivers, drug runners or counterfeiters have licenses in more than one state.

My GOD! Bad drivers are running free across state borders! Here's $50 million dollars of tax payer money. Get them! At all costs! What? You need me to carry a Real ID along with my other ID and birth certificate and registration? Ok, whatever you say!

I call for a halt to Real ID or Pass ID or whatever until we see a need for it.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (3, Insightful)

badfish99 (826052) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334165)

Given that a driving licence is supposed to be proof of your ability to drive, I would have thought that the more licences a person could obtain from different states, the less likely it would be for that person to be a bad driver.
Or doesn't the driving licence in your country require passing a driving test, as it does in mine?

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334295)

Possession of a license from one state is generally enough to not take a test in other states.

It is also generally enough to get an international driving permit, something that probably works in your country.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334395)

Given that a driving licence is supposed to be proof of your ability to drive,

If that were true, at least 1/3 of the people in my area would be removed from the road for their inability to drive in something close to a safe or competent manner.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334941)

In the UK at least, it's become proof of your ability to pass an arbitrary test of which the tutor knows exactly what will be tested on (in the limited time available) due to prior knowledge of all test routes in the area.

A prime example of "teaching for the test" is that my girlfriend was never, ever taught how to reverse bay-park as there are no bay-parking areas on any test route where we live. She can only put a car in a parking space forwards, and has to get me to reverse out of it for her. I am trying to rememeber what they taught me (as I learned in a different area) so I can teach her, but her license is exactly the same as mine despite having totally different levels of ability.

And please, no jokes about women not being able to reverse park anyway. I've seen blonde "SUV*" drivers reverse into spaces I'd not want to park a "compact*" in, and men in small cars take up two spaces and hit stationary obsticles.

* 4x4 and small car, respectively Think Range Rover and VW Golf.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (2, Interesting)

zephris (925151) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334613)

It's still a little early for me so unless sleep is playing tricks on my memory... As I recall, Real ID was supposed to make it harder for terrorists to cause problems here in the US. To quote you quoting the article: "But critics said the changes gut the law, weakening tools to fight fraud and learn whether bad drivers, drug runners or counterfeiters have licenses in more than one state." What the hell? Using a law designed to fight terrorism in order to prosecute a civilian who does something that is, at best, questionable is an abuse of power. It works both ways. This is blatantly, unignorably, an abuse of the intention and a JUMP towards taking power from the states and giving it to the Federal Government - It's one thing to have states work with each other (as was intended) but to usurp that process like this and then brag about how it could be used to monitor US citizens (innocent until proven guilty?) is an abuse! Papers, Citizen! If you do not provide papers, you cannot pass. This is, of course, assuming I am remembering the intent behind Real ID correctly.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334741)

Do not look at the intentions of a law think only try to realize the truth of how that law will be abused by those who use that law.

Real ids would have become papers please. Personally it would be wiser to standardize the states information.

Afro-American Racism Against Whites and Asians (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334853)

During the election, about 95% of African-Americans voted for Barack Hussein Obama due solely to the color of his skin. See the exit-polling data [cnn.com] by CNN.

Note the voting pattern of Hispanics, Asian-Americans, etc. These non-Black minorities serve as a measurement of African-American racism against non-Blacks. Neither Barack Hussein Obama nor John McCain is a non-Black minority. So, Hispanics and Asian-Americans used only non-racial criteria in selecting a candidate and, hence, serve as the reference by which we detect a racist voting pattern. Only about 65% of Hispanics and Asian-Americans supported Obama. In other words, a maximum of 65% support by any ethnic or racial group for either McCain or Obama is not racist and, hence, is acceptable.

If African-Americans were not racist, then at most 65% of them would have supported Obama. At that level of support, McCain would have won the presidential race.

At this point, African-American supremacists (and apologists) claim that African-Americans voted for Obama because he (1) is a member of the Democratic party and (2) supports its ideals. That claim is an outright lie. Look at the exit-polling data [cnn.com] for the Democratic primaries. Consider the case of North Carolina. Again, about 95% of African-Americans voted for him and against Hillary Clinton. Both Clinton and Obama are Democrats, and their official political positions on the campaign trail were nearly identical. Yet, 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama and against Hillary Clinton. Why? African-Americans supported Obama due solely to the color of his skin.

Here is the bottom line. Barack Hussein Obama does not represent mainstream America. He won the election due to the racist voting pattern exhibited by African-Americans.

African-Americans have established that expressing "racial pride" by voting on the basis of skin color is 100% acceptable. Neither the "Wall Street Journal" nor the "New York Times" complained about this racist behavior. Therefore, in future elections, please feel free to express your racial pride by voting on the basis of skin color. Feel free to vote for the non-Black candidates and against the Black candidates if you are not African-American. You need not defend your actions in any way. Voting on the basis of skin is quite acceptable by the standards of today's moral values.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

necrogram (675897) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335055)

One of the issues that Real ID adresses is to cut down on issuing DL's to those that have had them revoked. Its a common occurance for John Doe to loose his license in state X so he drives across the state lines, and gets an license from state Y. States do have reciprocity. but it takes years for the records to catch up to you.

Like it or not, theres a lot of stock put in to that little peice of goverenment issued plastic. Real ID helps to make sure the plastic card s being issued to the person it say it is. Document Authenticity is a big problem, and not just with licences, but plates/tag, car titles, vehicle registrations. You get quite a different perspective when talking to a state's DMV director.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334257)

maybe

Maybe if the government had been more open about it, you'd have something stronger than "maybe".

Instead, we got told that there were definitely plots foiled, but nobody could talk about them because it would tip off the enemy (as if the lack of an earth-shattering kaboom wasn't the first sign that their plan failed).

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334299)

Fine, prove that there was not attack because of it, and prove there would have been an attack had we not spent the money. Then I'll accept it. But the reality is that anything stopped was through the old traditional channels which existed pre-9/11.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (4, Insightful)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334573)

No.

All this relaxed talk by Americans of "homeland" this and "papers" that as though it's just another day at the office makes me little sick btw.

Our great friend the US of A teetering on the edge of becoming the monster that it once so valiantly wrestled. Fortunately something, a single thread perhaps, keeps holding it back...but for how much longer?

Tune in over the next few years to find out.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (0)

Fotograf (1515543) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333839)

yep, almost 8 years ago and still strong. we need to keep people to fear something, imo swine flu is even better because there can be discovered expensive vaccination once fear reaches peak.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

tibman (623933) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333907)

I'm pretty sure the vaccine for swine flu already exists and costs the same to produce as the seasonal flu vaccine?

But i'm sure if there was a lot of demand the price could go up.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

Lockblade (1367083) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333879)

We go right back to where we were on Sept. 10, 2001. Maybe governors should have been in the Capitol when we knew a plane was on its way to Washington wanting to kill a few thousand more people.

Couldn't you argue that we were the safest right after an attack? It's kind of like getting a flat tire and the other three exploding as you pull over. Or all the drives in a RAID array failing. Or dead pixels making your monitor unusable. Or...

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (4, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333901)

The thing is that security is no better now than it was before 9/11. People can still sneak things onto airplanes. In fact, the last two times I have flown, I have, entirely by accident, smuggled two knives onto an airplane. Note that these were simply a "multitool"-type knife that I use for taking computers apart when I have no other tools available, but they were still knives, still not allowed, and still, according the DHS, a security risk. Yet twice TSA screeners missed it. I myself didn't even realize it was stuck in my usual carry on (I won't say how or why it was missed because that information can be misused) -- I thought it was lost. But what if I had been a terrorist, fully aware of the knife?

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (3, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334005)

At worst, you might have killed a few passengers and made flying even more inconvenient for everybody else. If you chose your flight poorly, a marshal probably would have subdued you and you would be awaiting trial (I don't really have any sense of how quick they are to shoot...maybe you would be dead).

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334101)

At worst, you might have killed a few passengers and made flying even more inconvenient for everybody else. If you chose your flight poorly, a marshal probably would have subdued you and you would be awaiting trial (I don't really have any sense of how quick they are to shoot...maybe you would be dead).

What if they were 10 of me on that flight? 20?

Thing is that the way this knife (all metal), was stuck in the bag, screeners would likely miss it every single time. (Again, I'm not saying how.)

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334235)

I don't know. I guess it depends on the size of the plane and the mind set of the pilots (I'm assuming that they would have hardened cockpit doors and thus would be able to tell you to sit on it and spin).

I do like Bruce Schneier's general response to this, which is to focus on police work and investigation (and thus prevention), rather than ever more invasive protection against each scenario that someone happens to think up.

A truly, perfectly, safe society would be terrible to live in, so to some extent, the answer is to accept that shitty things are going to happen and get on with life.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (3, Insightful)

Phroggy (441) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334693)

At worst, you might have killed a few passengers and made flying even more inconvenient for everybody else. If you chose your flight poorly, a marshal probably would have subdued you and you would be awaiting trial (I don't really have any sense of how quick they are to shoot...maybe you would be dead).

Marshall, shmarshall. The other passengers would have whooped your ass, regardless of what sort of weapon you managed to smuggle on board. This is why 9/11 cannot happen again: the public is now aware that some hijackers may be suicidal terrorists, which means "sit down and shut up" may not be the best strategy to ensure survival. Flight 93 [wikipedia.org] marked the beginning of this change, but they figured it out too late to save the plane; any future hijacking attempts will be less successful.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334845)

I thought I covered that in my worst case scenario where a couple of passengers died.

Someone who knows what they are doing is quite likely to make the first couple of good Samaritan attackers bleed quite a bit.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334155)

I have carried a one inch blade with me every time I've flown. It always passes without question, even though I put it in plain view in the X-ray bin. The I think the reason is it doesn't look like a knife so they miss it (human nature being what it is and they having to scan thousands of passengers a day). But then again, there was one time a screener picked it up, inspected it and put it back in the X-ray bin without a question. So maybe it's not that they just keep missing it.

Singing Bowl Got Past Security (1)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334371)

The thing is that security is no better now than it was before 9/11. People can still sneak things onto airplanes. In fact, the last two times I have flown, I have, entirely by accident, smuggled two knives onto an airplane. Note that these were simply a "multitool"-type knife that I use for taking computers apart when I have no other tools available, but they were still knives, still not allowed, and still, according the DHS, a security risk. Yet twice TSA screeners missed it. I myself didn't even realize it was stuck in my usual carry on (I won't say how or why it was missed because that information can be misused) -- I thought it was lost. But what if I had been a terrorist, fully aware of the knife?

I was traveling with a stop over in Chicago a few years back. In my bag was a hand-made Nepali singing bowl (a musical instrument). Mind you, it was quite large and took up most of the bag, and is made of an alloy of 5 types of metal. The first time I went through security nobody noticed it. Then I went back outside for a smoke and had to go through security again. *This* time the scanner guy watching his little TV waved his arms frantically for all the other securty to run over and check out the bag. They were freaked out and furious. I told them it was a musical instrument and even gave them a demonstration of how it worked. Just as they were letting me leave/proceed, I told them, "oh yeah, the first time I went through here, not one eyebrow was raised". Then I got to see them all gallop back to the little TV sets in anger.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (5, Insightful)

Ioldanach (88584) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334405)

But what if I had been a terrorist, fully aware of the knife?

You're buying into the security theater paradigm. Before 9/11, hijackings were kidnapping and ransom situations in the US. If you wanted to survive, you kept a low profile and didn't rock the boat, and odds were everything would be fine. Out of 200 people they might kill one or two, so your odds of being that one were low enough that resistance was not a good idea. 9/11 changed all that. Now the possibility that everyone might be killed is very very real, so terrorists are likely to see an overwhelming resistance if all they could get on board were knives or possibly even a couple small firearms.

I honestly think that a modest knife, say 3" or less, presents no substantial hijack threat.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335065)

Niceidea, but you're assuming that there would be some person who would choose to be the first to confront them. By any chance is your name "Meatshield"? Because mine isn't.

Self preservation aside, there's also that the Britain's Got Talent / America's Next Top Model watching crowd are more than likely flabby, unfit cowards who would just end up as a nasty stain, scaring the rest of the passengers into suplication. Nothing quite like seeing a fellow human disembowled in front of you to get everyone to comply.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334489)

I myself didn't even realize it was stuck in my usual carry on (I won't say how or why it was missed because that information can be misused)

Lol! Just like the "big boys" - I know something so incredibly dangerous that if I let the secret out, the terrorists will kill everyone!
As if any 'terrorist' worth worrying about doesn't know 10x as many ways to smuggle shit on a plane already.
Here's one - use an obsidian or a ceramic knife.

The thing is that security is no better now than it was before 9/11.

Actually, it is. The cockpit doors have been reinforced. No one is piloting a plane into a building or anywhere else unless the pilot is tricked into letting them.

But what if I had been a terrorist, fully aware of the knife?

You'd be able to cut a few people, maybe kill them, before everybody else mobbed you and gave you the beatdown of your life.
You should be more worried about a bomb in the baggage hold.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334609)

As if any 'terrorist' worth worrying about doesn't know 10x as many ways to smuggle shit on a plane already.

Ding! Someone with a clue. That was my entire point!

Actually, it is. The cockpit doors have been reinforced. No one is piloting a plane into a building or anywhere else unless the pilot is tricked into letting them.

Because those cockpit doors can't be opened without the key, combination, whatever, right? Ask people in law enforcement, CIA, military special ops, etc., if that's really true. Just think about this: if I could a knife on a plane, what else could I get on plane?

You should be more worried about a bomb in the baggage hold.

True. Checked baggage doesn't get sniffed.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (2, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334917)

Ding! Someone with a clue. That was my entire point!

Except that you fell victim to the same groupthink when you made an issue of keeping the details of your special revelation a secret.

Because those cockpit doors can't be opened without the key, combination, whatever, right?

They can't even be opened with "the key" as there is no cabin accessible keyhole. They use dead-bolts and cross bars that are only accessible from within the cockpit.
There is a picture of the one in Delta jets in this article [usatoday.com] - normally it doesn't even have contact with the door, much less a cabin-accessible unlocking mechanism.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

halcyon1234 (834388) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334507)

In fact, the last two times I have flown, I have, entirely by accident, smuggled two knives onto an airplane

A couple months ago, I went on my first business trip for the place I work. They sent me to Houston, Texas. Before I went, every said "be sure to eat some BBQ". I did my best, but the hours were stupidly long, and the only good BBQ place was a cab-ride away. But on the last day, everyone piled into a cab and went out for some awesome, awesome BBQ. I got an extra sandwich with BBQ sauce to have on the plane (since food isn't provided anymore). It was an early morning flight, so I just stayed up rather than taking a near useless 1 hour nap.

Early in the morning, I zombied my way through security. Shoes off, laptop out, all my tools packed. The guards were hassling everyone about hand cream, hand sanitizer, etc. I had my three bottles in a baggie out already. Other people were arguing, red-faced and sunburned, about their creams. The guards were being very strict that day. I just wanted through. I put everything, including my breakfast, through the Xray, went through the metal detector without a hitch, and soon enough, I was on the plane.

Once the seatbelt lights were off, I cracked out the po boy, and dug in. It was very good the day after, especially dipped in BBQ sauce. And then, after about the second bite, once the proteins kicked in, I realized I was dipping the sandwich in a gigantic, for-surely-more-than-3-oz contained of liquid, oddly colored beef juice. And that's when I realized-- how in the hell did I get this on the plane? I didn't hide it, didn't conceal it, had it right out in the open.

But in reality, it was Texan BBQ sauce. The only thing it'd be terrorizing would be a vegetarian.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

the_fat_kid (1094399) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334617)

ok, true story time:
my little sister and I flew to Denver in 08. on the flight back we got canceled. new flight the next day. on my FIFTH trip through "security" the pulled me out of line when my leather jacket set off the x-ray machine. The culprit? a 3/8" drill bit had fallen through a hole in my pocket into my liner. I must say everyone was very nice "I'm sorry, you can't take this on the airplane. Did you want to take it back to your car?". We threw it away and flew back to Chicago.
The funny parts:
They had not noticed it the Four previous times my jacket was x-rayed.
It's been 27 years since I flew any where with out at least some pot on me. Like it or not. they don't EVER notice.

feel any safer?

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334673)

A piece of plexiglass can be sharpened equally as sharp as a metal knife.

A ball point pen can be turned into a small gun that can kill.

A length of cotton double wrapped can strangle someone.

It's not possible to stop people smuggling deadly weapons on board, as nearly any object can be used to hurt or maim. And if a maximum security prison can't stop smuggling, then neither can an airline. If they can then get the airlines to run the prisons.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334781)

If a terrorist group were patient enough to wait 10 years(which they clearly are) they can get anything on a airplane. Airport(specifically airline airport) employees can access pretty much any secure area, including the airplanes themselves as well as the ramp area, without any type of security screening after the initial background checks. I know someone who went to the range before going to work at the airport one day, and she accidentally left in her purse the slide of the gun as well as a loaded magazine. She had this inside the airport. Luckily, her husband worked with the police at the airport, so she could call him and he took it from her. But really, it is ridiculously easy to get things on planes.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

Rapid Supreme 17 (916052) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335199)

But what if I had been a terrorist, fully aware of the knife?

You could have taken apart a computer during the flight?

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (2, Insightful)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334323)

Translation: We know that for the past 8 years this has been pushed to prevent homeland terrorism but you know there hasn't really been any major events without it since 9/11. Also, we've got a lot of other shit to worry about that actually does affect your life more than having to present papers whenever you cross any political boundary inside the United States. You know, like the economy and jobs.

No, translation: The previous Administration wasn't able to get many states on board with this as it exists, so we're going to try watering it down a little. Once everybody's on board with this we can ramp it up to the real deal.

Re:Hopefully It'll Just Go Away (1)

cellurl (906920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334627)

I support a national-ID whatever its called.

Its the only way to secure our borders.

In Tennessee where I live, terrorists get the DMV ladies to get them licences and then blow up cars!

Its really the same as a drivers license which is a pain I know, but reasonable.

not dead yet? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28333787)

The fundamental issue to having reliable, un-forged ID cards has nothing to do with federal standards. Instead it has everything to do with the drinking age. As long as the legal drinking/smoking ages are higher than the age at which an individual can figure out who to make/get a fake ID, there will be no security provided by an ID card. This is why having a passport actually makes sense. no one goes to the bar on their passport (foreign exchange students aside.) So, a good fake DL can be obtained for $100 near almost any college campus... but a good fake Passport? I'm not sure I'd even know where to begin asking for one, since I'm not a spook. This is of course predicated on the idea that you even believe having a reliable ID card system is a 'good' thing... That is a point that basically can't be argued, either you're for or against it based on a ideological differences. But until the policy makers acknowledge the issue of technical standards being circumvented by clever 15 - 19 year olds every year as technology improves, no standard that they propose will have the effects they think they want.

Re:not dead yet? (2, Funny)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333883)

Could god create an ID card so secure, that it was unforgeable [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:not dead yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28333945)

Of course, since a goldly ID card is by definition a card delivered by god, then god could not himself forge a godly ID card not because he is unable to make one but because such a card would be by definition not a fake godly card.

Re:not dead yet? (3, Insightful)

Missing_dc (1074809) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334205)

Heard of DNA?

Re:not dead yet? (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334339)

Yes, and as science is finding out, it's not really unique like they once thought it was.

Re:not dead yet? (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335097)

Yeah, we share 50% of it with bananas [thingsyoud...toknow.com]

Re:not dead yet? (1)

rock_climbing_guy (630276) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333999)

I once presented my passport in the bar to get a drink after the barkeep refused to serve me when I showed him my driver's license. He says that Texas has state law prohibiting them from accepting a driver's license from another state as ID. I have no idea how this could stand up if someone took Texas to court for violating the "full faith and credit" section of the US Constitution.

Bartenders (1)

pleappleappleap (1182301) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334271)

I have a feeling that bartender wasn't talking about an actual law that exists. I suspect he was just full of shit.

Re:not dead yet? (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334311)

I wouldn't be surprised if that guy was just a prick.

Re:not dead yet? (1)

Bruiser80 (1179083) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334939)

While the state of Texas can't have a law, the establishment you were in could very likely have a rule stating that they won't accept out-of-state IDs, as they are easier to forge (an unusual ID is easier to get by). As a private business, they have the right to refuse to serve anyone they deem fit for (almost) any reason.

When I worked at the Wisconsin student union bar, we had a book of state licenses so we could check them. We also required student ID or union membership, and we had a LARGE book with all the students names and their birthdates so we could corroborate if we didn't like the look of somebody's ID.

It was a blast to refuse people because their ID was fake. Some were really bad - one guy scratched off the last digit on his birthdate and drew in a different number. Problem was, there was one place that said "under 21 until..." on the top of his picture, and the scratching there distorted the picture, which he didn't try to fix. Another one was a NY liscense that was glued onto the back of a ATM card to give it the right thickness. Classy.

Re:not dead yet? (1)

Bruiser80 (1179083) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334957)

Oh, and we did accept Passports and Military IDs

Re:not dead yet? (1)

Late Adopter (1492849) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334765)

Well, if the end goal is difficult-to-forge and reliable ID, surely the stricter Real ID requirements were better. After all, if a bartender scans your ID and it doesn't hit in the database, you can tell it's not a legit ID, regardless of how nice the physical document mimics real ones.

On top of that, having actual standards which the states apply to documentation they'll accept that establish your identity is a good thing. I realize there's a limit to how well we can check these things, but putting up a hurdle to providing a forged or stolen birth certificate would at least be a positive step toward ensuring that we know who these people are that are presenting their IDs to us.

To me, as a partial supporter of the concept (Real ID was WAY too far, but TFA suggests this compromise guts some important parts), I don't care about movements, I don't care about logging who does what where, and we shouldn't give the government that ability.

But the ability to say, YES, the State of Maryland vouches that I am Joe Shmuck, born on such and such a date, as verified by actual standards supported and depended on by our union as a whole, is a laudable goal. This isn't about surveillance, it's about preventing others from deceiving us about who they are. Identity theft, criminal pasts, etc.

Re:not dead yet? (1)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334883)

BS Man. The drinking age thing is not to prevent people under 21 from drinking. Mostly, to be honest, it's about people in their 30s wanting to be CERTAIN the girl they're hitting on is really 20 something, and not some 18 year old. Kids and bars don't blend well. Also, its a way to control merchants, make some extra tax money, andf in general just a measure of control.

But saying the drinking age is why we're making a stronger ID card??? No, that's about border access, illegal drivers, and illegal immigrants.

Why do we need a national ID system? We spend too much money on having 50 of them seperately, and too much money training people to spot real ones and fake ones. Last barkeep's listing I looked at had over 180 unique valid IDs (Most staes have at least 2, plus all the other military and givernment ID cards).

Also, unifying the ID system means we can normalize driver points, and track offenses from one state to another. today you can loose your license in one state for DUI and a dozen tickets, then just move to another state, apply, and drive away. That should NOT be possible. Heck, today, if your license is suspended in your state, but you're driving in another and get stopped, 9/10 the cop can't even pull your record, and if you do get a ticket, your home state is not informed.

If we make a harder to fake ID in the process of creating a national driver registration system that ALL state cops have access to (not to search blindly, but to look up a driver when he's handed an ID), then good, some kids who would lie to get into a bar won't be able to.

Personally, I think the drinking age should be lowered to 14, but keep the age to purchase alcohol at 21. Let parents and schools provide the alcohol and let the kids party. Keep em off the roads until they're a little more mature, 15-16 is too young, and no kid should have an unrestricted license until 18 (or until admitted to college if they get in at 17).

Re:not dead yet? (1)

necrogram (675897) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335145)

Getting a real fake ID isnt that hard if you know the process. If you bring falsified documents to the the DMV, assuming your forgeries ar half descent, you'll get your ID issued to you. The process is pretty easy to game today. Real ID is more about having the process to issue a licence authenicate the documents and ther person.

Hmm.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28333819)

I'm not a politician and heck I'm not even that smart. I don't have strong opinions on policy and the likes because I know I don't understand what's going on, etc..

But you don't need to explain *anything* about a national ID card for me to not like it.

Re:Hmm.. (1)

observer7 (753034) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334051)

To privacy both of them dashed the wooing was quick, unabashed as they both got bare both became aware that, dammit, the hard drive has crashed

Oh? (4, Interesting)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333899)

law passed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that was designed to tighten security requirements for driver's licenses...

The last eight years free of collapsing buildings seem to me a great indicator of its implicit uselessness. So why push it still?

Re:Oh? (5, Insightful)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333967)

The last eight years free of collapsing buildings seem to me a great indicator of its implicit uselessness. So why push it still?

It's useless for preventing terrorist attacks, but highly useful for helping government officials track a citizen's movements. Now they can use that power for good (more promptly serving arrest warrants) or evil (harassing political opponents as just one example). Anti-terrorism is a smokescreen. What RealID proponents really want, and won't stop until they get, is the 24/7 tracking of every person in the country.

What I say to this is, if you're not doing anything wrong ... then where you are and what you're up to are none of the government's damned business. [findlaw.com]

Re:Oh? (2, Interesting)

Sandbags (964742) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335139)

Tracking? We're already tracked. The Feds have FULL ACCESS you EVERY STATE SYSTEM today, it;s just clunky and expensive. RealID offers no additional access, just a cheaper, more regulated, and more consistent ability to stop fakes. It also provides the ability to track drivers from state to state as not only the feds would get access to it, but each state could look up driver statuses, assign points from tickets, and perform insurance checks, regardless of the state of your issue and state you're stopped in.

Unless you're REAL good, the government knows where you are, period, give up that fight. The card in your wallet provides no way to "track" you other than in a database. It;s not a GPS, It's just a line item next to the megabytes of data they already have on you. Your address, SSN, tax records, vehicle registration, criminal record, phone numbers, work history, and more are all on file and accessible the the govewrnment anytime they want it. If they want to put out a warent against someone they SHOULD know where to look. If they want to collect back taxes they SHOULD know where to look. If they want to depoer someone they SHOULD know where to look. Outside of that, they really could care less what you do day to day, and have no reason to track your whereabouts or activities.

What having realID means too is that you CAN ONLY HAVE 1. No more drivers licenses in 4 states, choosing where to pay vehicle taxes, where to get insurance, and where to be registered to vote irregardless of where you actually live... No more choosing which license to give a cop when you get stopped. It's all one ID, so no more cheating the system.

Real ID makes it harder for people who should not have a license (because it's been suspended in another state, or due to the lack of a valid address, or citizenship) to get one. If it's been revolked, it's invalid everywhere.

If they want more detail about you, it's a bench warrent away. Phone records, purchase history, putting a tracker on your car, all of these are easy to obtain, but the require a judge to ask "why" and "what proof do you have" before it can be done.

Trust me, i'm sitting in a building with over 3,000 servers, and medical records on every single man and woman who's ever worked for the government, and about 40 million other americans. HAVING this information MEANS NOTHING, since we can't just SEARCH it or run reports against it at will, the ONLY way to GET information is to HAVE information (an ID number and matching name, SSN and matching address, phone number and matching information, and with that you get 1 record. 1. even then a 3rd peice of information is needed to access the record once a match is confirmed. We process 7-10 billion transactions a quarter, we only look at the ones the conputer rejects, or that people make complaints about, or for people who don't pay. Keep your head down, and other than getting confirmation in the mail that a claim was accepted and paid, no one here cares that you exist and will never look you up. A few years ago an executive was doing some snooping on celebrity medical records, but he got fired and imprisoned damn quick for it... They really don;t play around when it comes to unauthoized access to personal information. Have more faith the the people in your government are actually people too, and many of them as paranoid as you are...

Re:Oh? (2, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334159)

correlation is not causation.

"I've been snapping my fingers the last 8 yrs too; and so far, no lions have appeared. this stuff must really work!"

Re:Oh? (1)

joebagodonuts (561066) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334593)

No Shit. So here's the quandary. The Real ID proponents tell me it is. They tell me Real ID will prevent attacks, as well as whiten my teeth and freshen my breath. So, who am I to believe? I think I'll oppose it, since it never had anything to do with planes flown into buildings (or the prevention of) in the first place.

Re:Oh? (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334745)

The absence of collapsing buildings isn't merely being correlated, it is observed, verifiable data.

The hypothesis: Lack of RealID contributed to 9/11's success and implementing RealID will prevent it in the future.

Evidence in favor: ??

Evidence against: ??

Point of interest: It seems completely unnecessary given the lack of any imminent threat.

So while the effectiveness of the program has yet to be measured, the WORTH of it is certainly in doubt, and there is a very, very high 'why bother' quotient at this point.

How, exactly, does snapping for lions relate to that?

Re:Oh? (1, Troll)

Ummite (195748) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334305)

If you think that 9/11 was an inside job (as most people that seriously analyse all the aspect of the 9/11 facts, as most of the close familly of the lost ones), then patriot acts and all other mesure to try to keep us far from terrorist is only a mirage, a way to get more control over american citizen.

Tatoos are inexpensive and oh so vogue (5, Insightful)

xednieht (1117791) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333979)

Why not just tattoo a number on people. Hear it worked real well about 60 years ago.

I'd be curious are people here more apprehensive about the intrusive government or terrorists?

When can I have my America back?

Re:Tatoos are inexpensive and oh so vogue (3, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334115)

Probably never. Most people don't care and a lot of people that do care don't take it any further than asking rhetorical questions.

(I'm not even suggesting some wacky revolution like a few fringies here do, I'm suggesting some higher level of civic engagement among people who want to live in a sane society, rather than the yell loudly about possibly scary things society that we have today)

Re:Tatoos are inexpensive and oh so vogue (1)

cellurl (906920) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334847)

I feel your pain. Find something to do. I started a speed limit campaign http://www.wikispeedia.org/ [wikispeedia.org] It helps medicate me.

Papers please (2, Insightful)

Nkwe (604125) | more than 5 years ago | (#28333987)

Commissioners called for federal standards for driver's licenses and birth certificates, noting, "For terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons." Eighteen of 19 terrorist hijackers obtained state IDs, some of them fraudulently, easing their movements inside the country.

Since when was a driver's license a "travel document"?

Re:Papers please (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334059)

Well, what do you do with a driver's license? Arguably, travel is the central use of such a document: not having one means not driving a car. If the quotation's right, and the hijackers found it easier to travel with licenses, it's not because anyone was checking for papers at state borders -- it's because they were able to drive a car. That's the fundamental mode of travel in the US. So, yeah, driver's licenses are travel documents.

On the other hand, they weren't intended originally as all-around ID's for financial transactions, alcohol consumption, hotel stays, etc. But travel document is an excellent description: the license facilitates travel by making the use of an automobile legitimate; those without papers and traveling by the primary means of travel in the US are cited for driving without a license, so a penalty is imposed on travel without papers.

Re:Papers please (2, Interesting)

badfish99 (826052) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334261)

In the UK we've got a different approach: you need to possess a driving licence in order to legally drive a car, but you don't need to carry it around with you as ID, even when driving a car. Indeed, the last time I was stopped by a policeman, he remarked that it was convenient that I didn't have my licence with me, as it reduced his amount of paperwork.

Re:Papers please (3, Insightful)

Brewmeister_Z (1246424) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334397)

Alcohol consumption and the driver's license relationship is odd when it comes to punishment for underage consumption. Many states will try to revoke a driver's license for underage consumption even if there was no related driving offense.

Many alcohol and drug laws go too far to stop big offenses by making minor offenses into a big ones as well. For example, in my state, testing positive in a drug test is the same as possession and results in more jail time compared to other states. And don't get me started on the 21 drinking age and the federal blackmail with highway funds.

Better (3, Interesting)

Spazmania (174582) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334141)

On the one hand, I object to requiring a driver's license for any travel other than driving. General travel documents are one of the hallmarks of a police state.

On the other hand, I have no great objection to requiring the states to standardize the physical driver's license card so that law enforcement doesn't need to know about the designs of fifty plus different licenses.

To the extent that Pass ID does the latter, I'm in favor.

Re:Better (2, Insightful)

jimicus (737525) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334219)

On the other hand, I have no great objection to requiring the states to standardize the physical driver's license card so that law enforcement doesn't need to know about the designs of fifty plus different licenses.

Then they should pass a law saying "All states will issue driving licenses in accordance with the following design..... Existing licenses will remain valid until their expiry".

Quick, easy, relatively non-controversial and the entire damn law can be written in about 2 sentences.

Re:Better (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334543)

On the other hand, I have no great objection to requiring the states to standardize the physical driver's license card so that law enforcement doesn't need to know about the designs of fifty plus different licenses.

Why? Just because the layout of the ID is standardized isn't going to stop forgeries that cost more than ~$20. If anything, standardizing the design will reduce the price of effective forgeries. Since they will all look the same, all of the forgers can focus on that one specific design rather than designs for multiple states.

Re:Better (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334727)

Michigan has embedded holograms (or whatever, the shiny things) in their card stock. That sort of thing means per-state forgeries without interfering much with the layout of the information, both visual and digital.

Re:Better (2, Insightful)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334855)

As far as I'm aware the US Federal Government doesn't have the mandate or authority to "require" the states to do anything like that. Given that it was the states who created the Federal Government and gave it the power to exist to do a limited range of things involving common defense and keeping interstate trade regular in the first place it's not really ok for it to turn around and tell the states what to do.

But that may just be my naive reading of the highest law of your land, the law that actually allows a legal entity such as the federal government to exists. I was under the impression that the US was a nation of laws. Unlike say Soviet Russia who had a set of laws outlined in a similar document that stated what the central government could do, but completely ignored them and did whatever it liked.

Re:Better (1)

Spazmania (174582) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334955)

As far as I'm aware the US Federal Government doesn't have the mandate or authority to "require" the states to do anything like that.

Then link it to highway funds. Unlike the drinking age, it'd at least be relevant.

Re:Better (2, Insightful)

Zan Lynx (87672) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334995)

"Unlike say Soviet Russia who had a set of laws outlined in a similar document that stated what the central government could do, but completely ignored them and did whatever it liked."

No, that's pretty much how the US Federal government works too. But don't say it too loudly or the government will call you a radical right-wing militia terrorist.

It will not stop terrorism (5, Insightful)

assertation (1255714) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334199)

A National ID would not have stopped the American terrorist who recently murdered the Holocaust Museum guard nor the American terrorist who murdered that doctor who performed abortions.

Re:It will not stop terrorism (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334771)

Those were murderers, not terrorists. Stop trying to pretend that there's not a difference.

Re:It will not stop terrorism (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335059)

Those two guys were not a terrorist who by definition belong to an organized group (key word there) attempt to affect change through fear. The museum dirtbag was a neo-Nazi wannabe who had a habit of this sort of behavior. "Oh but we can rehabilitate him." Sure you can. Let me know how that goes. Oh wait, he killed a guy. Oopsie. And the slime that killed the doctor was delusional. Terrorists never operate on their own. There is always a training and brainwashing hierarchy behind them. Now as for the c*ckbreath who killed an American soldier in Arkansas, you could say the same thing if you don't deep into his background to find out if he had real ties to Al Qaeda. But certainly the mainstream media won't dig into it and I'll bet that a federal investigation will close the case without bothering.

Impeach obama and the democrats! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334367)

Impeach LORD, GOD, the "INFALIBLE", obama!!!!!!!

impeach obama - impeach b.o.!!!!!!!!

Impeach the democrats!!!!!

Remove the CZARS - they have no congressional over-sight!!!!!!!

Reverse all bills passed since the innaguration!!!!!

NO MORE BAIL-OUTS!!!!!!

NO MORE NATAIOALIZED BUSINESSES!!!!! GOVERNMENT PROVES THAT GOVERNMENT RUN ORGANIZATIONS ARE A FAILURE!!!!

NO GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE!!!!!

DEPORT THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRINTS / ALIENS!!!!

PAY DOWN THE DEFICIT ---NOW---!!!!! IT HAS GRON MORE UNDER THE THUMB OF b.o. THAN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION!!!

NO LIBERALS!!!!!!

NO PROGRESSIVES!!!!

NO SOCIALISTS!!!!!!

NO FACISISTS!!!!!

How scarry is a National ID ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334623)

[privacy advocates warned it would create a de facto national ID]

Ok, so what? I still don't get why Americans are sooo afraid of the big ID Card. All European countries have one, it doesn't make our government track our every move or anything.

Re:How scarry is a National ID ? (1)

joebagodonuts (561066) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334721)

It 's as much tradition as anything else. This country was formed by the uncooperative, the rebellious.

That, and we don't trust our Government bureaucrats.

Re:How scarry is a National ID ? (2, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334759)

Is your ID card linked to a database that Russian police can access?

By comparison, ours would be linked to a database that the Texas police would have access to.

Re:How scarry is a National ID ? (4, Insightful)

twostix (1277166) | more than 5 years ago | (#28335003)

"it doesn't make our government track our every move or anything."

And you know that how?

Because in my country at least getting government departments to tell us what they do and don't talk to each other about and what info they are and aren't mining about the citizens is like pulling teeth and requires costly court battles.

I assume you just implicitly trust your public servants to do the moral thing in the course of their duties?

I've worked in our federal government, if the data is there and there isn't a specific law banning the use of it, at best there's a pilot project or little dodgey in house app to play with the data a million different ways. I know this because I wrote one and though it was pretty benign to start with, the potential that it created and the hunger for information on everyone displayed by the various deparments I worked with I'm sure it's not benign (or even legal) anymore.

The thing is, who's going to stop them from doing things like that? You?

Regardless we need it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28334877)

I'm not saying it will stop FakeIDs, but having a little more consitent document check is a good thing, I think having a standard ID type will also be helpfull, imagine your in CA and someone has a NY license, only trained security staff really have a clue as to what it should look like. I think this is more to help with illegal immigrants getting Gov issued ID's than to stop terroist, and I'm all for that. I don't understand it's called ILLEGAL immigrant for a reason. If they are supposed to be here let's call them Visiting/Undocumented/Drive By Immigrants. Cut welfare make the people who can work work. Sure they may have to do the jobs that snooty americans deemed "only good enough for immigrants" well forget that I won't look down on someone who is working, OK enough off topic. REALID is REALLY GOOD.

Yes, but it will only be mandatory for... (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | more than 5 years ago | (#28334925)

Right winger voters, soldiers returning from Iraq, and people with Ron Paul bumper stickers because "we have to know who these people are!"

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?