This week's giveaway is in the Java in General forum.
We're giving away four copies of Java Challengers and have Rafael del Nero on-line!
See this thread for details.
Win a copy of Java Challengers this week in the Java in General forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Paul Clapham
  • Ron McLeod
  • paul wheaton
  • Devaka Cooray
Sheriffs:
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Tim Cooke
  • Liutauras Vilda
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Tim Holloway
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Carey Brown
  • Piet Souris
Bartenders:
  • salvin francis
  • Mikalai Zaikin
  • Himai Minh

National ID

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 3
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Oppose a National ID! See http://www.whyfingerprint.com.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 400
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
public opinion in the uk has been against this as well, whenever our elders and betters have dared suggest it. It smacks of totalitarianism.
 
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
If we had a national ID then I would know who I was!
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 5093
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
yes, oppose the BIG BAD Government who are constantly out To Get You!
Anarchy is the way forward, as without a government everyone will be nice to each other and there will be no crime, right?
Think again... Given the incredible number of fake IDs out there biometrics are fast becoming a necessity to ensure the person preventing the ID is indeed the person the ID claims it is...
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 3404
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Think again... Given the incredible number of fake IDs out there biometrics are fast becoming a necessity to ensure the person preventing the ID is indeed the person the ID claims it is...
But now it's possible to fiddle with biometrics - eye colour at least.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 820
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
A lot of the opposition in the UK to an ID scheme was the proposal that the cards cost �40 and everyone has to pay. This is crazy - for a poor person that would be a lot more of their income than a rich person, especially when you take into account that several adults in a family may have to pay for it on one person's income.
I've got no objection to having an ID card (I carry driving license and NI card anyway), but the payment has to be fair; maybe with a one off temporary income tax increase.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 229
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by W Hobbs:
Oppose a National ID!


Uhm...why? I looked at the link you gave. I admit I didn't read everything from start to finish, but so far I didn't find a single reason why I should oppose fingerprinting.
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Rosie Vogel:
Uhm...why? I looked at the link you gave. I admit I didn't read everything from start to finish, but so far I didn't find a single reason why I should oppose fingerprinting.


Because the government will take your fingerprints and give them to people on welfare!
 
Ugly Redneck
Posts: 1006
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
yes, oppose the BIG BAD Government who are constantly out To Get You!
Think again... Given the incredible number of fake IDs out there biometrics are fast becoming a necessity to ensure the person preventing the ID is indeed the person the ID claims it is...


I would never like the government to have me carry an ID around. Instead if an association, for example NRA, wanted me to carry around an ID to verify my membership I would do that because the choice is upto me. But to force an ID on everyone is never acceptable by me.
The rebuttal I often hear is that Drivers Licenses and Passports already accomplish the same thing and there should be no reason to oppose another form of national identification. Wrong! DL and Passport are optional. If I wanted to drive a car I need a DL, if I wanted to travel abroad I need a passport but I should never need an ID to remain in the same place I was born and in my house. Why should anyone have the right to question me on my property and in my place of birth.
I will agree that mean of verifying identification must be improved to, say, include biometric scans etc. but to say that identification is compulsory is wrong, atleast IMHO.


Anarchy is the way forward, as without a government everyone will be nice to each other and there will be no crime, right?


The ideal society is one where there is NO government. Where everyone is responsible for their actions and is capable of being responsible. Europeans and some Americans view this as anarchy others view it as liberty
 
Rosie Vogel
Ranch Hand
Posts: 229
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

The ideal society is one where there is NO government. Where everyone is responsible for their actions and is capable of being responsible. Europeans and some Americans view this as anarchy others view it as liberty


Theoretically I agree: this would be very nice and save a ton of tax money. Unfortunately we don't live in a world where everyone is capable of being responsible, we live in a world where many people steal, rape and murder, just to name a few unpleasant things. My government tries to protect innocent, law-abiding citizens like me from this and I am glad that they do.
If the government finds it easier to catch the bad guys if they have everybody's fingerprints or even a DNA sample, I am all for it. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I just don't see the problem.
We had a similar discussion here about cameras in public places. Some people thought of it as an invasion of their privacy. But what the heck do I care if some security guard sees me standing in a train station?
 
Paul McKenna
Ugly Redneck
Posts: 1006
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Rosie Vogel:
[QB]
Theoretically I agree: this would be very nice and save a ton of tax money. Unfortunately we don't live in a world where everyone is capable of being responsible, we live in a world where many people steal, rape and murder, just to name a few unpleasant things. My government tries to protect innocent, law-abiding citizens like me from this and I am glad that they do.


This is exactly the tactic employed by the Nazis. They required all Jews to ID themselves and then used this very means to conduct the holocaust.
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
The ideal society is one where there is NO government. Where everyone is responsible for their actions and is capable of being responsible. Europeans and some Americans view this as anarchy others view it as liberty


So if I decide that your last name is stupid and kill you then your realtives hunt me down? What if they didn't like you either?
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:
This is exactly the tactic employed by the Nazis. They required all Jews to ID themselves and then used this very means to conduct the holocaust.


The Nazis used guns so I guess we should outlaw those too.
By the way, Godwin's Law! You lose.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 287
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

This is exactly the tactic employed by the Nazis. They required all Jews to ID themselves and then used this very means to conduct the holocaust.


So, because it was used for harm once before means it can never do any good?
Because a government bent on harming a portion of its population used it for ill means a government that really does use it for good intentions will naturally use it against it's citizens?
I'd say there is a world of difference between our Democratic Republic and the Nazi regime.
 
Rosie Vogel
Ranch Hand
Posts: 229
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

This is exactly the tactic employed by the Nazis. They required all Jews to ID themselves and then used this very means to conduct the holocaust.


I'm not sure what you mean by "this". It seems to refer to what I said about the government protecting innocent, law-abiding citizens , but perhaps I misunderstood.
Anyway, don't you think it makes it makes a tiny bit of a difference whether everyone has to carry an ID, or just the people of Jewish descent?
Also, do you think the nazis wouldn't have done what they did, if there had been no ID's?
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1340
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I oppose a national ID system. My life as a bigamist will be over for a start.
More Nazi talk (the two references should cancel each other out):

Under Nazi occupation, the Netherlands was three times as efficient as France at rounding up Jews. The difference, according to Edwin Black's IBM and the Holocaust, was that Holland had a population register based on state-of-the-art IT (Hollerith punch card tabulators). France had pieces of paper. By this argument, state inefficiency is the last bastion of freedom.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,1122844,00.html


I have to carry an ID card in Korea. Its compulsary for everyone living here. I haven't had any reason to complain yet, but the test will be how I'm treated if I can't produce it for any reason.
[ February 12, 2004: Message edited by: Richard Hawkes ]
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2676
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
My reasoning for being against national ids is that it can only be used to track law abiding citizens. Criminals, by their very nature, will find a way around the law.
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Matthew Phillips:
My reasoning for being against national ids is that it can only be used to track law abiding citizens. Criminals, by their very nature, will find a way around the law.

If everyone's fingerprints were on record then if fingerprints were found at the scene of a crime it would be easier to catch the culprit. My fingerprints are on record because I worked for the federal government once. I haven't noticed any of my rights being taken away because of that.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Paul McKenna:

This is exactly the tactic employed by the Nazis. They required all Jews to ID themselves and then used this very means to conduct the holocaust.


Well, technically the means to conduct the Holocaust were first tested among the handicapped and mentally ill to gauge public reaction. This is a tactic governments seem to repeat often- dehumanize and marginalize a block of the populace and then test their social experiments upon said group. Lack of engagement or outcry generally is taken as acceptance of policy and the envelope can be pushed a bit further each time.
Speaking of national ID cards. I'm already required to carry identification. I can be imprisoned by the inability to properly identify myself. Jaywalking aside I am law abiding for the most part, so I dislike the idea that information that is already accessible- mandatory in fact, is going to be made mandatory on a National level.
Why should I as a private citizen be responsible to fill in the gaps due to government inefficiency and inability to consolidate information? Time and time again the bureaucracy has shown itself either unable or unwilling to discern relevant information when it is presented yet continually demands more information from its citizenry.
To me, this reeks of social engineering and I'm concerned of what will be required next. Those who are representatives of myself in government have shown themselves to coddle more towards special interest, corporations and what benefits them, then what supports the interest of their constituency. They continually make decisions that effect my daily life while at the same time making decisions to maintain their political careers.
When a politician does make a stand on something I feel useful, i.e. a paper trail for electronic voting there's going to be someone else standing in the way.



Without that paper trail, a manual recount isn't possible, Wexler argued
But Circuit Judge Karen Miller ruled Wexler did not have the standing to file the suit, since he could not prove he had been hurt, either as a citizen or as a public official, by the voting system. Wexler's complaints would be better addressed through legislative remedies, her order said.
Wexler said the judge's order seemed to erase Florida voters' ability to challenge the system.
"I see this as the judge dismissing Florida's voters and ... their voting rights," he said.
Hood said she was "very pleased" with the court's decision.
"We never had any doubt that, with the high level of confidence in the equipment across the state, we would continue to see accurate and secure elections," she said.
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/democrat/news/local/7933189.htm


Heh, accurate and secure elections in Florida? The state that prevented people who committed a crime in the year 2008 from voting in the 2000 election.



Miller stressed the courts have no place in determining the remedy Wexler is seeking, since it would require them to determine a system for recounts, how to fund and oversee that system and how to resolve potential problems.


I have a hard time reconsiling this comment by Miller since, if I recall correctly, the Supreme Court got involved in the 2000 election.


On December 8, 2000, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered that the Circuit Court of Leon County tabulate by hand 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. It also ordered the inclusion in the certified vote totals of 215 votes identified in Palm Beach County and 168 votes identified in Miami-Dade County for Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., and Senator Joseph Lieberman


Well, before I get too off topic... I find it objectionable that I'm constantly being dictated by an ever intrusive government that apparently has more time to fiddle around with my rights then respecting my rights. I'm getting tired that I'm being held to a level of accountability that government and coporations do not abide by. I'm finding it increasingly diffult to find irony in spending life in prison for stealing a slice of pizza, whereas misappropriating billions and running a company into bankruptcy gets a night at the White House discussing national energy policy.
Speaking of off topic... Does whyfingerprint.com pass the Goodwin test , or since it is a web page does it not count? "It is therefore best to stop this piecemeal Nazism with the chains of the constitution."

My rant ends...
Michael
 
Steven Broadbent
Ranch Hand
Posts: 400
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
There is no govt history for this sort of stuff in the uk - it smacks of totalitarianism. Perhaps because the uk has never been occupied, unlike Europe.
 
michael bradly
Ranch Hand
Posts: 112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Steven Broadbent:
There is no govt history for this sort of stuff in the uk - it smacks of totalitarianism. Perhaps because the uk has never been occupied, unlike Europe.


Didn't Rome occupy the UK once upon a time?
 
Steven Broadbent
Ranch Hand
Posts: 400
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Yes but about a kajillion years ago. I mean in recent times.
 
Joe King
Ranch Hand
Posts: 820
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Steven Broadbent:
There is no govt history for this sort of stuff in the uk - it smacks of totalitarianism. Perhaps because the uk has never been occupied, unlike Europe.


Apart from the Channel Islands in WWII I suppose. Or the Falkland Islands.
I dont think that its totalitarianism at all - the much used argument that if you are inocent you have nothing to worry about is for the most part true. If having an ID card helps stop things like benefit fraud and illegal employment, then I'm all for it (as long as it is funded in a proportional way).
 
Steven Broadbent
Ranch Hand
Posts: 400
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
LOL, ok apart from the romans, germans and argentians.

I meant that the UK has never had the type of totalitarian govt that uses id cards and checks to keep tabs on it's citizens, or that whisks you away in the middle of the night never to be seen again.
 
Richard Hawkes
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1340
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Don't forget the Normans, and the Vikings!
 
Richard Hawkes
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1340
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Similar arguments against compulsory national ID cards are used by people that oppose gun registration, namely that the state is being given too much information about its citizens that could in theory be abused.
The main counter argument that "if you're a law abiding citizen then you have nothing to fear" doesn't seem to be able to sway that particular point of view.
I wonder what the correlation is (if any) between supporters of gun registration and supporters of national ID card systems?
 
michael bradly
Ranch Hand
Posts: 112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Richard Hawkes:
Similar arguments against compulsory national ID cards are used by people that oppose gun registration, namely that the state is being given too much information about its citizens that could in theory be abused.
The main counter argument that "if you're a law abiding citizen then you have nothing to fear" doesn't seem to be able to sway that particular point of view.
I wonder what the correlation is (if any) between supporters of gun registration and supporters of national ID card systems?


Being a law abiding citizen I have everything to fear. Being innocent and proving innocence are fundamentally different. The inability to prove my innocence can result in my being executed on death row. Although I don't contemplate this distinction on a daily basis, the thought does occur to me when I'm pulled over by the police because I fit a description, or I am questioned by my girlfriend when I say I am at one place, however a friend of hers remarks that they witnessed me elsewhere.
The assumption that we don't have anything to fear because we are innocent results in my opinion to complacency. Information is abused and misused. This is no longer simply theory, it's applied on a daily basis.
Words like "the state" or "the government" blanket what lies underneath, people with agendas who will use information for policies. To encompass these people with general notions like the state, the nation, or the government allows too much to be simply dismissed with statements such as "in theory the state might abuse the information," and displaces culpability for how these people misuse this information.
There was a period of time when innocent people were destroyed because someone dropped a name. If the information is out there, someone will use it and then it's an individuals interpetation as to whether that information was abused or misused based upon their own personal agenda and/or belief.


Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it.
-Woodrow Wilson

 
michael bradly
Ranch Hand
Posts: 112
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
To anyone still interested in this thread, here is an interesting case going to the supreme court...
http://papersplease.org/hiibel/
 
Matthew Phillips
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2676
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
If everyone's fingerprints were on record then if fingerprints were found at the scene of a crime it would be easier to catch the culprit. My fingerprints are on record because I worked for the federal government once. I haven't noticed any of my rights being taken away because of that.


My fingerprints are on record as well because I have a concealed firearms permit. You and I made a choice to have our records on file. That is very different from having it forced upon someone. I disagree that having everyone's fingerprint on file would make solving crimes any easier. Currently, a finger print found at a crime scene is checked against a database of known criminals. Under your system it would be checked against all citizens. If I happened to be at the location of the crime before the crime took place then I could become more of a suspect that the criminal who wore gloves during the crime.
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Matthew Phillips:
Under your system it would be checked against all citizens. If I happened to be at the location of the crime before the crime took place then I could become more of a suspect that the criminal who wore gloves during the crime.


But what happens now? The police have a mysterious fingerprint that may be related to the crime so they spend fruitless man-hours chasing a dead end lead. If your fingerprint is found at the scene, you may have useful information that you don't even realize you have.
 
Matthew Phillips
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2676
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Richard Hawkes:
I wonder what the correlation is (if any) between supporters of gun registration and supporters of national ID card systems?


In my case yes, because I oppose them for the same reasons. Only law abiding citizens will abide by a law to register their guns. What reason would a criminal have for doing so? Their guns aren't going to disappear when they fail to do so. The same applies to a national ID card system. Why would a criminal register for the national ID card. Before a law requiring registration ever passed, someone would perfect the means of forging the card.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 1408
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Richard Hawkes:
I wonder what the correlation is (if any) between supporters of gun registration and supporters of national ID card systems?


It's an excellent point. I think if it's good enough for gun owners, it should be good enough for everyone else.
As an analogy, if the ACLU won't support my claim to privacy when buying a handgun, then I'm certainly not going to take them seriously when they object to instant background checks for airline passengers. Likewise with respect to registration and national I.D. Sure, owning a gun is voluntary; so is remaining a citizen.
 
Matthew Phillips
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2676
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:

But what happens now? The police have a mysterious fingerprint that may be related to the crime so they spend fruitless man-hours chasing a dead end lead. If your fingerprint is found at the scene, you may have useful information that you don't even realize you have.


You are correct. That can indeed happen. How often have innocent people gone to prison only to have someone else admit to the crime later in our current system? It isn't many, but it does happen. It shouldn't. How much more often will it happen when an innocent person may be connected to a crime scene? I'd much rather see the occasional guilty person go unpunished than to see one innocent person received unjustified punishment.
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2823
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Matthew Phillips:

You are correct. That can indeed happen. How often have innocent people gone to prison only to have someone else admit to the crime later in our current system? It isn't many, but it does happen. It shouldn't. How much more often will it happen when an innocent person may be connected to a crime scene? I'd much rather see the occasional guilty person go unpunished than to see one innocent person received unjustified punishment.



It always seems interesting though, that the one who claimed to do it is in for life.
 
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Posts: 13974
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Matthew Phillips:
How much more often will it happen when an innocent person may be connected to a crime scene? I'd much rather see the occasional guilty person go unpunished than to see one innocent person received unjustified punishment.

I am not sure I see the relationship between the two. No one goes to jail simply because their fingerprints are found at the scene of a crime. Fingerprints on the murder weapon may get you convicted. Fingerprints by themselves are proof of nothing because fingerprints can stay around for weeks. it is how the fingerprints are realted to the crime scene that will convict a person.
 
author
Posts: 799
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
No one goes to jail simply because their fingerprints are found at the scene of a crime.


Some people think otherwise. http://www.innocent.org.uk/misc/fingerprints_bayle.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/1983567.stm
We put innocent people in jail often enough. It doesn't even take fingerprints: Apparently all it takes is for a few young girls to accuse you of molesting them, and you end up in jail for at least eight months.
If we're going to insist on identifying everyone with something, it may as well be DNA. The good news is that DNA evidence has salvaged the remnants of over 100 lives: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/falseconfessions020925.html. It's amazing that 1/4 of these people actually confessed to their crime.
Yet here's a poor sap whose life was screwed by poor use of evidence, including DNA evidence: http://www.ucc.org/ucnews/jan03/innocent.htm.
-Jeff-
 
Ranch Hand
Posts: 715
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
Why do we needed National ID when driver license could do the job just as well? In US, the Homeland Security Department could just add some extra codes into american driver license magnetic strip on the backside. Don't said about it, no one will find out. Hey, some of you may get a job doing it.
Regards,
MCao
 
Matthew Phillips
Ranch Hand
Posts: 2676
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
I am not sure I see the relationship between the two. No one goes to jail simply because their fingerprints are found at the scene of a crime. Fingerprints on the murder weapon may get you convicted. Fingerprints by themselves are proof of nothing because fingerprints can stay around for weeks. it is how the fingerprints are realted to the crime scene that will convict a person.


People have been covicted for less than fingerprints at the crime scene. Simply not having an alibi has worked against some people. It's not the norm, but it does happen. If it could result in one innocent person being punished, which it can and will, then I'm completely against it.
 
Sheriff
Posts: 6920
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Why do we needed National ID when driver license could do the job just as well? In US, the Homeland Security Department could just add some extra codes into american driver license magnetic strip on the backside. Don't said about it, no one will find out. Hey, some of you may get a job doing it.
As several people have pointed out above, registering for, and carrying, a drivers licence is completely optional. You have no requirement to carry or show a drivers licence if you are not in charge of a vehicle. Even in the car-loving USA, a large number of crimes are actually committed by people not in cars, and some are committed by people who don't even have cars
 
Matt Cao
Ranch Hand
Posts: 715
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi,
Before I own the car, I was issuing an ID card, then when I own a car, I was forced to surrender my ID card. Now, you people confuse me more saying driver license is an optional card. Could it be every states have their own laws?
Regards,
MCao
 
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic