>> In a message dated 6/26/98 8:23:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>> email@example.com writes:
>> This is NOT radical right-wing paranoia. Most of the elements of the new
>> proposed national ID system are already in place NOW. The next step is
>> all information to be coordinated and completely accessible to any and
>> bureaucrats for their arbitrary and capricious abuse.
>> The national ID card itself (which you will be required to carry) will
>> a magnetic strip (or chip) which is imbedded in it. That means YOU (when
>> have your mandated national ID card on your person) could be tracked
>> wherever you go. Privacy will be an anachronism.
>> Other cards that have magnetic strips: credit cards, ATM cards, hotel
>> appt keys, et al. The magnetic strips can't be used to somehow follow
>Oh yes they can. Credit card and debit card purchases directly access
>financial databases. Authorities have the ability to put 'sniffers' on
>systems to track people by their purchase locations. This applies to
>restaurants, etc. In fact, my bank was able to track me down while I was
>vacation last month to notify me of an account problem. Its kind of odd to
>phone call from your personal banker while having after dinner
>miles away from home.... I shiver at the thought that some government
>might track me down and drag me away merely by my participation in the
>> But the author of the article seems more interested in propogating
>> a juvenile kind of paranoia than paying much attention to the benefits of
>> a system or to the fact that the system really doesn't add any new powers
>> the government but only makes the government more efficient.
>Total BS. It makes to government more efficient at tracking people down, as
>as knowing everything about the people they are tracking down. The minute a
>fascist/totalitarian party takes over, the mechanisms will be in place for
>commit intercontinental genocide in a matter of hours.
>> In any immensely
>> large and complex society such as ours a standardized identification
>> makes perfect sense. And the presence of it simply has nothing to do
>> government encroachment of anyone's rights. It DOES have to do with
>> the government more efficient. The place to protect rights, however, is
>> the courts and the legislatures, and NOT upon the assumption of
>> inefficiency in enforcing its laws.
>Again, BS. As said by many great plitical philosophers and leaders in
>"That government governs best which governs least." Hindering the
>ability to be tempted by such powers are necessary. Giving such absolute
>over the individual's privacy to a priviledged few in the bureaucracy is
>corrupting potential in government. Privacy should be controlled by the
>individual, not by the government. Assuming that government will 'do the
>thing' with your personal information is assuming once too much.
> Michael Lorrey
Thanks for pointing some of the more obvious problems with this reasoning.
By this way of thinking, the govt should have bugs in everyones homes to protect
us from every concievable harm. After, if you're not breaking the law, what have you got to worry about? Making the govt even *more* efficient at tracking every
move makes me shudder. Haven't we all read 1984?