71% Favor Requiring Foreign Visitors to Carry Universal ID Card

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Fund ICE and let them do their jobs by enforcing the employment laws. You'll get all of the enforcement you need and I won't be violating the law by not pinning my ID to my clothing when I go for a run.

I wonder what would happen in that instance? Would you be detained/fined for not carrying it - or would you be required to present yourself at a police station within say 7 days.

What happens if you lose your card - how do you prove it? Do you get some sort of special dispensation for the above?

[GaryC 7]

Fund ICE and let them do their jobs by enforcing the employment laws. You'll get all of the enforcement you need and I won't be violating the law by not pinning my ID to my clothing when I go for a run.

I wonder what would happen in that instance? Would you be detained/fined for not carrying it - or would you be required to present yourself at a police station within say 7 days.

What happens if you lose your card - how do you prove it? Do you get some sort of special dispensation for the above?

The database would still have you in it. A quick finger scan (which could be done from a patrol car) and your stats would be right there. It's the same as if you forget your DL. I did that once and got stopped. I gave the police man my SSN and he looked it up right there picture included. No one would be hauled off because they don't have the card with them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

We are already on a slippery slope. One where we cannot control our borders and know who is here. It started in 1986 with the amnesty bill.

The problem is that the immigration laws are not being enforced today. The police can

already identify who is here legally and who is not - they are simply not doing that, and

no new card is going to magically make them do it.

The National ID card is excessive, expensive, unnecessary, unworkable and unpopular.

It has no clear purpose, and provides no guarantee against fraud. It is an answer of

search of a question.

Indeed. It provides the illusion of security, while at the same taking away your personal privacy.

Rather dodgy, given the resurgence of unpleasant nationalism in the US in recent years. The last thing this country needs is another autocrat.

[Dan J 277]

We are already on a slippery slope. One where we cannot control our borders and know who is here. It started in 1986 with the amnesty bill.

The problem is that the immigration laws are not being enforced today. The police can

already identify who is here legally and who is not - they are simply not doing that, and

no new card is going to magically make them do it.

The National ID card is excessive, expensive, unnecessary, unworkable and unpopular.

It has no clear purpose, and provides no guarantee against fraud. It is an answer of

search of a question.

Yup, National ID card really wont help anything. If you really want better enforcement, ask your government to raise taxes to sent it to the ICE. So they can hire more people and do a better job of enforcment. Problem solved.

[GaryC 7]

Then it seems we can agree. Do you still have reservations with a universal card for aliens then? It's basically the same thing as this Real ID.

I'm ok with it, if the police are not given the power to stop people at random and

demand to see their ID card (and presumably nick you if it's lost, damaged or

forgotten, which will inevitably happen to thousands of people every day).

One step at a time, and then you fall down the slippery slope..

We are already on a slippery slope. One where we cannot control our borders and know who is here. It started in 1986 with the amnesty bill.

No, your thinking of something else. Your nationalism clouds your view. To the point where you will likely accept a police state if it keeps out terrorism and illegal immigrants.

I am? What am I thinking of? You don't see 10-20 million people here without documentation as a problem. That is a fault in your logic. I see it as a very big problem. Fear mongering about a police state isn't going to change my mind or the minds of a large majority of Americans. Whether you like it or not a crackdown on the gatecrashers will happen.

[Dan J 277]

Then it seems we can agree. Do you still have reservations with a universal card for aliens then? It's basically the same thing as this Real ID.

I'm ok with it, if the police are not given the power to stop people at random and

demand to see their ID card (and presumably nick you if it's lost, damaged or

forgotten, which will inevitably happen to thousands of people every day).

One step at a time, and then you fall down the slippery slope..

We are already on a slippery slope. One where we cannot control our borders and know who is here. It started in 1986 with the amnesty bill.

No, your thinking of something else. Your nationalism clouds your view. To the point where you will likely accept a police state if it keeps out terrorism and illegal immigrants.

I am? What am I thinking of? You don't see 10-20 million people here without documentation as a problem. That is a fault in your logic. I see it as a very big problem. Fear mongering about a police state isn't going to change my mind or the minds of a large majority of Americans. Whether you like it or not a crackdown on the gatecrashers will happen.

You don't need national ID to fix that. You just need to allocate more tax money to ICE.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Some other miscellaneous arguments for and against ID cards.

Arguments for:

* One can be identified in banks or at national borders without a passport, making the identity card as a passport.

* Identity cards can be used to quickly verify ownership or eligibility to services; for example, a shopkeeper or cashier may request that an ID document be shown by a client paying with a credit card or cheque.

* False identification may be reduced in countries where identity cards are required to open a bank account. Of course, phishing and many other forms of identity theft will be unaffected.

* Identity cards can be a useful administrative tool that can increase efficiency in dealings with both the government and private companies.

* ID cards reduce crime. All banks require that ID cards be presented by customers, which increases security. Certain auction houses also require them from sellers.

* In American states that don't issue identity cards, private companies require equivalent documents, such as driver's licenses, which are not properly suited for identification purposes. Persons who don't have a driver's license are usually required in practice to get a document that is something very much like an identity card.

* Law enforcers can locate and identify people who either do not know or cannot communicate their names and/or addresses (e.g., due to Alzheimer's disease, amnesia or heavy intoxication), or who claim names that are not consistent with the names on their identity cards (e.g., due to dissociative identity disorder, as in the case of Billy Milligan).

* Cards may help reduce immigration service bureaucracy. In certain countries, the procedures for deporting illegal immigrants whose ages, identities or nationalities cannot be formally established are more complex than those for whom they can be readily asserted. This gives illegal immigrants more time to prepare their legal defence. In some countries (Spain, for instance) it may prevent the immigrant's deportation altogether. However, in this situation most illegal immigrants will destroy their identity papers, nullifying the reduction in bureaucracy.

* All humans already carry personal identification, which cannot be discarded or falsified: DNA. In lieu of identity cards, use of DNA sequencing hashes may soon become the preferred method for personal identification, even when interacting with private economic entities. The use of identity cards is arguably a lesser evil compared to the potentially extensive privacy risks associated with daily use of DNA for identification purposes.

Arguments against

* It has been argued that identity cards impose a disproportionate burden upon both government and citizens while empowering the executive, which is contrary to the maxim: "the government that governs best, governs least". Some have pointed out that extensive lobbying for identity cards has been undertaken, in countries without compulsory identity cards, by IT companies who will be likely to reap rich benefits in the event of an identity card scheme being implemented.

* Cards with centralised database could be used to track anyone's movements and private life, thus endangering privacy. The proposed British ID card will involve a series of linked databases, to be managed by the private sector. Managing disparate linked systems using a range of institutions and any number of personnel is alleged to be a security disaster in the making.

* A requirement to carry an identity card at all times can lead to the inconvenience of arbitrary requests from card controllers (such as the police). This can lead to functionality creep whereby carrying a card becomes de facto if not de jure compulsory, as in the case of Social Security numbers, which are now widely used as ID.

* Government claims that identity cards will prevent crimes may not be based in fact. The former UK Home Secretary Charles Clarke conceded that identity cards may only be useful in the identification of bodies in the aftermath of a crime. The facts that the terrorists involved in 9/11 and the London tube attacks did have and would have had identity cards, respectively. As a strong presumption of identity is given in favour of a card holder, the identity card scheme might be an asset to potential terrorists.

* Historically, totalitarian governments which issued identity cards to citizens used them forcefully. For example, Nazi Germany made use of unique biometric identities by tattooing identification numbers on the arms of concentration-camp detainees. More recently, the apartheid-era government of South Africa used pass books as internal passports to oppress that country's black population.

* In many cases, other forms of documentation such as a driver's license, passport, or Medicare card serve a similar function on a more limited scale, and thus an ID card is not needed.

* The cost of introducing and administering an identity card system can be very high. Figures from £30 (US$60) to £90 or even higher have been suggested for the proposed UK ID card.

* In some countries where ID cards are required to show religious affiliation (as used to be the case in Greece) or ethnic background, this can lead to cases of discrimination. This can become a bureaucratic nightmare when a person changes his or her affiliation which in any case should be a private matter of no business to officialdom.

* Some schemes do not adequately take into account whether data subjects have legitimate reasons to conceal their identity. Victims of domestic violence, witnesses in criminal investigations and trials, and others, may not want their identity or locations to be widely known. Some proposed schemes also do not adequately address these considerations.

Edited August 19, 2007 by Number 6

[GaryC 7]

Then it seems we can agree. Do you still have reservations with a universal card for aliens then? It's basically the same thing as this Real ID.

I'm ok with it, if the police are not given the power to stop people at random and

demand to see their ID card (and presumably nick you if it's lost, damaged or

forgotten, which will inevitably happen to thousands of people every day).

One step at a time, and then you fall down the slippery slope..

We are already on a slippery slope. One where we cannot control our borders and know who is here. It started in 1986 with the amnesty bill.

No, your thinking of something else. Your nationalism clouds your view. To the point where you will likely accept a police state if it keeps out terrorism and illegal immigrants.

I am? What am I thinking of? You don't see 10-20 million people here without documentation as a problem. That is a fault in your logic. I see it as a very big problem. Fear mongering about a police state isn't going to change my mind or the minds of a large majority of Americans. Whether you like it or not a crackdown on the gatecrashers will happen.

You don't need national ID to fix that. You just need to allocate more tax money to ICE.

We are talking about the universal card for aliens. We already settled the national ID card issue. Real ID is already coming and will suffice for proving a USC or LPR's status which was a sticking point earlier.

[GaryC 7]

Some other miscellaneous arguments for and against ID cards.

Arguments for:

* Cards may help reduce immigration service bureaucracy. In certain countries, the procedures for deporting illegal immigrants whose ages, identities or nationalities cannot be formally established are more complex than those for whom they can be readily asserted. This gives illegal immigrants more time to prepare their legal defence. In some countries (Spain, for instance) it may prevent the immigrant's deportation altogether. However, in this situation most illegal immigrants will destroy their identity papers, nullifying the reduction in bureaucracy.

The database will solve that problem. They can destroy the card all they want. A scan of a fingerprint and everything is there.

[Caladan 19]

If by 'settled' you mean 'states will adhere to minimum requirements for state driver's licenses, and can opt out if they want.' But I don't see why having a universal ID will help with the real problem, which is that ICE is underfunded. And if ICE is funded properly, there's no reason to introduce an ID for immigration reasons. It's not like ICE can't conduct raids now.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Fund ICE and let them do their jobs by enforcing the employment laws. You'll get all of the enforcement you need and I won't be violating the law by not pinning my ID to my clothing when I go for a run.

I wonder what would happen in that instance? Would you be detained/fined for not carrying it - or would you be required to present yourself at a police station within say 7 days.

What happens if you lose your card - how do you prove it? Do you get some sort of special dispensation for the above?

The database would still have you in it. A quick finger scan (which could be done from a patrol car) and your stats would be right there. It's the same as if you forget your DL. I did that once and got stopped. I gave the police man my SSN and he looked it up right there picture included. No one would be hauled off because they don't have the card with them.

What if I don't want to give a finger scan as the result of an arbitrary stop? I haven't done anything wrong - therefore I have the right to a modicum of privacy to not be hassled without due cause (Due Cause is not ' I stopped him because I felt like it').

[GaryC 7]

If by 'settled' you mean 'states will adhere to minimum requirements for state driver's licenses, and can opt out if they want.' But I don't see why having a universal ID will help with the real problem, which is that ICE is underfunded. And if ICE is funded properly, there's no reason to introduce an ID for immigration reasons. It's not like ICE can't conduct raids now.

The states may opt out but they will not. If you can't do any dealings with the federal government or fly without an approved ID then the states are pretty much forced to. It's like car insurance, the states are not required to force the drivers to have it but the consequences of not complying are to stiff to ignore.

We are not talking about ICE raids, we are talking about the excuse some cities and states use for not enforcing the law. They say there is no way to determine a persons status and it isn't their job to find out. This removes that excuse. I would think a change in the law should go along with the alien ID card. Any contact with public officials would require a check on that persons status. If an illegal is found then that person would have to be held for ICE. I would be willing to see a drastic expansion in ICE's budget to accommodate that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Some other miscellaneous arguments for and against ID cards.

Arguments for:

* Cards may help reduce immigration service bureaucracy. In certain countries, the procedures for deporting illegal immigrants whose ages, identities or nationalities cannot be formally established are more complex than those for whom they can be readily asserted. This gives illegal immigrants more time to prepare their legal defence. In some countries (Spain, for instance) it may prevent the immigrant's deportation altogether. However, in this situation most illegal immigrants will destroy their identity papers, nullifying the reduction in bureaucracy.

The database will solve that problem. They can destroy the card all they want. A scan of a fingerprint and everything is there.

One fingerprint wouldn't do it. When you have your biometric data collected for AOS they scan all of your fingerprints individually. More to the point - they collect duplicate data. Why is this? Why do I have to pay for biometric data collection:

(1) At AOS

(2) At removal of conditions

(3) If my LPR card is lost or destroyed

[GaryC 7]

Fund ICE and let them do their jobs by enforcing the employment laws. You'll get all of the enforcement you need and I won't be violating the law by not pinning my ID to my clothing when I go for a run.

I wonder what would happen in that instance? Would you be detained/fined for not carrying it - or would you be required to present yourself at a police station within say 7 days.

What happens if you lose your card - how do you prove it? Do you get some sort of special dispensation for the above?

The database would still have you in it. A quick finger scan (which could be done from a patrol car) and your stats would be right there. It's the same as if you forget your DL. I did that once and got stopped. I gave the police man my SSN and he looked it up right there picture included. No one would be hauled off because they don't have the card with them.

What if I don't want to give a finger scan as the result of an arbitrary stop? I haven't done anything wrong - therefore I have the right to a modicum of privacy to not be hassled without due cause (Due Cause is not ' I stopped him because I felt like it').

To bad. Give it or get arrested. In a lot of states it is against the law to refuse to identify yourself. It should be a national law.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Some other miscellaneous arguments for and against ID cards.

Arguments for:

* Cards may help reduce immigration service bureaucracy. In certain countries, the procedures for deporting illegal immigrants whose ages, identities or nationalities cannot be formally established are more complex than those for whom they can be readily asserted. This gives illegal immigrants more time to prepare their legal defence. In some countries (Spain, for instance) it may prevent the immigrant's deportation altogether. However, in this situation most illegal immigrants will destroy their identity papers, nullifying the reduction in bureaucracy.

The database will solve that problem. They can destroy the card all they want. A scan of a fingerprint and everything is there.

One fingerprint wouldn't do it. When you have your biometric data collected for AOS they scan all of your fingerprints individually. More to the point - they collect duplicate data. Why is this? Why do I have to pay for biometric data collection:

(1) At AOS

(2) At removal of conditions

(3) If my LPR card is lost or destroyed

they also collect it at POE