71% Favor Requiring Foreign Visitors to Carry Universal ID Card

[smoke20 0]

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

it sounds like tony saprono's argument about ripping the onstar & satelite nav. system out of his tahoe. so the feds can't track him.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

That kind of reasoning actually. That valuing your privacy makes a person worthy of suspicion.

More practically - consolidating the information into a single place, (typically under the care of a 3rd party contracted company) which is open to abuse.

What makes you think that the people entrusted to look after your complete personal profile would be any more efficient than the guys in charge of VA data who lose laptops containing thousands of insurance records; or credit card companies whose employees are caught stealing customer account information.

Have you ever gotten one of those "we're sorry but..." letters in the mail?

[smoke20 0]

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

That kind of reasoning actually. That valuing your privacy makes a person worthy of suspicion.

More practically - consolidating the information into a single place, (typically under the care of a 3rd party contracted company) which is open to abuse.

What makes you think that the people entrusted to look after your complete personal profile would be any more efficient than the guys in charge of VA data who lose laptops containing thousands of insurance records; or credit card companies whose employees are caught stealing customer account information.

Have you ever gotten one of those "we're sorry but..." letters in the mail?

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me - for the reason I said. So the question stands - why is being concerned about my right to a degree of personal privacy imply that I must have something to hide (AKA worthy of suspicion). Got any more semantics up your sleeve?

As far as "Big Brother's system" goes - there are currently many 'big brothers'. This would put all your information under the control of a single entity. Even the UK (which is bringing in a national ID card scheme - against much public opposition) has backed off from doing that.

That's of course - getting away from the point that this is about a biometric card scheme for non-resident visitors and AOS applicants. You may want to pay to subsidise the cost of that bureaucracy. I don't. Simple as that. I don't think its good value for money, its expensive, and it detracts from the real issues of enforcement which chronic underfunding in ICE and law enforcement have essentially brought about.

Lets not address the basics - but go right off the deep end by supporting dubious policies of questionable value.

Edited August 20, 2007 by Number 6

[smoke20 0]

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me - for the reason I said. So the question stands - why is being concerned about my right to a degree of personal privacy imply that I must have something to hide (AKA worthy of suspicion). Got any more semantics up your sleeve?

As far as "Big Brother's system" goes - there are currently many 'big brothers'. This would put all your information under the control of a single entity. Even the UK (which is bringing in a national ID card scheme - against much public opposition) has backed off from doing that.

That's of course - getting away from the point that this is about a biometric card scheme for non-resident visitors and AOS applicants. You may want to pay to subsidise the cost of that bureaucracy. I don't. Simple as that. I don't think its good value for money, its expensive, and it detracts from the real issues of enforcement which chronic underfunding in ICE and law enforcement have essentially brought about.

Lets not address the basics - but go right off the deep end by supporting dubious policies of questionable value.

nothing to add....once again you can not explain your stance. you just keep repeating repeating repeating yourself.

i'll leave this thread now. i've read read read your non responce.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me - for the reason I said. So the question stands - why is being concerned about my right to a degree of personal privacy imply that I must have something to hide (AKA worthy of suspicion). Got any more semantics up your sleeve?

As far as "Big Brother's system" goes - there are currently many 'big brothers'. This would put all your information under the control of a single entity. Even the UK (which is bringing in a national ID card scheme - against much public opposition) has backed off from doing that.

That's of course - getting away from the point that this is about a biometric card scheme for non-resident visitors and AOS applicants. You may want to pay to subsidise the cost of that bureaucracy. I don't. Simple as that. I don't think its good value for money, its expensive, and it detracts from the real issues of enforcement which chronic underfunding in ICE and law enforcement have essentially brought about.

Lets not address the basics - but go right off the deep end by supporting dubious policies of questionable value.

nothing to add....once again you can not explain your stance. you just keep repeating repeating repeating yourself.

i'll leave this thread now. i've read read read your non responce.

Nothing to add eh? You sure get frustrated fast. Lets try again.

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me. It bothers me because:

1) I value a modicum of personal privacy.

2) I don't want my data consolidated into a single database where it will be more open to abuse and ID theft. If the system is compromised I lose all my personal data rather than one or two things.

But again this thread is not about Federal ID card programme for USCs and LPRs but rather a card scheme to provide a Federal ID card for foreign visitors and people between immigration statuses (rather than rely on their new biometric passports). I disagree with this because:

1) Processing people for a biometric ID card (essentially giving visitors the same level of background check processing that we would get for AOS) would be expensive - with that cost being born by the US taxpayer. The biometric passport requirement currently puts the onus on the foreign country. Would you have the US start paying for this now?

2) It does nothing to address the enforcement aspects of ICE which is overworked and understaffed.

Essentially this idea is about trying to run before we can walk. I'm all for reform of immigration services and increasing enforcement - but what's wrong with starting with the basics, before we bring in wild ideas?

Edited August 20, 2007 by Number 6

[pedroh 21]

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

it sounds like tony saprono's argument about ripping the onstar & satelite nav. system out of his tahoe. so the feds can't track him.

I think number 6 and others (incluiding me) established our reasons.. how certain groups (as the latinos) could get easily discriminated, due to some people (police incluided) believe that accent, or looking 'mexican' is a probable reason to pull over someone and ask for id (AND NO THAT'S NOT SHOWING ID TO GO BUY BEER, OR TO PYA WITH A CREDIT CARD)

[smoke20 0]

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me - for the reason I said. So the question stands - why is being concerned about my right to a degree of personal privacy imply that I must have something to hide (AKA worthy of suspicion). Got any more semantics up your sleeve?

As far as "Big Brother's system" goes - there are currently many 'big brothers'. This would put all your information under the control of a single entity. Even the UK (which is bringing in a national ID card scheme - against much public opposition) has backed off from doing that.

That's of course - getting away from the point that this is about a biometric card scheme for non-resident visitors and AOS applicants. You may want to pay to subsidise the cost of that bureaucracy. I don't. Simple as that. I don't think its good value for money, its expensive, and it detracts from the real issues of enforcement which chronic underfunding in ICE and law enforcement have essentially brought about.

Lets not address the basics - but go right off the deep end by supporting dubious policies of questionable value.

nothing to add....once again you can not explain your stance. you just keep repeating repeating repeating yourself.

i'll leave this thread now. i've read read read your non responce.

Nothing to add eh? You sure get frustrated fast. Lets try again.

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me. It bothers me because:

1) I value a modicum of personal privacy.

2) I don't want my data consolidated into a single database where it will be more open to abuse and ID theft. If the system is compromised I lose all my personal data rather than one or two things.

But again this thread is not about Federal ID card programme for USCs and LPRs but rather a card scheme to provide a Federal ID card for foreign visitors and people between immigration statuses (rather than rely on their new biometric passports). I disagree with this because:

1) Processing people for a biometric ID card (essentially giving visitors the same level of background check processing that we would get for AOS) would be expensive - with that cost being born by the US taxpayer. The biometric passport requirement currently puts the onus on the foreign country. Would you have the US start paying for this now?

2) It does nothing to address the enforcement aspects of ICE which is overworked and understaffed.

Essentially this idea is about trying to run before we can walk. I'm all for reform of immigration services and increasing enforcement - but what's wrong with starting with the basics, before we bring in wild ideas?

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

it sounds like tony saprono's argument about ripping the onstar & satelite nav. system out of his tahoe. so the feds can't track him.

I think number 6 and others (incluiding me) established our reasons.. how certain groups (as the latinos) could get easily discriminated, due to some people (police incluided) believe that accent, or looking 'mexican' is a probable reason to pull over someone and ask for id (AND NO THAT'S NOT SHOWING ID TO GO BUY BEER, OR TO PYA WITH A CREDIT CARD)

again no real reasons. just the SOS. i got bad news for ya boys. its gonna happen eventually.

Edited August 20, 2007 by smoke20

[Marilyn. 340]

why aren't they real reasons? because you say so ...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

never said it make you worthy of suspicion. i said " if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

if you aren't hiding anything it shouldn't.

do you have a drivers licence? an insurance card? credit cards? a bank account? you are already in "the big brothers system"

id theft is already a problem. so, that argument has no base.

again what are you hiding tony?

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me - for the reason I said. So the question stands - why is being concerned about my right to a degree of personal privacy imply that I must have something to hide (AKA worthy of suspicion). Got any more semantics up your sleeve?

As far as "Big Brother's system" goes - there are currently many 'big brothers'. This would put all your information under the control of a single entity. Even the UK (which is bringing in a national ID card scheme - against much public opposition) has backed off from doing that.

That's of course - getting away from the point that this is about a biometric card scheme for non-resident visitors and AOS applicants. You may want to pay to subsidise the cost of that bureaucracy. I don't. Simple as that. I don't think its good value for money, its expensive, and it detracts from the real issues of enforcement which chronic underfunding in ICE and law enforcement have essentially brought about.

Lets not address the basics - but go right off the deep end by supporting dubious policies of questionable value.

nothing to add....once again you can not explain your stance. you just keep repeating repeating repeating yourself.

i'll leave this thread now. i've read read read your non responce.

Nothing to add eh? You sure get frustrated fast. Lets try again.

I don't have anything to hide. Yes it bothers me. It bothers me because:

1) I value a modicum of personal privacy.

2) I don't want my data consolidated into a single database where it will be more open to abuse and ID theft. If the system is compromised I lose all my personal data rather than one or two things.

But again this thread is not about Federal ID card programme for USCs and LPRs but rather a card scheme to provide a Federal ID card for foreign visitors and people between immigration statuses (rather than rely on their new biometric passports). I disagree with this because:

1) Processing people for a biometric ID card (essentially giving visitors the same level of background check processing that we would get for AOS) would be expensive - with that cost being born by the US taxpayer. The biometric passport requirement currently puts the onus on the foreign country. Would you have the US start paying for this now?

2) It does nothing to address the enforcement aspects of ICE which is overworked and understaffed.

Essentially this idea is about trying to run before we can walk. I'm all for reform of immigration services and increasing enforcement - but what's wrong with starting with the basics, before we bring in wild ideas?

this whole argument against a national id & checking peoples legal status, reminds me of the argument on random drug testing. nobody is putting cameras in your house, noone is implanting gps chips in anyone.

If you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?

it sounds like tony saprono's argument about ripping the onstar & satelite nav. system out of his tahoe. so the feds can't track him.

I think number 6 and others (incluiding me) established our reasons.. how certain groups (as the latinos) could get easily discriminated, due to some people (police incluided) believe that accent, or looking 'mexican' is a probable reason to pull over someone and ask for id (AND NO THAT'S NOT SHOWING ID TO GO BUY BEER, OR TO PYA WITH A CREDIT CARD)

again no real reasons. just the SOS. i got bad news for ya boys. its gonna happen eventually.

No real reasons eh? Not sure what thread you were reading. It sure wasn't this one. Lets see something substantial from you on the subject...

Oh that's right.

"if you have nothing to hide why does it bother you?"

Idiot.

[almaty 19]

i am against a national ID card..it is a waste of time and money to start the system..the states have taken care of this role just fine...i don't want the Feds ###### with me anymore, than they do now

[smoke20 0]

Idiot.

*gives #6 the #1 sign*

its amazing how you keyboard warriors say things on this board, you wouldn't have the courage to say to peoples face.

Edited August 20, 2007 by smoke20

[thesnowman 1]

First off I stopped reading after page 10 so I apologies if I am duplicating what has been said.

1. I do penetration testing which means that I legally hack into systems and then inform the client how I done it so that they can fix it. I tested a trial for the UK Biometric system when I lived in the UK and it was seriously flawed and vulnerable. Having all the data on on system is called a 'single point of failure', if anyone got onto that system it would be game over, your SS, Driving licence number, finger print hash, credit card number etc would all be leaked onto the internet. All these systems are connected to the internet and trusted third parties are generally allowed connection onto these networks, therefore any illusion of security is well and truly scuppered.

2. The 911 terrorists and the terrorists in the UK were all there legally. No ID card would have stopped them from carrying out there attacks.

3. Recently ICE started a crackdown on people modifying video game consoles. Modifying consoles allows you to play games and DVDs from other regions, and it also allows you to play pirated games. Now I have no problem with there being a crackdown on this. But as has been pointed out several times there are 10-20 million illegal immigrants out there and apparently is a big deal. So why are ICE spending there limited resources on teenagers modifying there console rather than performing raids on illegal immigrants.

4. there are already sufficient laws in place, they just have to enforced. The I-94 clearly shows how long you are suppose to be in the country, your fingerprints and iris scans are already in the database, and your entry and exit are all recorded. The only thing I like would be a card show your status when you are in the middle of AOS, would be good for driving licence etc.

The ID system in the UK will probably not make it into law as there is so much opposition to it. My dad is for it, his argument being, "if I have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about". I look at it like, "If I have done nothing wrong then why do I need to get bothered.

Anyone read Animal farm!!!

Edited August 20, 2007 by thesnowman

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Idiot.

*gives #6 the #1 sign*

its amazing how you keyboard warriors say things on this board, you wouldn't have the courage to say to peoples face.

Really? Based on....?

[almaty 19]