Uk Id Cards

[j2k4]

Is it really seen as a loss of liberty issue?

All of the objections I've seen on that basis seem a bit vague.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by j2k4@25 April 2004 - 18:19
Is it really seen as a loss of liberty issue?

All of the objections I've seen on that basis seem a bit vague.

put simplistically you HAVE to carry the card ( i am assuming there would be some sort of penalty for non compliance) if it becomes compulsory so you lose the freedom of choice....i am not suggesting that you lose your liberty in the locked up sense rather the condition of being free from restriction or control sense as one would not be allowed to roam freely without the id card .
In reality it wouldn't have any affect on the everyday lives however it will be seen as a form of control.
I do not know if these cards are going to be biometric....if they are it will give the state a bio database of every person...big brother looms

[Barbarossa]

It was on the news that only 35% of terrorists use fake ID, so at most this measure will ignore the other 65% of terrorist activity (including 9/11, where they used they're real identities)

It just seems to be that Terrorism is being used as an excuse to bring this in, and in fact there is a hidden agenda for bringing this in that we're not party to.

For example, to cut down on benefit fraud.

The scary thing is that if Biometric information starts being held on central databases, there are many people who would be desperate to see it, for example medical insurers.

[j2k4]

I see the concern as re: the biometric version (as a privacy issue), but it seems a bit nit-picky to complain about having to carry around a card.

Feeling that you "are not allowed to roam freely without the card"?

To speak thus is to cast a suspicious eye on the activity of "roaming freely".

Last time I roamed freely, I had my wallet for the cash necessary to truly roam in a free fashion, though I may have been less free than I was aware; I forgot to remove my ID before I roamed.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by j2k4@26 April 2004 - 03:58
I see the concern as re: the biometric version (as a privacy issue), but it seems a bit nit-picky to complain about having to carry around a card.

Feeling that you "are not allowed to roam freely without the card"?

To speak thus is to cast a suspicious eye on the activity of "roaming freely".

Last time I roamed freely, I had my wallet for the cash necessary to truly roam in a free fashion, though I may have been less free than I was aware; I forgot to remove my ID before I roamed.

it's a perception thing...i did say the reality is not the same as the perception.
I wonder what that libertarian person that ram raided the forum a while back would have thought of the issue ??????
That said, how would you feel personally if you had left your ID at home while you were roaming freely (might get confused with jay walking ) and you where stopped by the police and possibly charged and fined thus giving you a criminal record. i appreciate that is a worst case scenario.
as an example of feeling, here we have the NRA spouting about the right to have guns, a personal freedom and they fight every attempt to tighten controls. We may not agree with them but we understand their constitutional rights. So why would it be considered "pickey" if someone wants the personal right to not have to carry an ID card in their own country ? It's not the fact that it's just a card It's what it represents in ones mind...just a card today...what will it be tomorrow?

All this is just theory on the assumption that the cards will become compulsory, but knowing the English (i spent a large chunk of my life there) they are prouder than we are about personal freedom, just with the English reserve they don't have to high 5 it all the time.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by j2k4@26 April 2004 - 12:58
I see the concern as re: the biometric version (as a privacy issue), but it seems a bit nit-picky to complain about having to carry around a card.

Feeling that you "are not allowed to roam freely without the card"?

To speak thus is to cast a suspicious eye on the activity of "roaming freely".

Last time I roamed freely, I had my wallet for the cash necessary to truly roam in a free fashion, though I may have been less free than I was aware; I forgot to remove my ID before I roamed.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with carrying an ID card.

Any argument that "it will be copied anyway" is just claptrap. Just because it will be copied is no reason not to do it. I know we can't make it impossible for criminals, but let's at least make it a bit more difficult for them.

Take money launderers, or fraudsters for example. Let's make it a bit more difficult for them to open bank accounts in false names.

If we make the card as difficult to copy as possible then we will stop some crime. Not all of it, but at least some. That is enough reason for me to carry 1 more credit card sized piece of plastic in my wallet.

It really is not a problem to me.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J'Pol@26 April 2004 - 17:45

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with carrying an ID card.

Any argument that "it will be copied anyway" is just claptrap. Just because it will be copied is no reason not to do it. I know we can't make it impossible for criminals, but let's at least make it a bit more difficult for them.

Take money launderers, or fraudsters for example. Let's make it a bit more difficult for them to open bank accounts in false names.

If we make the card as difficult to copy as possible then we will stop some crime. Not all of it, but at least some. That is enough reason for me to carry 1 more credit card sized piece of plastic in my wallet.

It really is not a problem to me.

I also have no problem carrying an extra card around with me..

I do have a problem with being made to carry an extra card around with me.

I already forget to carry too many of the bloody things on a regular basis, quite apart from the feelings of indignation and stubborn pigheadedness the very idea invokes in me.


The cost is way over the top of the very limited benefits.

There is a lot more can be done with that money, even if just given to the police, than this stupid idea will help with.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@26 April 2004 - 10:54
I also have no problem carrying an extra card around with me..

I do have a problem with being made to carry an extra card around with me.

my point exactly as to how many will feel

the test will be seeing how many do pay up on the voluntary scheme (at least one here by all accounts)
it will be interesting to see what happens if someone refuses to pay should it become compulsory

[Chevy]

Just seen this:

ID card scheme £2,500 fine threat
The home secretary has unveiled his plans for ID cards
People who refuse to register for the government's planned ID card scheme could face a "civil financial penalty" of up to £2,500, it has emerged.

David Blunkett said not making registering a criminal issue would avoid "clever people" becoming martyrs.

And he promised strict limits on the type of information stored on ID cards.

Under Monday's draft bill, carrying false papers will be a criminal offence but MPs have until 2013 to decide if registration should be compulsory.

Bet the average fine would be less than £100 though.



I know it's not the issue the thread as evolved into (roaming freely) but I just spotted it on the BBC News site (source)

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+26 April 2004 - 19:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced &#064; 26 April 2004 - 19:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@26 April 2004 - 17:45

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with carrying an ID card.

Any argument that "it will be copied anyway" is just claptrap. Just because it will be copied is no reason not to do it. I know we can&#39;t make it impossible for criminals, but let&#39;s at least make it a bit more difficult for them.

Take money launderers, or fraudsters for example. Let&#39;s make it a bit more difficult for them to open bank accounts in false names.

If we make the card as difficult to copy as possible then we will stop some crime. Not all of it, but at least some. That is enough reason for me to carry 1 more credit card sized piece of plastic in my wallet.

It really is not a problem to me.

I also have no problem carrying an extra card around with me..

I do have a problem with being made to carry an extra card around with me.

I already forget to carry too many of the bloody things on a regular basis, quite apart from the feelings of indignation and stubborn pigheadedness the very idea invokes in me.


The cost is way over the top of the very limited benefits.

There is a lot more can be done with that money, even if just given to the police, than this stupid idea will help with. [/b][/quote]
I disagree, the benefits far outweigh the cost. The cost is minimal.

You are already forced to be registered, to register your marriage and to register your children. You are forced to have an NI number, you are forced to pass a driving test, you are forced to have insurance (not really but to all intents and purposes) you are forced to get an MOT if your car is over a certain age. You are forced to do many things, this is just another fairly minimal one.

I really do not agree that the cost outweighs the benefit. However I fully accept that is probably because we are looking at this from an entirely different perspective.

There are various ways to deal with criminality, traditionally we did this by apprehension and prosecution. However nowadays we also use disruption. In essence that is making the crime more difficult to commit and in so doing minimising the level. For example if we could half the level of Excise fraud in the UK then that would save the Government around £3,000,000,000, just on Tobacco and Oils frauds. No-one would have to be arrested or charged, just by making it more difficult to commit the fraud the billions are saved.

The principle of disruption extends to most if not all areas of profit related crime. How much for example is lost to benefit fraud (which I hate because the bastards are stealing my money). So if we could help to lower that, great in my view. Same for money laundering, make it difficult for the drug traffickers to conceal their money.

Like I said, I think the cost is outweighed by the potential benefits (no pun intended).