• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Do We Need a National ID Card?

Do You Support a National ID Card

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
A

Anonymous

Guest
In most the articles I've read involving the immigration/alien problem, the solution proposed includes a new National ID Card- a tamper-proof, non-forgeable national ID card which proves citizenship (something first off, I don't think exists, because anything made by man can be forged, counterfeited, or duplicated if the price is right)...

I'm sorta of split on the ID idea...Especially as presented in this article where if stopped or contacted by law enforcement without your National ID card, it be required you be jailed by local law enforcement until you can present proof of identity-- this plays to an image of Nazi Germany or Communist Russia....I seldom carry any identification on my person-- just a little cash in my pocket for mad money, and anything I need I charge on local accounts because everyone knows me...I don't think we need a Federal Law requiring local Law Enforcement to jail people they know until they can show paperwork to prove their ID...

I know the Montana Legislature voted overwhelmingly in favor of a law AGAINST a National ID card- partially because of the huge cost the National D/L proposal would be to the state taxpayers, and partially because of Montana's historical backing of individuals Privacy Rights- and the fact this law may be unconstitutional under Montana's Privacy section of the Constitution....

The solution is a national ID card. Require every U.S. citizen 18 years or older to apply for a tamper-proof, non-forgeable national ID card which proves citizenship. The card must at least include a unique ID number, your name, a current photograph, and a positive means of identity verification (a thumbprint and/or iris scan). To apply, you must present a certified birth certificate or citizenship papers.

If your name has changed since birth, you must offer proof of the legality of such name change (marriage certificate if you are a woman). Since birth certificates can easily be forged or illegally obtained, the application form must also require additional information to verify your identity, such as social security card, residences and jobs during the past five years, or marital history.

The data from the application form must be entered into a new federal database, where it will be thoroughly checked for evidence of fraud. If the application contains suspect information, the applicant is interviewed to determine the appropriate disposition.

Once everyone here legally has a national ID card, visa, or green card, only illegals will be unable to present a required ID. Any person without one will be subject to arrest and, after an investigation and immigration hearing, subject to deportation.

Here's what Congress should do:

1. Enact and fully fund the proposed national ID card initiative.

2. Enact laws denying employment, driver's licenses, and welfare benefits to those having none of the three approved types of identification (national ID card, valid visa, or green card). These laws shall go into effect immediately after the deadline for issuing ID cards to all U.S. citizens has passed.

3. Enact laws requiring state, county, and city law officers to ascertain whether persons stopped or arrested have one of the three required types of identification.

If none of those IDs are produced, the individual shall be detained until an immigration agent determines the person's status. Any state or local government entity, which fails to enact and enforce these policies, shall be denied all federal funding.

4. A high percentage of illegal immigrants work in the huge illegal economy, where requirements for business licenses and employment verification checks are ignored, and most transactions are in cash to evade paying employee and business taxes.

A large increase in the number of immigration and IRS agents is the solution. These agents would be authorized to investigate and shut down illegal businesses, prosecute the owners, and deport their employees who are here illegally.
 

schnurrbart

Well-known member
I, for one, do not see where the problem with a national ID is. Many of the rightwing seem to be against this but gripe the loudest about illegals being in this country. This wpuld seem to be a very good tool to help get rid of them. As the old saying goes, "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs." I can't see where the loss of freedom of not being able to prove who you are at a moment's notice is good. Also, do you mean that you drive around town without a valid driver's license on your person? You are required to carry that anytime you are b ehind the wheel and also proof of insurance and valid current registration for your vehicle. What is one more thing to carry? Not much.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
schnurrbart said:
Also, do you mean that you drive around town without a valid driver's license on your person? You are required to carry that anytime you are b ehind the wheel and also proof of insurance and valid current registration for your vehicle. What is one more thing to carry? Not much.

I'm not sure if its the law in the state- but I know it is the practice by most law enforcement and Judges that if you get a ticket/warning for No D/L -- if you provide proof that you had them prior to being stopped the citation is usually dismissed...Maybe just because of the rural nature of the area...

Problem is-- I jump from outfit to outfit-- all have registration and Ins cards in them (sometimes don't get them in right on time tho- and leave them laying on my desk)-- but I seldom carry a billfold-- usually leaving that in my #1 vehicle that I do any travelling with...Lost them too many times in the hayfield or riding....

Shnurrbart--How about if you're just a passenger in the vehicle? Or walking down the street? Should you be forced to show ID or go to jail until it can be produced?
I'm really split on this part- the old Law Enforcement in me says this could be quite a tool- even for tracking down wanted persons (altho I don't believe it is possible to keep folks from getting fake Identification)-- but I can see where it could be badly abused... The Libertarian in me says this is just one more intrusion into/erosion of our state and personal rights (which this current administration has taken away more of-- and added more government control and bureaucracy- than any other administration since FDR)......

This isn't such a big thing to me- as I usually have a nationally accepted ID-- my retired Law Enforcement ID which allows me to pack concealed nationwide-- but it will be an inconvenience to many people...

And the main opposition I had was in the current Homeland Security Proposal- the National ID was to be a Drivers License/State ID which all states had to do identically on a National format-- and ALL THE COST of equipment and redoing the ID's was to be footed by the individual State...
 

Texan

Well-known member
I voted "No," but only because you didn't have a "Hell, NO!"

Just like you Oldtimer, I almost never carry a drivers license. I'd hate to think that I even lived in an area where I needed one. The thought of having to carry some type of federal 'papers' reminds me too much of the old WW II movies with the Gestapo agents - "Your papers, please."

What we need is more control of the people who are here illegally and less control of the people who are here legally. If I could vote again, I'd vote "They Can Kiss My Ass" except you didn't have that choice, either. :lol:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Calm down boys.....you and I both know the Fed's know when you go take a crap.

There is NO privacy anymore in our world today.....so why bother to pretend there is????

You got GW on the phone listening....planes taking pics of your house/property for local taxes, satellites working for Google Earth or the GPS used in your car.

I went and bought one of those little camping light thingies you can clip on the brim of your cap....and I had to show my licenses to prove I was over 18. Now why I had to...no one could tell me. So I just told'em to keep it.

ATM cards, credit cards, cell phone calls, reg calls from a land line....they got ya if they want ya.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
kolanuraven said:
ATM cards, credit cards, cell phone calls, reg calls from a land line....they got ya if they want ya.


Yep-- I just had to throw away my perfectly good cell phone and get a new one-- because the old one didn't have GPS compatability (so they can track your location if you make a 911 call :roll: :wink: ).....The old ones wouldn't work after this month....

Neighbor even claims that the Feds (EPA) jumped on him for spreading his manure too thick after they spotted it from a satellite.... :roll:

Calm down boys.....you and I both know the Fed's know when you go take a crap.

I flush twice because D.C. is a long way away and I want to share with them....
 

schnurrbart

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
schnurrbart said:
Also, do you mean that you drive around town without a valid driver's license on your person? You are required to carry that anytime you are b ehind the wheel and also proof of insurance and valid current registration for your vehicle. What is one more thing to carry? Not much.

I'm not sure if its the law in the state- but I know it is the practice by most law enforcement and Judges that if you get a ticket/warning for No D/L -- if you provide proof that you had them prior to being stopped the citation is usually dismissed...Maybe just because of the rural nature of the area...

Problem is-- I jump from outfit to outfit-- all have registration and Ins cards in them (sometimes don't get them in right on time tho- and leave them laying on my desk)-- but I seldom carry a billfold-- usually leaving that in my #1 vehicle that I do any travelling with...Lost them too many times in the hayfield or riding....

Shnurrbart--How about if you're just a passenger in the vehicle? Or walking down the street? Should you be forced to show ID or go to jail until it can be produced?
I'm really split on this part- the old Law Enforcement in me says this could be quite a tool- even for tracking down wanted persons (altho I don't believe it is possible to keep folks from getting fake Identification)-- but I can see where it could be badly abused... The Libertarian in me says this is just one more intrusion into/erosion of our state and personal rights (which this current administration has taken away more of-- and added more government control and bureaucracy- than any other administration since FDR)......

This isn't such a big thing to me- as I usually have a nationally accepted ID-- my retired Law Enforcement ID which allows me to pack concealed nationwide-- but it will be an inconvenience to many people...

And the main opposition I had was in the current Homeland Security Proposal- the National ID was to be a Drivers License/State ID which all states had to do identically on a National format-- and ALL THE COST of equipment and redoing the ID's was to be footed by the individual State...

That is almost always the case of a federal mandate. However, the equipment needed is already in place in the DL offices. Only a new form would have to be printed. A lot of states already have an ID available for people who want one because they don't drive. If you are serious about getting rid of illegal aliens, you will have to sacrifice a little and I keep hearing that we haven't sacrificed much as individuals lately in the "war on terrorism." I don't have a problem with it at all. I'll tell you another little tool that will make all you rightwingers froth at the mouth. In Germany, ALL residents of each home have to register with the police so that they know how many people are living in each house and what their names are. That would also help get rid of the illegals.
 

Aztumbleweed

Well-known member
I am against any form of national i.d. If the feds were makin areasonable effort to stop illegals from getting in the problem would not be so big. Why try to force me to carry something to prove that I belong here when they are not stopping the wets. You want to carry one go to a country that uses them and travel around for awhile. What comes after an id permission to travel from place to place? Poor idea for fixing something they could fix without bothering me.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
We already have a national ID system.

It's called a Social Security Number!!!

That one number tracks you forever via your education, insurance applications, how many ck you write, anything and everything you do is tracked back thru that one number.



!!!! DUH!!!!!
 

schnurrbart

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
We already have a national ID system.

It's called a Social Security Number!!!

That one number tracks you forever via your education, insurance applications, how many ck you write, anything and everything you do is tracked back thru that one number.



!!!! DUH!!!!!
\

When was the last time you looked at your SS card? I know you can spend a little extra money and get a fancy metal one but the one they issue is just a little stiff piece of paper. I had mine laminated years ago but it doesn't take anything to make a copy of one. I know that everyone thinks one thing leads to another but but having lived and traveled several years in Europe, I never once heard of anyone being stopped from traveling for not having permission. If you want to stop illegals, you have to have some way that would be relatively easy to check and something that is hard to duplicate to check to stop them. The way we are doing it now obviously isn't working, so I think it is time to try something else. Many people are complaining that the American public hasn't had to sacrifice. Maybe this would qualify for some of that sacrifice. Everyone seems to want the "other guy" to be the one made to sacrifice.
 

Aztumbleweed

Well-known member
I should not have to sacrifice anything to have the borders protected. The man power and tech. allready exist to control the border what doesn't is the will. Maybe europe is different than the countries I have been to that require id. Those did require permission to move about the country. As far as the S.S. number yes they have destroyed the reason for that number. You should try and not use it man the looks on those peoples faces when you just say no.
 

passin thru

Well-known member
An ID is just a feel good measure and it will solve nothing.
You have to make it tough on employers so you take the jobs away from the illegals
You have to make it tough to send illegally gotten money to a foreign country.
Those two things to start with will drastically cut on illegal immigration. After all if they have no job there is no use to come here.
A piece of paper is just that .............a piece of paper.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Pushing National IDs
By Dennis Behreandt
Published: 2007-07-09 05:00


The ABC News headline was intended to be alarming. Posted by “Brian Ross & the Investigative Team,” the headline proclaimed: “FBI Terror Watch List ‘Out of Control.’” According to the report by Justin Rood, the watch list, intended to help authorities keep tabs on a few of the world’s worst terrorist threats, had gotten so big as to become nearly useless for actually fighting terrorism. “A spokesman for the interagency National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), which maintains the government’s list of all suspected terrorists with links to international organizations, said they had 465,000 names covering 350,000 individuals,” Rood reported. “Many names are different versions of the same identity — ‘Usama bin Laden’ and ‘Osama bin Laden’ for the al Qaeda chief, for example.”

The number cited by the NCTC spokesman turns out to be too small, in fact. The ABC News report noted that a budget request on the Department of Justice website actually refers to a list containing 509,000 names. As Rood points out, this extensive list contains numerous mistakes. “U.S. lawmakers and their spouses have been detained because their names were on the watch list,” Rood observed. “Reporters who have reviewed versions of the list found it included the names of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, at the time he was alive but in custody in Iraq; imprisoned al Qaeda plotter Zacarias Moussaoui; and 14 of the 19 Sept. 11, 2001 hijackers, all of whom perished in the attacks.”

The expanding terror watch list is compelling evidence that the federal government can’t even manage to keep a relatively small database under control. That’s a bad omen for the future. Under legislation signed into law by President Bush in 2005 and now due to be implemented in 2009, the nation will create a federally administered list that is a quantum leap in size larger than the terrorist watch list. Moreover, under this new program it won’t be the names of terrorists or suspected terrorists that inhabit the new, gargantuan federal database; it will be the names and personal information of ordinary law-abiding Americans.

The measure in question is the Real ID Act, which creates a de facto national ID for all Americans by requiring states to both issue licenses that conform to federal Department of Homeland Security guidelines and to link state driver’s-license databases together in a massive new federally administered database. It’s a highly controversial measure that is increasingly running into conflict with the states themselves over its enormous funding costs and its authoritarian overtones.


The Legislative Back Door
There have been many attempts to foist a national ID card onto the American public, even going back as far as the early 1980s, though these have often been viewed in a dim light as a result of religious concerns. The Reagan administration was a case in point. Writing for the Cato Institute in 1997, author Stephen Moore recalled that during Reagan’s early years in office, “Then-Attorney General William French Smith argued that a perfectly harmless ID card system would be necessary to reduce illegal immigration. A second cabinet member asked: why not tattoo a number on each American’s forearm? According to Martin Anderson, the White House domestic policy adviser at the time, Reagan blurted out ‘My god, that’s the mark of the beast.’ As Anderson wrote, ‘that was the end of the national identification card’ during the Reagan years.”

Opposition to such a scheme by President Reagan was not enough to kill national ID proposals outright, and by 1997, Congress was debating a measure introduced by Florida Republican Bill McCollum that intended to “improve the integrity of the Social Security Card” by turning it into a picture ID.

The issue came up again in a big way following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Then, Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison sparked outrage among privacy advocates when he offered to supply the database software that would underpin a national ID card to the federal government for free. “The government could phase in digital ID cards to replace existing Social Security cards and driver’s licenses,” Ellison said at the time in an article for the Wall Street Journal. “These new IDs should be based on a uniform standard such as credit card technology, which is harder to counterfeit than existing government IDs.” At a conference on privacy that year, Wired News reporter Declan McCullagh noted, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) passed out “LarryCards” to attendees. Another group called Larry Ellison “the privacy villain of the week.”

Even in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, few took the prospect of a resurrected push for a national ID system seriously. But public disdain for a national ID in the wake of Ellison’s proposal apparently didn’t register with congressional lawmakers or with the Bush administration. On January 26, 2005, Wisconsin Republican F. James Sensenbrenner introduced H.R. 418, the Real ID Act of 2005, into the House of Representatives. The measure stipulated that federal agencies “may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver’s license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section.”

Among the requirements for the new ID was the stipulation that it include “common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements” — in other words, an electronic means of storing personal data on the card itself that could be accessed by appropriate card-reading technologies. Moreover, all the data on the card would be linked via a massive federal database, much as envisioned by Larry Ellison.

The measure initially passed the House in February 2005, but because it looked like it would stall in committee in the Senate, the text of the Real ID Act was added to what was deemed the next must-pass legislation — an emergency supplemental appropriations bill funding the Iraq War as well as aid for victims of the Asian tsunami. The appropriations bill, with the Real ID Act attached, was passed 368-58 in the House on May 5, 2005, and in the Senate five days later by a unanimous vote. “I am glad the House could complete its work on the emergency supplemental bill,” Real ID Act author Sensenbrenner said when the measure passed the House. “It provides the resources needed by our military to protect the country and win the war against terror. I am especially pleased with its inclusion of the REAL ID Act.”

Opposition
Critics were not as pleased as Sensenbrenner. Pointing out that the measure was falsely linked with popular efforts like fighting terrorism and stopping illegal immigration, Congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul pointed out, in an essay entitled “The National ID Trojan Horse,” that it was really a dangerous step toward authoritarianism. “Supporters claim the national ID scheme is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens,” Paul warned. “The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist.” Though supporters insisted the measure was not meant to be a form of national ID, Paul disagreed. “Federal legislation that nationalizes standards for drivers’ licenses and birth certificates creates a national ID system pure and simple,” he said. “It is just a matter of time until those who refuse to carry the new licenses will be denied the ability to drive or board an airplane. Such domestic travel restrictions are the hallmark of authoritarian states, not free republics.”

Critics of Ron Paul’s position on the measure point out that similar restrictions already exist for those who don’t carry a state license or ID. That may be true, but the constitutionality of such a measure on the federal level is at least dubious, and the underlying philosophy of a national ID is diametrically in opposition to the motivating aims of the Founding Fathers. They believed, as Thomas Jefferson eloquently expressed, that rights come not from government, but from God, and that government may not abridge those rights. A government that issues a national ID turns that concept on its head. In issuing a national ID, a government, in essence, issues a license to citizens granting them access to rights that, absent the ID, would be legally inaccessible.

In sum, when a government issues a national ID, it is a sign that the government has adopted the idea that it — not God — is the source of human rights. This is the source of Congressman Paul’s quip that those lacking a national ID, once these are required, will, in the eyes of government, “cease to exist.”

Others have since echoed Congressman Paul’s concerns and have added their own. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been similarly critical, stating that Real ID creates a dangerous national ID that will facilitate government surveillance of law-abiding citizens. “Once the IDs and database are in place,” EFF warns, “their uses will inevitably expand to facilitate a wide range of surveillance activities. Remember, the Social Security number started innocuously enough, but it has become a prerequisite for a host of government services and been co-opted by private companies to create massive databases of personal information. A national ID poses similar dangers; for example, because ‘common machine-readable technology’ will be required on every ID, the government and businesses will be able to easily read your private information off the cards in myriad contexts.”

Moreover, when implemented, Real ID will compromise the integrity and security of each person’s private information while failing to improve national security. In EFF’s opinion, the “IDs do nothing to stop those who haven’t already been identified as threats, and wrongdoers will still be able to create fake documents. In fact, the IDs and database will simply create an irresistible target for identity thieves.”

Security experts agree that the plan puts personal data at risk. According to computer security expert Bruce Schneier, author of the book Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World, a national ID would be a security nightmare. In Schneier’s opinion, no matter how secure the card is made, sooner or later clever criminals will find a way to create a forgery. They will have great incentive to do so because, unfortunately, the harder it is to create a forgery, the more valuable a successful forgery becomes.

Beyond that, though, is the risk from the linkage of 50 state databases into one massive federal database. “The security risks of this database are enormous,” Schneier said in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “It would be a kludge of existing databases that are incompatible, full of erroneous data, and unreliable. Computer scientists don’t know how to keep a database of this magnitude secure. The daily stories we see about leaked personal information demonstrate that we do not know how to secure these large databases against outsiders, to say nothing of the tens of thousands of insiders authorized to access it. The fact that REAL ID database is a ‘one stop shop’ for personal information exacerbates these risks.”

For all the risk the Real ID system would mean to the integrity and security of personal information for millions of Americans, it would do little or nothing, according to Schneier, to prevent terrorism and ensure national security. It is based, he says, on the mistaken assumption that if government knows who everyone is, it will be able to identify the evildoers.

The theory behind Real ID, Schneier said in his Senate testimony, is that “if we know who you are, and if we have enough information about you, we can somehow predict whether you’re likely to be an evildoer.” That, he says, is untrue. “If you need any evidence of this, look at the single largest identity-based anti-terrorism security measure in this country: the No-Fly List. The No-Fly List has been a disaster in every way: it harasses innocents, it doesn’t catch anyone guilty, and it is trivially easy to evade. This is what you get with identity-based security, and this is what you should expect more of with REAL ID.”

Battleground in the States
As passed, the measure was due to take effect in 2008, but under pressure from vigorous and growing opposition, the Bush administration announced on March 2 that implementation would be postponed to December 2009 — if it is not repealed before then.

Opposition to the bill has come from many of the nation’s states where the measure is billed as a dangerous, expensive, unfunded, and unnecessary mandate. In Missouri, opposition has been led by state Senator Jim Guest, a vocal critic of the measure who leads Legislators Against Real ID (LARI), a nationwide coalition of state legislators fighting to stop implementation of the Real ID Act.

Like others, Guest warns that the measure undermines the basic rights and freedoms of the American people. “We’re supposed to be a government of, by and for the people,” he told the online tech journal eWeek.com. “Government’s role is to protect citizens’ freedom. In this case, they’re not doing that.” According to the Missouri legislator, Real ID “is a direct frontal assault on the freedom of citizens.” And it has to be stopped now, before implementation, he says, because it falls under the Department of Homeland Security and lacks future legislative oversight. “Homeland Security has total control; there is no judicial or legislative control over this. Once they issue [the Act] there is no way of stopping them.”

Many states have taken Rep. Guest’s warning seriously. So far 38 states have seen legislation introduced in their legislatures opposing the Real ID Act or even barring state participation in the measure once implemented. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, “The states that have passed anti-REAL ID legislation are Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Maine, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, and Washington.”

The resolution passed by the state of Arkansas pulls no punches in its assessment of the threat posed by the Real ID Act. The Arkansas measure notes: “The ‘common machine-readable technology’ required by the REAL ID Act of 2005 would convert state-issued driver licenses and identification cards into tracking devices, allowing computers to note and record a person’s whereabouts each time he or she is identified.” The Arkansas resolution also points out that the Real ID Act “wrongly coerces states into doing the federal government’s bidding by threatening to refuse to the citizens of non-complying states the privileges and immunities enjoyed by the citizens of other states.”

In Montana, legislation opposing implementation of Real ID was tougher still. There, House Bill 487, which was signed into law by Governor Brian Schweitzer on April 17, directs “the Montana Department of Justice not to implement the provisions of the Federal Act” and states that “the purpose of the Legislature in enacting [this measure] is to refuse to implement the REAL ID Act and thereby protest the treatment by Congress and the President of the states as agents of the federal government and, by that protest, lead other state legislatures and Governors to reject … the REAL ID Act.” As he signed the measure into law, Governor Schweitzer was defiant. “The best way for Montana to deal with the federal government on this issue and many others is to say ‘No. Nope. No way and hell no,’” he said.

The opposition at the state level may have finally caught the attention of federal lawmakers. On the Democratic side of the aisle, measures have been introduced in both the House and Senate to repeal the Real ID Act. While neither measure has garnered much support as of yet and both have been referred to committee, their existence is proof that activism at the state level is beginning to have an effect at the federal level. Much good has been done by the states that have already passed measures opposing the implementation of a national ID — it now falls to the rest of the states to follow suit and prevent the federal government from converting the free citizens of America into subjects of the budding new national-security regime.

http://www.jbs.org/node/4539
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Sounds to me like it's time for our state to secced (sp) from the Union.

What they keep forgetting is that we as citizens should not have to prove we are citizens.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Jinglebob said:
Sounds to me like it's time for our state to secced (sp) from the Union.

What they keep forgetting is that we as citizens should not have to prove we are citizens.


Now JB hunny....that last statement you made makes no sense.

You always have to prove you're JB, like when you go to the hospital, go to a bank that doesn't know you, write a ck somewhere, lots of places require you to PROVE who you say you are. Fill out any credit card app. and they ask for your mothers maiden name, to prove who you are, the list is endless.

This is not something new, we've all been proving who we say we are to others all our lives.


Just look, here we run under an alias and lordy knows we all know that we've got people here saying they are one, two even three different people and it keeps being screamed " PROVE IT".
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Jinglebob said:
Sounds to me like it's time for our state to secced (sp) from the Union.

What they keep forgetting is that we as citizens should not have to prove we are citizens.


Now JB hunny....that last statement you made makes no sense.

You always have to prove you're JB, like when you go to the hospital, go to a bank that doesn't know you, write a ck somewhere, lots of places require you to PROVE who you say you are. Fill out any credit card app. and they ask for your mothers maiden name, to prove who you are, the list is endless.

This is not something new, we've all been proving who we say we are to others all our lives.


Just look, here we run under an alias and lordy knows we all know that we've got people here saying they are one, two even three different people and it keeps being screamed " PROVE IT".

See, you proved my point. We already have everything we need to prove who we are. Why more? What makes you think a new piece of plastic or paper will change anything? Illegals will just get forged copies of what ever new thing they come up with.

Lets quit making excuses for a bunch of people who are not doing their jobs. Immigration.

We don't need new laws, we need new members of congress and the Whitehouse, if they think this ID thing is a good idea.

Enforce the laws we already have!
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Ok..I agree.]

What I'm saying is that all seem to be acting this is something we've never had to do before....when is retrospect we do this everyday.

And yes, if this comes to pass there will be people out there who will make a killing for forgery of such documents.


Point is we always have and always will have to prove who we are in matter of importance.
 
Top