So, ID cards are back in the news again....

Post by **Roman Totale** » March 6th, 2008, 22:51

pfft, I don't take it personally

I do think though that, despite people making very good points here, there is a general over reaction when anything like this comes up. People seem to think we'll be plunged into a dystopian nightmare world where we have to get permission just to go for a piss. Even if they did it might be a good thing, if only to stir up the apathetic masses.

Hyperbole aside, do you honestly think that if you forgot your ID you'd be locked up? I imagine most forms of civil disobedience would take the guise of not carrying it with you. Do people really think that overnight the police horse will take to streets en masse (fat bloody chance, I see more traffic wardens that police these days) and decide to start shaking people down?

Don't think that I'm rabidly pro-ID cards by the way - I just think that some of the criticism leveled against them is slightly over the top (at worst seemingly fueled by conspiracy films/tv series).

My uncle is an MP, and I've met quite a few politicians - the thought of that bunch of shabby bastards being capable of a totalitarian regime strikes something of a discord. If anything, I'm now inclined to sway towards the 'anti' vote on the basis of them being incompetent data handlers.

Something I have noticed about the political stance of 5punk in general based on previous discussions:

* pro corporal punishment etc (in some cases extending towards National Service)

* pro different cultures but anti-multiculturalism

* against identity cards

* pro limiting immigration

* against "political correctness" but pro equal rights

Quite a bizarre mix of political leanings we all seem to have.

buzzmong · Post by **buzzmong** » March 6th, 2008, 22:55

We really need to form our own politcal party, we really do.

Mainly just so we can have our CDC Logo on the national news at election time.

Post by **Dog Pants** » March 6th, 2008, 23:01

Roman Totale wrote:the thought of that bunch of shabby bastards being capable of a totalitarian regime strikes something of a discord. If anything, I'm now inclined to sway towards the 'anti' vote on the basis of them being incompetent data handlers.

That's pretty much my argument against them. I was all for it once, presuming that all the arguments against were on civil liberty grounds, which I don't really think would be threatened. Later I read about the potential expense, likelihood of cock-ups, and meagre potential benefits and changed my mind. Now I've thought about it for myself and, based on evidence I've scrutinised and criticised to make sure I'm not being swayed by media and/or government propaganda, I've drawn the conclusion that you pretty much summed up in the bit I've quoted.

Roman Totale wrote:Quite a bizarre mix of political leanings we all seem to have.

And you're surprised? Everything about us lot is bizarre

Post by **FatherJack** » March 6th, 2008, 23:56

To borrow another Orwellian motif - if you tolerate this..where will it end?

The arguments about it making crime harder to get away with seem all very reasonable, and as I never intend to intentionally commit any crimes and believe people who do should be caught and punished, it shouldn't really affect me, right?

I remember this http://www.huesforalice.com/bbs/ posted on the disco board a while back, which while perhaps a little overdramatic perhaps illustratrates how far things could be taken.

Feature creep of the information stored and cross referenced (which can be added later without any need for further legislation) is what worries me.

Putting aside for a moment that the criminal fraternity are probably more likely to be able to collate a huge body of information about an individual than our shower of shite public services - should you happen to have your fingerprints on an item that was subsequently used in a crime, or just happened to be in the area where one was committed, do you really want plod to have all this information about you? What websites you visit, what you post here? That your preferences scroll up his screen as "Bumming...Guns...Horse love..."?

Hands up who's never done anything a bit naughty, ever.
I kicked over a bin once. Got caught though.

Hehulk · Post by **Hehulk** » March 7th, 2008, 0:03

FatherJack wrote:Hands up who's never done anything a bit naughty, ever.
I kicked over a bin once. Got caught though.

People could have a field day with what I did in my teenage years narf

*Has nothing valid to contribute to this thread, so move along please

friznit · Post by **friznit** » March 7th, 2008, 0:16

Roman Totale wrote: Something I have noticed about the political stance of 5punk in general based on previous discussions:

* pro corporal punishment etc (in some cases extending towards National Service)

* pro different cultures but anti-multiculturalism

* against identity cards

* pro limiting immigration

* against "political correctness" but pro equal rights

Quite a bizarre mix of political leanings we all seem to have.

Surprisingly right wing and interestingly enough, not actually such a bizarre mix. I wonder what that says about the kind of people 5punk attracts. Or if 5punk attracts a generous cross section, are these views representative of our society?

Post by **Dog Pants** » March 7th, 2008, 0:23

friznit wrote:are these views representative of our society?

I don't think so. YouTube is a representative cross section of our society, or the BBC 'Have Your Say' things. Most of society are ill informed and reactionist. Only some of us are like that

Fear · Post by **Fear** » March 7th, 2008, 3:36

I don't see how it attacks freedom, it isn't preventing you doing anything. Most people carry ID on them all the time. I always carry my driving licence and a warrant card, both are government backed photo IDs to some extent. It's the fuckers who have been out breaking into cars that don't carry them, and as we stop them in dark clothes moving about a housing estate at 4am (and we do, lots) it would be incredibly useful to find out who they are, so when Mrs Jones reports a burglary in the area at 9am we can go back looking for the cupcake we have a pretty good idea may be responsible.

The only thing I don't truly trust about the government is their technical capability. They have no doubt outsourced it to some company who uses lots of big words but hasn't got a fucking clue about the technologies they should be using. The cards them selves should carry minimal data and a primary key to link to shit loads more. Which in reality is how it has got to work anyway, if you think about it. I hope they aren't going for security through obscurity again.

Edit: I do object to paying for one.

Moar Edit: I think the reality is it's just the paper passport moving into the digital age.

Post by **Joose** » March 7th, 2008, 7:29

Fear wrote: The only thing I don't truly trust about the government is their technical capability. They have no doubt outsourced it to some company who uses lots of big words but hasn't got a fucking clue about the technologies they should be using. The cards them selves should carry minimal data and a primary key to link to shit loads more. Which in reality is how it has got to work anyway, if you think about it. I hope they aren't going for security through obscurity again.

This.

I think I should point out: I'm not against ID cards *in principle*. I'm against *these* ID cards, as they don't seem to achieve much useful, will cost a fortune, and will be managed by a bunch of incompetents. If it were not for that, I would be all for ID cards.

I think the main problem with the idea of ID cards resulting in an Orwellian dystopia is the presumption that all people who work for the government are power hungry control freaks, and all coppers are Nazi psychos. From my experience, the government is largely filled with well meaning idiots, an coppers are, by and large, actually nice guys who just want to catch criminals and get away from extra paperwork.

Moar Edit: I think the reality is it's just the paper passport moving into the digital age.

I predict that much fuss will be made, it will be launched, and we will suddenly realise that almost fuck all has changed.

Post by **Dr. kitteny berk** » March 7th, 2008, 7:37

Joose wrote: This.

I think I should point out: I'm not against ID cards *in principle*. I'm against *these* ID cards, as they don't seem to achieve much useful, will cost a fortune, and will be managed by a bunch of incompetents. If it were not for that, I would be all for ID cards.

so very hard.

Personally I'd welcome a more convenient piece of ID, CBA to get a driver's license and I'm not that willing to lose my passport.

However, the fact all this information will be stored on a database, which will then be put onto a cd and get lost in the post, that scares me.

Not to mention, having to pay for it, that's just a bit cheeky.

buzzmong · Post by **buzzmong** » March 7th, 2008, 8:23

This post from another forum I use regarding the subject is more along the lines I'm going for:

Musky wrote: There seems to be a little misunderstanding of exactly what the government is proposing here.

The actual cards are only the tip of the iceberg, the real problem being the Databases that will be accesed in real time. Every time you present your card it will be recorded against the database. Asked for ID at the off license? The bank, your doctors, the library? All recorded.

This is a way of not just identifying us, but of gathering information as well. And because it will be so useful for cutting down on fraud, it is very likely we will see an extension of the circumstances in which we're asking for ID. Private organisations are also to be given access to these databases.

No other country in the world has anything like what is being proposed. A hideously expensive scheme, for which we all will be footing the bill.

Lateralus · Post by **Lateralus** » March 7th, 2008, 8:27

I want to add to this discussion, but Joose has pretty much said everything I wanted to already, so basically: what Joose said.

As for the political leanings of 5punkers, I'd probably say that if anything I'm a lefty-leaning hippy by most standards, but do get the impression that I may not be in the majority. However, that's far from saying most 5punkers are not Daily Mail readers. It's funny how people are judged by what paper they read - and I know I'm guilty of it. One of our family friends once asked us if we "take" the Telegraph or the Times, but my parents read the Independent which this woman clearly didn't think of as being suitable.

Post by **Dog Pants** » March 7th, 2008, 9:47

I don't think the left and right are actually that different, and the more extreme they get the closer they become. Take the extemes of fascism and communism for example - Hitler and Stalin weren't all that dissimilar. I consider myself to some degree or other right of centre - that too much emphasis is put on civil liberty and it has eroded our society's ability to deal with crime. It would seem that under scrutiney, though, I have a very similar outlook to those of you who consider youtself left wing, just for slightly different reasons. I think it really just depends on why you think you have an opinion, rather than what that opinion is.

Case in point; it seems like the majority of us believe that ID cards in theory - ie. to crack down on crime (the effectiveness of that aside) - are a good idea, and most of our objections are down to how the data about us is handled. This is regardless of which newspaper we read or which 'side' we consider ourselves to be on. Why is it called left and right wing anyway?

Joose has made an interesting point. I wonder how many people believe that the government have sinister motives. Everyone I've ever spoken to who's worked in government or have worked with personally is either of the same opinion as Joose (ie. well meaning idiots) or falls into that category. I won't outright say there aren't people with sinister motives, because we've all heard of corrupt politicians and I'm sure it isn't just limited to them, but I think they're individuals rather than organisations.

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » March 7th, 2008, 10:46

That was quick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Post by **Dog Pants** » March 7th, 2008, 11:22

Haha

Although I wasn't accusing anyone of being Hitler/a Nazi

Post by **HereComesPete** » March 7th, 2008, 13:21

Thought I might finally land some sort of argument here but first I wanted to post this, it's not exactly my sentiments, but it is a slightly more considered liberal reply (compared to the average have your say liberal, who are quite rare it has to be said) to the problem of the war on terror vs liberty, it's from el reg, I thought it was humorous despite its rather alarmist overtones.

Liberal guy on el reg wrote:
HMG has notified all UK citizens that the product 'liberty' has been permanently withdrawn due to incompatibilities with the 'War on Terror' product.

In a press release a government spokesperson said the new War on Terror product had conflicted with the older product and as the new product was proving to be so lucrative to to the UK economy the Government had been forced to withdraw it.

The press release went on to state that the following products would be developed to replace liberty.

Detention without trial

Deportation to countries with the death penalty

Enforcement of democracy in the Middle East

Support of dictators supporting enforcement of democracy in neighboring states in the Middle East

Retention of DNA samples of people convicted of nothing

The spokesperson said that in order to develop the above products all UK citizens would be required to voluntarily accept an ID card. Obviously any one not volunteering would be classified as a terrorist and forced to carry an ID card if they where ever released from prison.

This is from an argument about the police and their stopping a man with a gun that was actually an mp3 player, some old biddy shopped him because she's silly.

Personally I think this degree of 'control' is dangerous because of the governments inability to guard against data loss. There is also an insidious element to the dna collection, the guy I mentioned above had his dna taken but was later dropped off without charge, he's on the dna database for good now, it doesn't count as one of the things to be destroyed when you ask under the data protection act. Plus he can't go to america or other similarly freaked out countries without a personal visa instead of signing the usual visa waiver because his name is connected on the database to 'taken in for questioning about carrying a gun'.

I know I've not done anything arrestable, I've had a night in the cells for being so shitfaced I couldn't remember where I lived and I'd lost my wallet, but that's it, they gave me a puke bucket and let me sleep it off, then kicked me out in the morning.

I am more concerned therefore that any card I may carry can be and will be cloned by criminals to mask their true identity, and how long would it take for my real card to reflect the naughtiness of the criminal and get me arrested? Or how long to get it cleared up once a mistake was made, and mistakes WILL be made.

And what are the repercussions of having this false flag against your name on a database, loss of job? Bank account frozen? Repossession of house due to no monies? Nothing?

Also - "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security". That's Benjamin Franklin, I put it in there because it's quite a good quotation and somewhat pertinent to the argument.[/quote]

Post by **TezzRexx** » March 7th, 2008, 14:33

Fighting Terrorism? There is only one way.

SEND THE BUGGERS BACK.

mrbobbins · Post by **mrbobbins** » March 7th, 2008, 14:36

HereComesPete wrote:(compared to the average have your say liberal, who are quite rare it has to be said)

How on Earth can you say that?, is it because you don't know any?!

Post by **Dog Pants** » March 7th, 2008, 14:51

I've just been reading the 'Have Your Say' on the uniform thing that's on the news at the moment and I 'Have To Say' that most of them are pretty badly informed, regardless of which side of the political fence they fall on. It's just an online soapbox for people to rant on. I'd like to think that there are more intelligent people out there and I think there probably are. It would appear the Bobbins and myself have very different views on a lot of things, but I'd like to think that should be ever talk about them we could either agree to disagree or come to a satisfactory conclusion, rather than ranting about our own opinions like the people on 'Have Your Say'. That is to say, I'm sure there are reasonable people from all political persuasions. Just maybe not on the BBC websites.