1984, anyone? Options

[*Statues/Shadows*]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/idcards/story/0,,1817559,00.html

Read that. Discuss. If it gets too deep (), feel free to move this to debate; I thought it'd be better suited for the lounge as this particular article is very biased towards one side, however, not living in England myself, I have yet to come across anything else on it (but perhaps that's just me being ignorant).

[Mr. Me Too]

I thought it'd be better suited for the lounge

Yeah me too.

[no-name]

^agreed

[SarahxJoy]

I didn't finish reading all of it, but got a little over half.

I'll have to agree when The Guardian talks about having forty-nine separate pieces of private and personal information in the hands of God knows who. I don't like it. But maybe I'd have to hear the other side of the story in all of this, 'cause like you said: this particular article is very biased towards one side.

[ghjgfkgfk]

umm can someone summerize that

[*Kathleen*]

^ Can't read? Mmm I'm reading it right now. I shall get back to you when I'm done.

[ghjgfkgfk]

lol, if i couldn't read why would i ask for a summary

[*Kathleen*]

Well I just figured maybe you couldn't read this in particular due to the amount of difficulty it seems to be for you.

[*Statues/Shadows*]

Because reading a summary is hardly reading. You don't read the description on the back of a book and say that you've read it.

[SarahxJoy]

umm can someone summerize that

Lazy, much?

If you're not willing to read it yourself (or at least some of it), why bother even replying to this topic?

[*Statues/Shadows*]

For what it's worth, her post was far more useful than smallsXalmighty's, who insists upon being the most useless thing in existance. At the very least, we are all perfectly well aware that Mr. Me Too's entire goal is to be a total pain in the ass, making him even less worthwhile.

[SarahxJoy]

Ah, good point.

[ghjgfkgfk]

sry, i just didn't feel like reading the whole thing. because im lazy

[*Kathleen*]

aeg;hhg I had all this stuff quoted and typed then I pressed the wrong button on here and lost it. df;hfdg Okay, well, I'll try to just post my main points.

You will be required to attend an enrolment centre with some form of identifying material - bank statements, credit cards, driving licence or birth certificate, who knows what. Then you will be fingerprinted, photographed and the iris in your eye will be measured. You will give the authorities 49 pieces of information about yourself. If you don't, you may be fined up to £2,500. Additional fines of up to £2,500 may be levied every time you fail to comply.

Now that is creepy.

It's a devilishly clever scam because, in essence, the government is charging you so that it can charge companies that wish to confirm your identity.

I am afraid I do not trust the government's motives - nor do I trust its competence.

I am preternaturally against the state forcing me to supply biometric measurements and 49 separate pieces of information about myself to a database which will be accessed by God knows who without my permission or knowledge. I am genetically incapable of submitting to such a process. I cannot do it. I will not do it,

Although it came a bit humorous in the manner that he stated it, I believe every word of it reflects how I feel about the subject.

The Spanish ID card did not stop the Madrid train bombers and a British ID card wouldn't have stopped the London July bombings of 2005. ID cards, it is plain, will not deter home-grown terrorists or suicide bombers

Again, great point. There will always be ways around the ID card for terrorists and suicide bombers if need be. Overall, I'm just scared of this being 'successfully' implemented - our own government might consider it. Blargh. I guess Orwell was merely twenty-ish years too early.

Edit: Is there anyone in Parliament brutally opposed to this?

[ghjgfkgfk]

measure the iris in your eye? why?

[*Kathleen*]

Why would you ask if you didn't read the article? My God am I the only one besides Nicki that actually read it?

[technicolour]

Apparently the iris is a more reliable blueprint, as compared to the normal fingerprint. Iris' are more unique.

I'll read it in a bit.

[*Statues/Shadows*]

Edit: Is there anyone in Parliament brutally opposed to this?

God, I hope so. There ought to be, really. However, apparently the only thing really stopping it from going ahead right now is problems with implementing the technology.

I found this paragraph particularly bothersome

Every time you get a library card, make a hire-purchase agreement, apply for a fishing or gun licence, buy a piece of property, withdraw a fairly small amount of your money from your bank, take a prescription to your chemist, apply for a resident's parking permit, buy a plane ticket, or pay for your car to be unclamped you will be required to swipe your card and the database will silently record the transaction. There will be almost no part of your life that the state will not be able to inspect. And it will be able to use the database to draw very precise conclusions about the sort of person you are - your spending habits, your ethnicity, your religion, your political leanings, your health and even perhaps your sexual preferences. Little wonder that MI5 desired - and was granted - free access to the database. Little wonder that the police, customs and tax authorities welcome the database as a magnificent aid to investigation.

[*mona lisa*]

The government just wants to be seen as doing something. The article brings up many great points and really, I think the ID cards are just a waste of time and money. It's like the issue with the government listening to your phone calls. It claims it will reduce or prevent terrorism, when in fact, it doesn't do anything.

[*Statues/Shadows*]

^There was a sketch on SNL at one point about two old women discussing things, when words kept popping up that would attract the government to listen in, until the conversation remained so boring that they gave up listening in, at which point they actually did start discussing plans to bomb something or whatever it was.

Apparently I don't remember it well enough to describe it very well. But it was amusing.

[ghjgfkgfk]

Why would you ask if you didn't read the article? My God am I the only one besides Nicki that actually read it?

i read your post

[*Kathleen*]

God, I hope so. There ought to be, really. However, apparently the only thing really stopping it from going ahead right now is problems with implementing the technology.

I found this paragraph particularly bothersome

Eep me too. I was going to quote that as well. Scarrrry.

[Mr. Me Too]

At the very least, we are all perfectly well aware that Mr. Me Too's entire goal is to be a total pain in the ass, making him even less worthwhile.

Who the you think you talkin to, I'm the boss
Someone has a lot of spite , hater get lost
I'm in the air I don't hear CBers corny words
Yeah the Kid is back, so what you heard.

[*I Shot JFK*]

^ oh goodie. a new imbecile. the ones we had WERE getting tedious.

Edit: Is there anyone in Parliament brutally opposed to this?

Yes. I know that you guys can't bu tif the opportunity ever should arise, vote Liberal Democrat.

The entire concept of ID cards, and the reasoning behind introducing them is flawed. I seethe with rage. Ah well, Tony Blair will be out of office in a year, and hopefully his sucessor will have a gram of common sense. hahahahahahahaha.

oh, and when i read that, i could have sworn the guys name was harry potter. lol.

[Mr. Me Too]

^ oh goodie. a new imbecile. the ones we had WERE getting tedious.

I know what you thinkin why I said me too
Cause she said the topic should be in lounge, so I said me too
If you say you got a benz I will say me too
You wishin everybody could be just like you
But Im not the type to throw fits like yall do
Or bitch and wine like yall do