ID cards

[Marc]

Can't agree with you at all there. When terrible things happen we have to learn from them. I'm not saying that something like that will happen again, I'm saying it's very possible that something similar could happen and we should be aware of the power the Government has over us WITHOUT being scared of them. I'm not fighting the Government in every way, they can do wonderful things for society. I'm anti ID cards, but pro freedom and pro democracy. The NO2ID campaign is specifically pro privacy. This is a positive campaign. I provided an extreme example as just that, an example of what can happen when systems like this are in place.

Thinking that things like that couldn't happen, "in this day and age," is simply wrong. Terrible things happen in this day and age. Look around you, read the newspapers. It is important to be aware of these things, but I am very strongly against acting out of fear.

I take on very little of what the newspapers say as they are the worst scaremongers out there. Yes, things CAN happen, but in this case the likelyhood is so minimal that is wrong to say they will happen. As for things such as sexual preference/political beliefs, I stand by what I said in that they won't happen. You have yet to say how you think they would.

 

[vicious]

I take on very little of what the newspapers say as they are the worst scaremongers out there. Yes, things CAN happen, but in this case the likelyhood is so minimal that is wrong to say they will happen. As for things such as sexual preference/political beliefs, I stand by what I said in that they won't happen. You have yet to say how you think they would.

In this case the likelyhood is massive that bad things will happen, just because the government is "older and wiser" doesn't mean we can sit back and let them do whatever they want, it's not scaremongering if it's true and possible, IMO.

edit: and on your previous post, it is easy for a big power to glean information from people, willing or no.
you can't just rule out the possiblity.

 

[Marc]

In this case the likelihood is massive that bad things will happen, just because the government is "older and wiser" doesn't mean we can sit back and let them do whatever they want, it's not scaremongering if it's true and possible, IMO.

So what do you base this massive likelyhood on? Bare in mind you have quoted my posted and I was talking about the gathering of data such as sexual preference, political beliefs etc

 

[Ewan]

I take on very little of what the newspapers say as they are the worst scaremongers out there. Yes, things CAN happen, but in this case the likelyhood is so minimal that is wrong to say they will happen. As for things such as sexual preference/political beliefs, I stand by what I said in that they won't happen. You have yet to say how you think they would.

Yes, the newspapers are scaremongerers. But they also report facts. And there are plenty of alternative sources of news and information.

I will provide another example for you. It has been shown that the police show discrimination against ethnic minorities in their use of Stop and Search powers. People with darker skin are more likely to be stopped and searched by police. If the police had easy access to the addresses of everybody in the UK, their religious beliefs and the country they come from, powers could easily be put in place to search the homes of people they considered 'likely terrorists', which because of proven prejudices would often be used against people from ethnic minorities.

 

[Marc]

Yes, the newspapers are scaremongerers. But they also report facts. And there are plenty of alternative sources of news and information.

And all those sources of information have a bias of some sort. Sorry, but I don't refuse to cross the street just because there are plenty of scary "facts" out there that tell me how many people get killed crossing the road.

I will provide another example for you. It has been shown that the police show discrimination against ethnic minorities in their use of Stop and Search powers. People with darker skin are more likely to be stopped and searched by police. If the police had easy access to the addresses of everybody in the UK, their religious beliefs and the country they come from, powers could easily be put in place to search the homes of people they considered 'likely terrorists', which because of proven prejudices would often be used against people from ethnic minorities.

To be honest, I'm not going to go into alleged police discrimination as that is a whole different subject.

 

[vicious]

So what do you base this massive likelyhood on? Bare in mind you have quoted my posted and I was talking about the gathering of data such as sexual preference, political beliefs etc

.. the "massive likelyhood part was about the IBM thing.
i was only quoting you to show that i was talking about subjects you had brought up, not just the ones in that post

And about PD it is, in NO WAY a different subject, the subject we're on is the faults in id cards, so it covers everything they might change.

 

[Marc]

.. the "massive likelyhood part was about the IBM thing.
i was only quoting you to show that i was talking about subjects you had brought up, not just the ones in that post

The IBM thing happened a very very long time ago, in a very different world. Could NOT happen today!

 

[vicious]

The IBM thing happened a very very long time ago, in a very different world. Could NOT happen today!

you fail to have stated why it could not, pure ignorance maybe?

EDIT: and history is prone to repeat itself, as i'm sure you've heard before.

and tbh it wasnt that long ago, there are still people who will remember it.

 

[Ewan]

The IBM thing happened a very very long time ago, in a very different world. Could NOT happen today!

No, but with the numerous new powers being given to the Government and the police in this country we're heading towards a society where something of that sort could happen.

And all those sources of information have a bias of some sort. Sorry, but I don't refuse to cross the street just because there are plenty of scary "facts" out there that tell me how many people get killed crossing the road.

No, I'm not saying you should at all. But maybe you should ask the Government to put some speed cameras up, or build a crossing. It's not about being scared of what could happen, it's about being aware that it could happen and taking measures to prevent it. You seem to be saying that we shouldn't do anything, about any problem, because the newspapers are lying to us and really none of these things are happening?

To be honest, I'm not going to go into alleged police discrimination as that is a whole different subject.

It's fairly simple. Some people are racist, we know this. It's common sense that there are racists in the police. Give a racist a baton, a tazer and permission to use nessecary force against someone he considers a threat, what do you think will happen?

 

[Marc]

you fail to have stated why it could not, pure ignorance maybe?

No need to get personal! :nono:

I think the onus here is to prove that it will happen as that is the accusation.

EDIT: and history is prone to repeat itself, as i'm sure you've heard before.

and tbh it wasnt that long ago, there are still people who will remember it.

Yes there are many people who remember it, members of my family remember it first hand. The thread here is about ID cards in Britain. There is no way what happened 70 years ago could happen in an integrated cosmopolitan country such as this.

 

[vicious]

No need to get personal! :nono:

I think the onus here is to prove that it will happen as that is the accusation.



Yes there are many people who remember it, members of my family remember it first hand. The thread here is about ID cards in Britain. There is no way what happened 70 years ago could happen in an integrated cosmopolitan country such as this.

you , again fail to state why it couldnt happen. no arguement behind you, and tons behind me, and this fellow (Ewan)..

sorry, but to quote a hull saying: Epic fail:thumbsdown:

 

[Marc]

No, but with the numerous new powers being given to the Government and the police in this country we're heading towards a society where something of that sort could happen. /

Pure conjecture and assumption though.

No, I'm not saying you should at all. But maybe you should ask the Government to put some speed cameras up, or build a crossing. It's not about being scared of what could happen, it's about being aware that it could happen and taking measures to prevent it. You seem to be saying that we shouldn't do anything, about any problem, because the newspapers are lying to us and really none of these things are happening?

But you aren't talking about taking measures to prevent something happening, but to not do anything. I want to cross the road. Do I take measures to prevent being hit by a car by looking first and wait for a safe gap or do I just not bother to cross at all. Saying NO to ID cards is not crossing at all. As for the newspaper, things are usually not happening they way they are reported to be happening.

 

[Marc]

you , again fail to state why it couldnt happen. no arguement behind you, and tons behind me, and this fellow (Ewan)..

sorry, but to quote a hull saying: Epic fail:thumbsdown:

And you fail to understand yet again. You are the one stating that something will happen without backing it up with any evidence, it's down to you to prove your case.

 

[Ewan]

But you aren't talking about taking measures to prevent something happening, but to not do anything. I want to cross the road. Do I take measures to prevent being hit by a car by looking first and wait for a safe gap or do I just not bother to cross at all. Saying NO to ID cards is not crossing at all. As for the newspaper, things are usually not happening they way they are reported to be happening.

I'm talking about stopping the NIR and the ID card scheme, to prevent Britain from taking another step towards a state where we are controlled by our Government and its police. They are giving us something a few of us want, a lot of us don't want, and most of us don't even know about. Oh yeah, and they're charging us five billion pounds (by the Government's own estimate, the LSE says it could cost up to eighteen billion). ID cards will not help to prevent terrorism, crime or ID fraud.

 

[Marc]

I'm talking about stopping the NIR and the ID card scheme, to prevent Britain from taking another step towards a state where we are controlled by our Government and its police. They are giving us something a few of us want, a lot of us don't want, and most of us don't even know about. Oh yeah, and they're charging us five billion pounds (by the Government's own estimate, the LSE says it could cost up to eighteen billion). ID cards will not help to prevent terrorism, crime or ID fraud.

I'm afraid we are going to have to disagree on this one Ewan. I have not seen anything that convinces me that all these bad things are going to happen and you are convinced of your side of the debate. I think I'll leave it at that.

 

[vicious]

And you fail to understand yet again. You are the one stating that something will happen without backing it up with any evidence, it's down to you to prove your case.

my dear fellow, we never said that it WOULD happen, we said that things have happened before, to give us reason to be weary of such government behaivor. now please, stop floundering in deep water, and give us a real arguement, careful; us sharks bite.

and we are not convinced that terrible things will happen, but if it's possible then we'd rather not risk it.

 

[Marc]

my dear fellow, we never said that it WOULD happen, we said that things have happened before, to give us reason to be weary of such government behaivor. now please, stop floundering in deep water, and give us a real arguement, careful; us sharks bite.

A lot of things have happened before, doesn't mean they could happen again given strong changes in society. I have yet to hear sufficient argument as to why there is a great chance that it will happen, therefore I am unable to construct a retaliatory one.

Out of curiosity, are you a photographer? You appear to have joined a photography forum but so far only posted with regard to a non photography related subject. Hows about popping over to the welcome forum and introduce yoursef and let us know a little about you photography.

 

[vicious]

A lot of things have happened before, doesn't mean they could happen again given strong changes in society. I have yet to hear sufficient argument as to why there is a great chance that it will happen, therefore I am unable to construct a retaliatory one.

Out of curiosity, are you a photographer? You appear to have joined a photography forum but so far only posted with regard to a non photography related subject. Hows about popping over to the welcome forum and introduce yoursef and let us know a little about you photography.

yes i am a photographer, i do it in my spare time, i will once i have sorted out a few things, thank you.
back on topic..
we never said there was a great chance it would happen, any chance at all its enough to be weary. if you've played chess you will know that if the king is in a spot that the enemy can take 2 or less moves to get to, then you are at risk. and knowing this "chance" you move to a safer place, the safer place in this arguement being stoppage of id cards.. any chances we take usually have to be for a reason, and because there are no reasons to take these chances, like in the chess game.. why take them? and please, more retaliation!

 

[Marc]

we never said there was a great chance it would happen

Ahem.

In this case the likelyhood is massive that bad things will happen,

 

[neo2810]

I couldn't care less for this agrument since you're both trying to justify the impossible, but I AM interested to know why vicious' post count is still 0 after so many posts.

 

[Marc]

I couldn't care less for this agrument since you're both trying to justify the impossible, but I AM interested to know why vicious' post count is still 0 after so many posts.

Because he has only posted in OOF.

 

[vicious]

Ahem.

haha i didnt say great

ok well you've got me on that, but that still doesnt give you a reason not to take into account what we've said, and reply with a REAL arguement..

and about posts.. what he said ^^^^^

 

[Marc]

haha i didnt say great

ok well you've got me on that, but that still doesnt give you a reason not to take into account what we've said, and reply with a REAL arguement..

and about posts.. what he said ^^^^^

TBH I'm not going to repeat myself so I will leave this be as it's obvious nothing I say will convince you and vice versa.

 

[vicious]

TBH I'm not going to repeat myself so I will leave this be as it's obvious nothing I say will convince you and vice versa.

if you give me a solid arguement you may be able to convince me.
and you should think the same way, have an open mind (if you do not already) and see it every angle. i only request that you research further into it.

 

[Marc]

if you give me a solid arguement you may be able to convince me.
and you should think the same way, have an open mind (if you do not already) and see it every angle. i only request that you research further into it.

*Sigh* - The point I was making was that you haven't come up with an argument, just conjecture. The point is, you are against ID cards because of what they might become or lead to, not because of what they are. I have never actually said that I am pro cards, but no-one has yet convinced me of a real reason to be anti. You will never convince me with "this could happen/that may happen". Those arguments just say that, should they introduce ID cards, then steps must be made to ensure these things don't happen, and quite rightly so. Otherwise you might as well be against all legislation as it will be brought in by the government and we don't trust the government. :shrug:

 

[Ashers]

i dont want ID cards simpl because i dont want any tom **** or harry on the police force to know who i am or were i am and give them another reason to abuse me. if we was forced to have them id be "losing" mine on a regular basis. because i hate the idea of that.

 

[andy_fozzy]

i dont want ID cards simpl because i dont want any tom **** or harry on the police force to know who i am or were i am and give them another reason to abuse me. if we was forced to have them id be "losing" mine on a regular basis. because i hate the idea of that.

Why would they abuse you?

 

[Marc]

Why would they abuse you?

Why not? We do!

 

[andy_fozzy]

Why not? We do!

True

 

[Ewan]

i dont want ID cards simpl because i dont want any tom **** or harry on the police force to know who i am or were i am and give them another reason to abuse me. if we was forced to have them id be "losing" mine on a regular basis. because i hate the idea of that.

Yeah, exactly

I hate the idea of it too. Unfortunately if the scheme is put in place you could face £1000 fines for things like losing, tampering with or failing to update your ID card (if some of the information they have about you changes.) :rules:

 

[Steep]

I always carry 2 id cards and sometimes up to 4 id cards at a time for work. I have no problem with carrying another or being asked to procuce it. My real problem is with .gov expecting me to pay for it. As for .gov using the information for their own ends, that's why we have elections, if you don't like what they are doing vote them out.

 

[Ewan]

I always carry 2 id cards and sometimes up to 4 id cards at a time for work. I have no problem with carrying another or being asked to procuce it. My real problem is with .gov expecting me to pay for it. As for .gov using the information for their own ends, that's why we have elections, if you don't like what they are doing vote them out.

I wish that solved issues like this one, but a Government can do a lot of harm in 5 years, and there's no guarantee that the Government we vote in won't act in exactly the same way once they no longer have to worry about gaining popularity (or, not for another 4 or so years anyway).

 

[hepburn]

I have never actually said that I am pro cards, but no-one has yet convinced me of a real reason to be anti. You will never convince me with "this could happen/that may happen". Those arguments just say that, should they introduce ID cards, then steps must be made to ensure these things don't happen, and quite rightly so. Otherwise you might as well be against all legislation as it will be brought in by the government and we don't trust the government. :shrug:

Marc, a real reason to be anti ID cards is because they are another step towards the creation of a society that assumes "guilty until proven innocent" rather than "innocent until proven guilty". Once introduced it will become the norm for them to be routinely used, and failure to produce to an appropriate authority will result in loss of personal liberty. You only have to research WWII era to see that has already happened in this country before.

It is all very well to promote safeguards through legislation but the fact remains that legislation is slow to implement or change, doesn't always hit the spot, and is often overlooked or abused by many, including the officials charged with implementing it.

Rather than try to convince you with "this could happen/that may happen" scenarios let's look at how recent legislation has been used:

1. In the UK anti-terrorism legislation has been misused to stop and detain people, including photographers, usually by misinformed jumped up would-be police officers. That's fact, not hearsay.

2. In the USA the Patriot Act has been used by the FBI to obtain the library records of the public on demand, simply by walking into any library. No court order required, just on demand access to know what material you have accessed or borrowed - for whatever purpose, legitimate or not.

So legislation is not always protective of the people it sets out to protect, and it increasingly discounts personal privacy. Regardless of any legislation the facts remain that as a society we are discounting basic assumed honesty and becoming more reliant on documented and gathered "evidence" of honesty and accountability. I wonder how long it will be before we CRB check our friends and family, or require ID to go shopping.

Personally I am saddened there are people such as yourself who do not take up the mantle, either pro or anti, and just watch from the sidelines. No doubt it will be people like yourself who will complain bitterly when it all goes wrong. I could understand it if you were all too busy trying to rectify past legislation that is now failing, but you're not - are you? :|

 

[Marc]

1. In the UK anti-terrorism legislation has been misused to stop and detain people, including photographers, usually by misinformed jumped up would-be police officers. That's fact, not hearsay.

Well actually it is mostly hearsay as the knowledge of it tends to come from the media. Also, "misinformed jumped up would-be police officers" describes just that and nothing to do with legislation. The law is already in place that say that it is not illegal to take photographs in public. Just because some prat in a pretend cop uniform thinks that it is is hardly the fault of the lawmakers.

Personally I am saddened there are people such as yourself who do not take up the mantle, either pro or anti, and just watch from the sidelines. No doubt it will be people like yourself who will complain bitterly when it all goes wrong. I could understand it if you were all too busy trying to rectify past legislation that is now failing, but you're not - are you? :|

That's a little unfair. There is always middle ground. Just because you are not pro, doesn't mean you have to be anti. I have yet to see a convincing argument against ID cards, only conjecture and examples from a very different age. For the record I am definitely against the fact that they will cost so much to implement and that people will have to pay the amounts quoted for them. But I am in favour of the principle of the idea.

 

[hepburn]

Well actually it is mostly hearsay as the knowledge of it tends to come from the media. Also, "misinformed jumped up would-be police officers" describes just that and nothing to do with legislation. The law is already in place that say that it is not illegal to take photographs in public. Just because some prat in a pretend cop uniform thinks that it is is hardly the fault of the lawmakers.

It was legislation at the hands of the lawmakers which allowed for the creation of prats in a pretend cop uniform. It hasn't prevented abuse though, has it? Let's hope the same isn't the case when it comes to ID cards...

As for hearsay, not true. The media report what happens. I'll concur it is sometimes with sensationalism, as that is the nature of the tabloid beast. However, because of the way it is reported does not mean it doesn't or hasn't happened. You also do an injustice to other forum members who have reported it happening by saying it is mostly media based.

That's a little unfair. There is always middle ground. Just because you are not pro, doesn't mean you have to be anti.

My earlier comments weren't intended to be unfair but it's interesting you find them to be so. I believe something as important and contentious as ID cards really deserves a defined point of view. I am however, not surprised at your middle ground stance given the way you cherry pick at people's posts on this subject and reply only to those elements which you can draw upon to substantiate your indifference to this topic.

And I say that in a friendly observational way and not as a personal attack.

I have yet to see a convincing argument against ID cards, only conjecture and examples from a very different age.

There can only be conjecture and historical examples until such time as ID cards, or the legislation for them, is fully implemented. So you choose to repudiate peoples concerns because the concern isn't a reality yet? How churlish.

For the record I am definitely against the fact that they will cost so much to implement and that people will have to pay the amounts quoted for them.

Interesting you are against the costs involved despite those being pure conjecture at present...

But I am in favour of the principle of the idea.

Would you be kind enough to tell us all what you believe the principle of the idea is?

 

[Marc]

It was legislation at the hands of the lawmakers which allowed for the creation of prats in a pretend cop uniform. It hasn't prevented abuse though, has it? Let's hope the same isn't the case when it comes to ID cards...

Well that's a bit of a round about way of blaming someone isn't it? There will always be officials who overstep their authority, it's hardly a fault of legislation.

As for hearsay, not true. The media report what happens. I'll concur it is sometimes with sensationalism, as that is the nature of the tabloid beast. However, because of the way it is reported does not mean it doesn't or hasn't happened. You also do an injustice to other forum members who have reported it happening by saying it is mostly media based.

With all due respect to other posters here, my point is that in all these instances we only ever hear one side of the story, whether it be in the media or a personal experience of a forum member. I don't judge on one side of a story as I wouldn't like to be judged in the same manner.

My earlier comments weren't intended to be unfair but it's interesting you find them to be so. I believe something as important and contentious as ID cards really deserves a defined point of view. I am however, not surprised at your middle ground stance given the way you cherry pick at people's posts on this subject and reply only to those elements which you can draw upon to substantiate your indifference to this topic.

And I say that in a friendly observational way and not as a personal attack.

O do not cherry pick, I just quote the specific part of the post I am replying to. It may well be that |I do not have a reply to the other parts and I personally find it easier if these things are uncluttered.

There can only be conjecture and historical examples until such time as ID cards, or the legislation for them, is fully implemented. So you choose to repudiate peoples concerns because the concern isn't a reality yet? How churlish.

I have only asked for evidence rather than conjecture. People aren't just expressing concerns though are they? They are in a fixed position of "No" stating that their concerns should be enough to stop legislation altogether. Hardly churlish.

Interesting you are against the costs involved despite those being pure conjecture at present...

Well you got me on that one. I should have put "should these costs prove to be accurate".

Would you be kind enough to tell us all what you believe the principle of the idea is?

The principle is late out tin the link to the official website in the OP of this thread. I see no need to repeat it here.

 

[2blue4u]

i dont want ID cards simpl because i dont want any tom **** or harry on the police force to know who i am or were i am and give them another reason to abuse me. if we was forced to have them id be "losing" mine on a regular basis. because i hate the idea of that.

I can think of dozens of reasons why we should have ID cards. And I've just seen another one - YOU!

People who get aggro off the police usually do so because they give aggro. This often stems from problems with positive ID. If the Police Officer does not believe the name provided and there is no valid form of id provided then it's off to the local police station. Producing an ID card to quickly and positively confirm one's identity will enable both parties to continue on their way quickly and with no aggro. ID cards will, in such circumstances, result in quicker on-street processing.

I feel sad that there are people who wouldn't feel proud to carry a UK ID card - or are fearful of having to provide accurate ID information to a police officer. Are you that ashamed of who you are?

What a sh!te state this country is in.

 

[2blue4u]

The National Identity Register is the database that goes with the card, and that is the real issue here. They will keep a huge amount of your personal information, no matter where you work, and this information will be available to a hell of a lot of people

No it won't and no it won't. It's an IDENTIFICATION (<<- clue) CARD not a data repository. The data is already held elsewhere.

Positive identification through the use of the ID Card will enable those so authorised to pull the other data applicable to their role. It will also ensure that they retrieve the data that applies to you and not someone with a same/similar name/dob.

 

[hepburn]

Well that's a bit of a round about way of blaming someone isn't it? There will always be officials who overstep their authority, it's hardly a fault of legislation.

It's a failure of legislation that allows officials to overstep their authority.

With all due respect to other posters here, my point is that in all these instances we only ever hear one side of the story, whether it be in the media or a personal experience of a forum member. I don't judge on one side of a story as I wouldn't like to be judged in the same manner.

We will always only hear one side until we go and seek out the other side - unless the side we hear is the only one we want to hear? I personally never judge a book by its cover

O do not cherry pick, I just quote the specific part of the post I am replying to. It may well be that |I do not have a reply to the other parts and I personally find it easier if these things are uncluttered.

Good quoting helps keep things uncluttered. Not having, or just not, replying to all parts of a post sends a message to the OP that you didn't consider their comment worthy of a reply, or that you are devoid of a reply and perhaps therefore not fully committed to a reasoned debate of the topic?

I have only asked for evidence rather than conjecture. People aren't just expressing concerns though are they? They are in a fixed position of "No" stating that their concerns should be enough to stop legislation altogether. Hardly churlish.

And until such time as firm legislation is proposed or passed there will be no evidence which meets your unreasonable demands. Personally I am not in a fixed position of no, but I do have my feet firmly in the no camp because of my concerns. I don't consider myself churlish and would be happy to listen to people who put forth positive reasons why i should move into the yes camp. sadly no-one has yet come forward to do that, although there are plenty who come forward to try and denigrate the reasons for saying no. I guess it's easier to do that eh?

Well you got me on that one. I should have put "should these costs prove to be accurate".

I wasn't out to get "you" Marc, just to highlight that conjecture is something you are willing to use, as you have reaffirmed above, yet you negate it when dismissing the no camp.

The principle is late out tin the link to the official website in the OP of this thread. I see no need to repeat it here.

You missed the point of my question Marc. I asked what you believe the principle is. Would you like to reconsider answering now?

 

[Marc]

Heppers, you are just picking holes in everything I say now. I have yet to be convinced by the nay sayers in this and it is their role to convince me, not the other way around as they are the ones making the allegations. I could spend the entire day answering every point and you responding to my every point in turn, going round in circles until we both collapse with exhaustion and we still won't agree.

I know I've said it before, but I am this time going to step away from the discussion.