ID cards in the UK.From a Left/Right perspective - Poll

[unbeliever]

why serious question?? what are you afraid of?

 

Any number of things. Top of the list is probably the government of the day using the cards and database to track and monitor their political opponents and undermine them.

[L00b]

Your argument centres around convenience.<...> Mine refers to basic civil liberties.

These arguments are not mutually exclusive, as with most other areas of Government responsibility at the very 'interface layer' of civil liberties.

 

Up to a point (the data bullet-listed in my earlier post), I would deem your concerns invalid or misplaced, because the data is, in and of itself, relatively inconsequential/inoffensive, as just 'fit for purpose' and nothing more.

 

Beyond that point (e.g. the unnecessary additional data and relational hooks into other databases mooted in 2006 per unbeliever's post), I would deem your concerns entirely worthy of consideration, many of them very valid indeed.

[TJC1]

It wouldn't solve the problem at all, it would just be another form of identification to the ones you already have.

 

As part of the ID card schemes so far proposed they would centralise all the information they hold on you, making any leak or breach or misuse much more serious.

 

---------- Post added 03-08-2015 at 13:24 ----------

 

 

At the moment I carry no stuff around with me. So is how is 1 thing better than none?

 

In bold. That's scary enough to reject the proposal! Who would control this giant database anyway?

[RonJeremy]

Ask your local GP surgery, which feeds biometric info into NHS servers.

Actually it's not, it's exactly the sort of tool required to achieve a smaller state. More can be done administratively by fewer people once proof of ID becomes as easy to verify as looking at a card (or passport...but current ID verification systems are not geared towards passports - because passports are optional).

No. Having an ID card does not mean being watched, monitored and controlled. It's just a piece of plasticized cardboard with stuff printed on it. You're much easier to watch and monitor though your mobile phone and CCTV interfaced with facial recognition software. Which does exist indeed, and is in use.

I'm all ears. Who could use ID card data and how?

You must be the right colour, then

Serves you right for getting caught

 

Driving-in-France tip: never be the fastest car around, always let at least one more moronic than you (yes, I include myself in that) 'open' the way

 

GB plates don't help either - and I wasn't driving - and I told Mrs Jeremy to slow down.

[TJC1]

These arguments are not mutually exclusive, as with most other areas of Government responsibility at the very 'interface layer' of civil liberties.

 

Up to a point (the data bullet-listed in my earlier post), I would deem your concerns invalid or misplaced, because the data is, in and of itself, relatively inconsequential/inoffensive, as just 'fit for purpose' and nothing more.

 

Beyond that point (e.g. the unnecessary additional data and relational hooks into other databases mooted in 2006 per unbeliever's post), I would deem your concerns entirely worthy of consideration, many of them very valid indeed.

 

At the apex of the civil liberties layer lies a very large margin for human error or otherwise.

health data is fit for purpose too, should we have that on a card? The personal information held on us would most certainly expand.

 

Data's one concern

power misuse and control another

administration another

privacy?

 

The convenience argument holds no water when all taken into account.

services already have the data they need. All other forms of ID are optional. I'm comfortable with that scenario and protected under the data protection act.

why should I have to prove I'm entitled to services I am already given?

Edited August 3, 2015 by TJC1
...

[RonJeremy]

See post #36

it has very serious dangers and practical implications to individuals privacy, business and civil liberties.

 

Are they a serious threat and an endangerment to civil liberties in the following Police states?

Belgium

Brazil

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Germany

Greece

Luxembourg

Malta

Mauritius

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Spain

Thailand

Uruguay

 

There are others which are debateable as to whether they are oppressive regimes, but the above is a list of those where it is compulsory to have a form of ID which I would not consider to be so.

[unbeliever]

Are they a serious threat and an endangerment to civil liberties in the following Police states?

Belgium

Brazil

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Germany

Greece

Luxembourg

Malta

Mauritius

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Spain

Thailand

Uruguay

 

There are others which are debateable as to whether they are oppressive regimes, but the above is a list of those where it is compulsory to have a form of ID which I would not consider to be so.

 

Do you trust the government to bring in an ID card scheme which does not have, and can be trusted not to grow; the more sinister aspects of the 2006 plan?

[Cyclone]

In bold. That's scary enough to reject the proposal! Who would control this giant database anyway?

 

The government obviously. And they've demonstrated complete trustworthiness and reliability. They totally understand about IT security, and no legislation they've passed has ever been used for far more than it was originally 'intended'...

[TJC1]

Are they a serious threat and an endangerment to civil liberties in the following Police states?

Belgium

Brazil

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Germany

Greece

Luxembourg

Malta

Mauritius

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Spain

Thailand

Uruguay

 

There are others which are debateable as to whether they are oppressive regimes, but the above is a list of those where it is compulsory to have a form of ID which I would not consider to be so.

 

Thailand has a terrible human rights record. You are likely to face the butt of a soldiers gun and a lengthy jail term in the most inhumane prison possible if you refuse to show I.D.

[unbeliever]

The government obviously. And they've demonstrated complete trustworthiness and reliability. They totally understand about IT security, and no legislation they've passed has ever been used for far more than it was originally 'intended'...

 

Are you suggesting that the UK government would abuse such power?

Surely not.

I mean it's not like the last Labour government would, for example, have used anti-terrorism legislation to eject somebody they didn't like from their party conference for heckling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Wolfgang

The very idea!