Its legislating for the lowest common denominator. Something successive governments have been good at. Using the press as the mouthpiece. If I didn't give two hoots for humanity, I'd be inclined to do something about it. But fuck it I just can't be arsed.
I suppose that compulsory DNA swabs at birth wouldn't be the next control move then.Don't even think that its never been mooted in some back room.
So when I turned up in person to get this unique ID, how would I prove I was who I said I was ? If all of the other means of ID are open to fraud why couldn't I just create a persona, turn up and get it 'verified' ?
Well insurers are already planning to write life insurance based on your genetic predisposition to have cancer, heart disease, obesity problems, diabetes...it goes on and on. Like being fat, unhealthy and out of work isn't enough of a burden...
You can get verified i.e. tied in with a bank account on paypal with any stupid name like Artie Choke or Mike Oxlong.
So....in a time of cut backs, potential for one card to do it all, passport, driving license, ID, Birth Certificate etc. Hmmm. Sounds like a huge potential saving and cut back in services..nnnnnoooo... that would just be plain silly!
All in one card with fingerprint ID..no need for photo driving license or passport. Even the kids new phone has fingerprint technology. Too many jobs would be lost in the public sector.
John, there is only one of you. You have one identity only. That identity has just one name, one photograph, one fingerprints, one address, one date of birth, one driving licence, one passport, one national insurance number, one electoral registration, etc. - permanently. You will never be able falsely to get (or keep) any of those things under another identity, and no-one else can falsely get (or keep) any of those things under your identity. It is unique. So what is your problem? What do you mean by "create a persona"? What do you imagine it would consist of? What do you mean by "verified"? And what purpose could it conceivably serve?
Problem with the proposed ID cards, IMO was that (like many things proposed/introduced by the regime of the time) the primary purpose would have undoubtedly been control of the generally decent people. As with CCTV, speed cameras, SORN, continuous insurance and countless other recent stuff, it seems to me that it only serves to penalise, and extract as much cash as possible from decent people (those who are 'registered') whilst allowing the scumbags, who don't care/follow the rules to do what they want - lazy, spiteful & cowardly enforcement of 'compliance' offences whilst virtually ignoring anything that requires a bit of work, backbone & integrity to resolve. And for that Mr Blair must shoulder much of the responsibility - FOI his greatest mistake?, give me a break...
I went to school with a Mike Oxlong, and my training officer when I was an apprentice was Isaac Hunt.
There is fundamentally and intrinsically only one of me. (sorry girls). I have no need for a card to tell me who I am. I concede that some might. Keith Richards perhaps. Why the need to write things down. What is it with some people that they need to write lists? The ID card is just a list of lists. Get tae fuck wi it
Pete, John is not my real name, and you didn't answer my question. This whole NIC thing is an interesting issue. It is supposed to uniquely identify the individual and prevent or at least make it harder for terrorists, amongst others, to go about their nefarious ways. If we can't guarantee who people are now how can we be sure (verify) who we give cards to. I can just about see the advantage of the NIC but I keep coming back to the Benjamin Franklin quote "They who can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".
Biometric Passports carry data on the geometry / symmetry of you face, nothing more nothing less. Who gives a toss ?
Since you choose to post under the name of John, that is how I addressed you. If you prefer to reveal your real name, I will be happy to use it. Your pseudonym on this forum is not connected to anything else, so it doesn't much matter. I thought I had answered your question pretty thoroughly, although perhaps I did not understand what you were asking. By all means explain the meaning of your question, if you wish. I really don't understand your reference to "liberty". You seem to be implying that a national identity system somehow involves giving up liberty, but you don't explain why. As far as I'm concerned, when I registered for a NIC in 2010 it was an enhancement to my liberty, not a loss; it was the later abolition of the scheme which reduced liberty. I presume you have a birth certificate, passport, driving licence, and national insurance number - do those things involve a loss of liberty? So would you prefer not to have those things?
