Argument Against a National Identification System The concept of a national ID card has been debated in the United States for over three decades. In the past, the opposition as well as its allies has been strong. As a result of the September 11th terrorist attacks there has been new interest in the concept of national ID cards. While this idea is not all a new, it is closer to becoming more of a reality than ever, gaining the approval by the key members of congress. Currently the Bush Administration objects this renewed idea, however due to the intense emotion from the recent terrorist attacks the nation is closer to the idea than ever before. The idea of a national identity (ID) card seems simple enough. Take the photographic and alpha-numerical information on our birth certificates, Social Security cards, driver s licenses, and voter registration card; add a bar code, fingerprint, microchip, or other biometric identifier; and display all that information on a neat plastic card no bigger than a credit card. But beneath this smooth surface hides a complex issues and perhaps the greatest threat to personal freedom Americans have ever confronted. A national ID system will Require Americans to obtain federal government authorization to travel, work, rent or buy housing, obtain medical care, use financial services, and make many purchases. This federal authorization could be denied for many reasons, including database errors, a suspicious transaction profile, being a deadbeat parent, failure to pay taxes or fines, and any other social control measures Congress wishes to hang on the system. The system will almost certainly create an outlaw class--as large as 10 to 20% of the population--cut off from "normal" life in America. This outlaw class will sustain the underground economy for the use of future terrorists (and ordinary criminals). (Dority Barbara, p10) The general questions about national ID cards and concepts involved in the debates, found on the Privacy International website at www.privacy.org/pi/activities/idcard/idcard_faq.html. Can be summarized as below: 1. Who uses ID cards now? About a hundred countries currently utilize official, compulsory, national IDs for various purposes. These include Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, and Spain. Among the developed countries that don't have such a card are Australia, Canad... ... middle of paper ... ... promote new forms of discrimination and harassment of anyone who looks or sounds "foreign." Failure to carry a national I.D. card would likely come to be viewed as a reason for search, detention or arrest of minorities. The disgrace and humiliation of constantly having to prove that they are Americans or legal immigrants would ponder heavily on such groups. There I strongly believe that national ID system is not the solution for the problems we are facing today. We have seen before that technological solutions involve risks that should be identified and understood in advance of its use to the greatest extent possible. These risks should be discussed and understood in detail before any decisions regarding its adoption is any form should be made. Work Cited Dority, Barbara. ?Halt and show your paper!? Humanist. 1 March.2002, Vol.62 Issue 2 Mohl, Jeff. ?How public is personal information?? Communications & Mass Media Complete, 1 September 2003, Vol. 91, Issue 7 Safire, William. ?The Threat of National ID.? Kirszner and Mandell 586-88. http://www.aclu.org Privacy International www.privacy.org/pi/activities/idcard/idcard_faq.html.
The voter ID issue starts with certain laws that, in the US, require that a person show a form of official ID before they are allowed to register to vote. This issue has split both Republicans and Democrats. According to Kenneth Jost, “republicans say [voter-ID laws] are needed to prevent fraud and protect the integrity of elections. Democrats say the laws are not needed and are being pushed in order to reduce voting among groups that skew Democratic in elections especially Latinos and African Americans” (Jost, p. 171). Both of these perspectives are valid, and with an open mind, can both sides have important points about the validity and inclusion of elections. On one hand, it is crucial to prevent fraud and keep the elections free of error, otherwise the outcome could be an unfair ruling. On the other side of the argument, voter-ID laws can cause discrimination and prevent people from voting, also
In William Safire’s “The Threat of National ID”, he argues against a National ID card. Safire published an article in the New York Times to establish different context. Safire gives details about the use of National ID card at different places in different situations. He emphasizes that many Americans are willing to give up personal privacy in return for greater safety, but none of us have privacy regarding where we go and what we do all the time. Safire disputes that mandatory National ID become necessary for people to prevent fear of terror attack.
Voter ID laws in the United States have begun to create controversy since the beginning of its adaptations in the early 2000’s. Voter ID laws in the United States is a law that requires U.S. citizens to have a special form of identification in order to vote in an election. The idea with Voter ID laws is that the state must make sure that the laws do not pose any sort of burden on the voters. These laws have been proposed in order to stop voting fraud. However, the institution of Voter ID laws have made trouble in states, including Texas, regarding to the various amount of identification requirements needed.
Exchanging privacy for the benefits of the use of internet. In Plotz's essay “Privacy is Overrated” he want's to convince people to not be too concerned about privacy and to try to be more open. He gives many examples that could convince people into being more open. For example, he writes “But I bet you want to know if your baby-sitter has ever been convicted of child abused, if your business partner has a history of bankruptcy if your boyfriend is still married”(68). Yes I agree that this is tr...
Solove, Daniel J. "Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have 'Nothing to Hide'." Chronicle of Higher Education. 15 May. 2011: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
All humans have some desire for privacy, but people have different boundaries to what information about them should be private. Problems arise with these widely varying definitions. What one person may define as a casual curiosity, another may define as a blatant invasion of privacy. Often, these disagreements find themselves in court rooms, and have been subjects of some of the most controversial court cases ever.
have suggested that until powerful information technologies were applied to the collection and analysis of information about people, there was no general and systematic threat to privacy in public. Privacy, as such, was well-enough protected by a combination of conscious and intentional efforts (including the promulgation of law and moral norms) abetted by inefficiency. It is not surprising, therefore, that theories were not shaped in response to the issue of privacy in public; the issue did not yet exist. (17)
Voter Identification (ID) Law, one of the most talked about political issue is in the news again and the focus is now from the Presidents administration: "A pattern of duplicate registrations found nationwide shows voter fraud is both massive and systemic. Yet, the Obama administration claims there is no problem and that demands for voter ID cards are racist" (Investor's Business Daily). American citizen have one of the greatest fundamental rights of the free world, the ability to vote in our democratic system.
For Big Brother to stay in control there cannot be individual identity. The ‘Party’ strives to strip away people's identities to have power over a group of emotionless individuals. Big Brother believes that the past must be controlled in order to regulate the present. Since Big Brother “is in control of the present” ( 20 ), they decide how everyone lives their everyday lives. The reason why the Party breaks links between the past from the present is clear. Therefore, citizens will fail to remember their individual identities from the past, and way of life was far better than is it now. “Oceania” lacks diversity, all their citizens are thought to be like emotionless robots. They all live in the same style apartment buildings, wear plain clothes, and eat stale food, everyone has to be uniform. This uniformity causes their citizens to act how they are told to which is the reason for their uniqueness and lack of personal identity. All over Oceania are posters reminding their citizens “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING [THEM]” ( ). This is the ‘Party's’ way of telling citizens there is never a time they can be alone or be by themselves. They always have to act in accordance to how the party expects them to. To make sure of this, the government is constantly monitoring their citizen via ‘telescreens’ that are found in every room. Big Brothers obsession of complete control leads to the destruction of individual's
Today, because privacy is a emerging right, a discussion of privacy is usually consists of a list of examples where the right has been recognized. Privacy can be talked about in the nature of the right and the source of the right. There are four rights in the USA, unreasonable intrusion such as physical invasion, appropriation of a persons name or likenesss, publication of private facts such as income tax data or sexual relations, and publication that places a person in a false light, and the only one that is widely accepted in the US is the second one. A person might also recover under intentional infliction of emotional distress, assa...
Solove, Daniel J. “5 Myths about Privacy” Washington Post: B3. Jun 16 2013. SIRS. Web. 10
Just like many college students, Dana and her friends decided to go to a bar one Saturday night. The problem: Not everyone in their group was old enough to enter. The solution: Use fake ID obtained through a friend. So Dana and her friends used fake IDs to enter the bar without a problem, or so they thought. Later that night, police raided the bar. Dana's ID was confiscated and she was later arrested.
LeRoux, Yves. "Privacy concerns in the digital world." 03 Oct 2013. Computer Weekly. 24 April 2014 .
Powell, Robert. "Four Ways Technology Invades Your Privacy." Lovemoney.com. N.p., 5 Oct. 2011. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
Staff, Proquest. At Issue: Technology and Privacy. N.p.: ProQuest LLC, 2013. Web. 5 Dec. 2013. .