Rejoice!

Cressers

..but remain vigilant...

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=15070

sheffsimon

Cressers wrote:

..but remain vigilant...

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=15070

Wouldnt have had a problem with id cards personally, not really sure what benefits they would bring either mind.

Carry plenty of other sh1te around in me wallet, so one more card wouldnt have been life threatening.

In summary, didn't give a f*** one way or the other

spen666

SheffSimon wrote:

Cressers wrote:

..but remain vigilant...

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=15070

Wouldnt have had a problem with id cards personally, not really sure what benefits they would bring either mind.

Carry plenty of other sh1te around in me wallet, so one more card wouldnt have been life threatening.

In summary, didn't give a f*** one way or the other

A very myopic approach to take IMHO

15peter20

Well if the Queen says it's ok to scrap - that's good enough for me.

sheffsimon

spen666 wrote:

SheffSimon wrote:

Cressers wrote:

..but remain vigilant...

http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=15070

Wouldnt have had a problem with id cards personally, not really sure what benefits they would bring either mind.

Carry plenty of other sh1te around in me wallet, so one more card wouldnt have been life threatening.

In summary, didn't give a f*** one way or the other

A very myopic approach to take IMHO

Why, what impact would carrying around a plastic card have on my life.

sturmey

not really sure what benefits they would bring either mind.

Identity fraud is more widespread than ever. This would have made it harder for those people with something to hide to hide behind fake id.
Can't understand why people object to it on civil liberties grounds- you HAVE to have a passport with your photo on to travel, you HAVE to have a driving licence with your photo on to drive- yet no-one seems to object.
People hiding behind fake id are invariably criminals. We should make it harder for them not easier.

sheffsimon

sturmey wrote:

not really sure what benefits they would bring either mind.

Identity fraud is more widespread than ever. This would have made it harder for those people with something to hide to hide behind fake id.
Can't understand why people object to it on civil liberties grounds- you HAVE to have a passport with your photo on to travel, you HAVE to have a driving licence with your photo on to drive- yet no-one seems to object.
People hiding behind fake id are invariably criminals. We should make it harder for them not easier.

I agree with your points mate, and cant see where it would affect my civil liberties one iota (paranoid bullsh1t IMO), but as you say, your criminal types can hide behind a fake identity card. Cant this card be faked as easily as others - driving licence/passport etc?

veronese68

you HAVE to have a driving licence with your photo on to drive

Really? Mine doesn't have a photo.

sturmey

Cant this card be faked as easily as others - driving licence/passport et

In theory,yes,though enhanced security encryption was promised.
The point about the id cards though was that it would have been compulsory to carry them and they would be subject to more frequent inspection if, for example, the holder had an encounter with the police and then subject to closer scrutiny. As it stands anyone can pretend to be anyone and of course criminal types do this all the time and there is little the authorities can do to prevent it.

Yes,there were possibly other motives for wanting to introduce it but It was also another line of defence against threats to this country's security.

daviesee

See.

That was the problem. How were they going to be checked?

There was talk of retina scan etc, etc. Would that mean every police officer carrying retina scan devices to check. Waste of time and shed loads of money.

briantrumpet

sturmey wrote:

Can't understand why people object to it on civil liberties grounds- you HAVE to have a passport with your photo on to travel, you HAVE to have a driving licence with your photo on to drive- yet no-one seems to object.

There is a difference, though: these other forms of identification allow you to do something extra - drive a car, or travel to a foreign country. Once ID cards have to be carried by law, you break the law as soon as you step out of your front door without the card - you are not a 'legal person' in your own country without a piece of plastic. That's not just a difference of degree - the other forms of ID permit us to do something; this would have permitted us just to be.

Smokin Joe

I don't need an identity card because I already know who I am and it is none of anyone else's business unless I choose to tell them or they have lawful authority to ask, in which case the procedures for finding out are all in place.

sturmey

in which case the procedures for finding out are all in place.

Perhaps this should have read:

'...the procedures for finding out are all over the place.'

It is clear to see that 'procedures' are not quite adequate when there is so much identity fraud and fraud generally in this country.

Mettan

I think we need microchips fitted at birth.... ''just in case'' ........








































Anyone thinks of buying the Steps back-catalogue.

Ollieda

sturmey wrote:

Can't understand why people object to it on civil liberties grounds- you HAVE to have a passport with your photo on to travel, you HAVE to have a driving licence with your photo on to drive- yet no-one seems to object.

Yes you need both to do as you say (although not everyone has a photo ID for drivers licence) HOWEVER you do not HAVE to carry these with you all of the time, you don't even HAVE to carry these with you when doing the things they are required for!

I don't disagree with the concept of ID cards but the practicality of giving one to everyone and enforcing that they always keep them on them is silly. Also in regards to obtaining fake ones - if you bring them out the fruadsters will find a way to fake them, simple.