Ah, but I don't think they were combat trained Marines. At least in Oregon and California they weren't. Those patrolling troops were relatively green National Guardsmen ordered onto temporary duty by state governors.
They may have used national guardsmen in California and Oregon, but it was mostly Marines in every airport I (unfortunately) had to travel through (in Dallas, Atlanta, and Chicago) - and
all Marines are combat-ready, whether their MOS is tank gunner, cook, paper-pusher, or musician. They all have combat training and rifle range qualification.
You bring up an interesting point, though. The regular forces, the reserves, and the national guard all have VERY different missions; and very different training to accomplish those missions.
Actually when the system began there was considerable opposition to the government collecting the information required to issue the cards. To counter some of the uproar the government agreed that social security numbers (and cards) could only be used for the purpose of the Social Security Administration and for tax purposes and the cards themselves were printed with the statement "For Social Security and Tax Purposes - Not for Identification". The thing that most likely eliminated much of the opposition was the fact that ultimately the individual would be denied retirement benefits if they did not obtain the required number and card - money (or lack thereof) can have a major impact on the opinion of many.
Chris wins the prize. I bet you even actually know the Privacy Act, too, don't you?
The situation became quite unpleasant at Virginia DMV when I pointed out that they were in violation of several parts of the Privacy Act. The agent got overtly hostile with me when I asked them to comply with the Privacy Act. Even though I never raised my voice, I was told I had a choice - leave or deal with the police (who I'm sure would have arrested me on the panacea charge of "disorderly conduct.")
Now, back to the basic topic here. Has anyone paid any attention to Chertoff's take on this? "We can't tell you any of the details of the program, nor how any of that information will be databased and used; that would be a matter of national security. But you must comply." So, I guess we are supposed to trust the federal government when they tell us that every single entry in their national database, every single driver's license issued in this country, is 100% correct. Just like the "no-fly list." If there were an error, you could not question it, you could not correct it. If they used it for purposes besides those that were legal, you would have no way of knowing, and no recourse. Ladies and gents, regardless of how much the government tries to scare you into compliance, you should never allow them to put you in a "no fault, no recourse" sitation.
Every citizen should tell their elected representatives, under no uncertain terms, that the REAL ID program is unacceptable, and anyone who votes for it will not be re-elected. Period.
