Yikes...

[Pecker]

Virginia DMV has not required a SSN for an operator's license for several years.

The number on my license was changed to a DMV # at my request a long time ago. It's the I.D. number I put on my bank checks now and any other document that asks for my SSN for identification. I get some flack every once in a while but it's worth the extra time spent educating officious clerks and managers when they insist on my SSN.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Originally posted by Pecker@May 19 2005, 08:50 PM
Virginia DMV has not required a SSN for an operator's license for several years.

The number on my license was changed to a DMV # at my request a long time ago. It's the I.D. number I put on my bank checks now and any other document that asks for my SSN for identification. I get some flack every once in a while but it's worth the extra time spent educating officious clerks and managers when they insist on my SSN.

[post=312914]Quoted post[/post]​

Sorry, Pecker, but VA DMV DOES require SSN for operator's license. They give you the option to display an alternate number on the face of the license, but before issuing, the DO require that you give them your full SSN with documentation. Check the VA DMV website... A state ID does not require the SSN. The proposed "REAL ID" national ID database legislation, if passed, will require states that do not now require the SSN to begin collecting that. Various types of federal funding to the state will be withheld if the state does not comply. I don't have the reference handy, but I believe so far the only state flatly refusing to participate is Montana. I'm sure this will eventually lead to "smart" license cards, with readable chips - like the SmartCard I use to ride the bus or subway here. I chose not to register my card. It was just on the news yesterday that the Transit Authority here is building databases. When you use your SmartCard (a proximity-read card) it records where and when you go. If you add money to the card using a credit card, they do collect your CC info, and keep it on file. I only add to mine with cash. Funny thing is, Transit Authority is only just now having meetings to develop a Privacy and Security Policy to dictate how they deal with the information they are collecting.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Originally posted by Hockeytiger+May 19 2005, 08:41 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hockeytiger &#064; May 19 2005, 08:41 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-DC_DEEP@May 19 2005, 05:57 PM

[post=312894]Quoted post[/post]​

I&#39;m glad you did that. IMO people people shouldn&#39;t just take their word for it. If you find a certain requirement objectionable, make them prove it&#33;

[post=312912]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]

This silly woman could not understand my concerns, nor why I would not just take her word for it. The analogy I tried to use for her was "If I tell you I am authorized by law to search your house, will you ask me for proof, or will you just step aside and let me search your house? If you can&#39;t show me the law, it does not exist." She just kept saying, "but we are REQUIRED by law, everything changed with the Patriot Act." But could not show me any bank policy, nor any law. I would think that any laws by which a financial institution is bound would be 1) used in employee training, and 2) readily available.

 

[13788]

carolinacurious: Sorry if everyones already read this one, I thought it would go along with this discussion. It appears that SC may already have a "smart liscense"; it&#39;s definitely scannable. The link at the end goes to an editorial where the guy talks about how the upshot of a lot of this mess is that we&#39;re just making things harder on Mexicans but easier on the Saudi&#39;s. I know that makes me feel safer.

Originally posted by carolinacurious@May 11 2005, 05:27 AM
I agree that what private companies can already do is fairly similar and frightening. That doesn&#39;t mean that I have to like it or that I need to go out of my way to make it easier for anyone else.

Look at the whole Social Security Number business/fiasco; the goverment says seven ways to Sunday that your Social Security Number is not to be used for ANY other purpose than for things that directly deal with the Social Security Administration, but just try to get virtually anything important done in this country without it&#33;

It&#39;s becoming commonplace now for people to scan the magnetic strip on my driver&#39;s liscense when I have to present it for ID to get into a club or to buy beer, I have definitely caused a scene or two over it but what are you going to do after they&#39;ve already swiped it?

I almost got arrested when I refused to give a thumbprint when trying to cash a check, that was a "fun" one; I was being perfectly polite but I kept explaining that I had complied with all the rules on the check AND all the rules posted on the walls of the bank and that if they didn&#39;t have the money to cash my check they should just say so.(Oh yeah, attempting to cause a "run" on a bank, you probably don&#39;t want to follow in my footsteps on this one either&#33 I demanded to see where I was legally required to submit to be fingerprinted and the bank manager could only come up with internal bank documents (that disgreed with their posted regulations). At one point I was as cool as a cucumber with the bank manager SCREAMING at me in the middle of his bank. I&#39;m ashamed to admit that I did cave when the police pulled into the lot.

(I don&#39;t reccommend trying this one yourself, the bank WAS in the wrong in that they did not have their regulations clearly posted and that they were not able to provide paperwork proving the regulations; however, I looked it up when I got home and they&#39;re actually using archiac laws from back before most people were literate to slide this one through, and getting away with it.

It was also VERY clear just whose side the police were on when they showed up, there would have been no reasoning with them.)

ANYWAY, it&#39;s clear to me that whatever info is required on this new card will be immediately required and utilized by business, regardless of what the government says and then of course the government will be privy to the new data generated by Megacorp USA because they were more able to track our buying habits/medical needs/travel with our new card.

***

Another take on what this is REALLY all about:

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/gallagher213.html

When the FUCK are people going to get upset about the Saudi&#39;s and our President&#39;s chummy relationship with them?

[post=310020]Quoted post[/post]​

 

[MattBoyMA]

Originally posted by DC_DEEP+May 19 2005, 09:37 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DC_DEEP &#064; May 19 2005, 09:37 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by Hockeytiger@May 19 2005, 08:41 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-DC_DEEP

@May 19 2005, 05:57 PM

[post=312894]Quoted post[/post]​

I&#39;m glad you did that. IMO people people shouldn&#39;t just take their word for it. If you find a certain requirement objectionable, make them prove it&#33;

[post=312912]Quoted post[/post]​

This silly woman could not understand my concerns, nor why I would not just take her word for it. The analogy I tried to use for her was "If I tell you I am authorized by law to search your house, will you ask me for proof, or will you just step aside and let me search your house? If you can&#39;t show me the law, it does not exist." She just kept saying, "but we are REQUIRED by law, everything changed with the Patriot Act." But could not show me any bank policy, nor any law. I would think that any laws by which a financial institution is bound would be 1) used in employee training, and 2) readily available.

[post=312927]Quoted post[/post]​

[/b][/quote]



Keep on singin&#39; it, my friend.... Your posts are so educated and thoughtful and well-written. And sure, to an extent, they&#39;re your opinions, and other people have different opinions. But the fact of the matter is, the Constitution and what it stands for is more and more being put somewhat aside in the name of "national protection." And - I&#39;m just not sure that the constructors of the document would ever accept that. Sigh.

 

[DC_DEEP]

Mattboy and carolinacurious, thank you so much. Carolina, I think most states have, for some time, used the magnetic strips of which you speak. But please don&#39;t confuse this with the smartcard, which uses an embedded chip. The magnetic strips, as I understand it, do contain some information, but must be pulled through a reader, and generally are used "read-only." The chips, on the other hand, can store and receive and transmit amazing amounts of information, and are "proximity" cards - simply passing within an inch or two of the receiver to make transactions. The implications are staggering. Parking ticket in NYC? Denied boarding in Dallas. Recent shotgun purchase at Wal-Mart? Real problems if you get pulled over for speeding. This is not just wild paranoia, all these agencies want a server-client relationship to these various databases.

Mattboy, don&#39;t just sit back and enjoy the singin... please put up at least a little resistance... when your rights are being minimalized.

And don&#39;t get me wrong, I don&#39;t support his views... but Jose Padilla IS a US citizen. Terrorist or not, regardless of any executive order or the patriot act - he is a citizen, and it is illegal to incarcerate him without charges, it is illegal to hold him without counsel, it is illegal to decide his fate in secret meetings and seal the results. I just happen to think the constitution trumps executive order, not the other way around.

 

[jonb]

If Jose Padilla were guilty of a crime, they&#39;d charge him with one. *snicker*

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Originally posted by Pecker@May 19 2005, 03:31 AM
... and who&#39;ll be among the first to complain that not enough was done to prevent the disaster the next time several thousand innocent Americans on our shores lose their lives to these fanatics?

Whoever is not in power when the next attack happens.

SG

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Originally posted by DC_DEEP@May 20 2005, 12:22 PM
And don&#39;t get me wrong, I don&#39;t support his views... but Jose Padilla IS a US citizen. Terrorist or not, regardless of any executive order or the patriot act - he is a citizen, and it is illegal to incarcerate him without charges, it is illegal to hold him without counsel, it is illegal to decide his fate in secret meetings and seal the results. I just happen to think the constitution trumps executive order, not the other way around.

[post=313048]Quoted post[/post]​

Agreed absolutely. Padilla may well be guilty of plotting violent crimes but the Bush administration needs to shit or get off the pot with this guy. He&#39;s a US citizen and is entitled to at least a speedy trial. Bring charges against him and try him or or let him go. I&#39;d like to know why his incarceration hasn&#39;t been challenged in court.

You can bet that if Padilla was some anti-tax, anti-government, UN hating, aryan gun nut being held incommunicado for suspected terrorism by Janet Reno the right would be going apeshit over it.

 

[MattBoyMA]

Originally posted by DC_DEEP@May 20 2005, 08:22 AM
Mattboy and carolinacurious, thank you so much. Carolina, I think most states have, for some time, used the magnetic strips of which you speak. But please don&#39;t confuse this with the smartcard, which uses an embedded chip. The magnetic strips, as I understand it, do contain some information, but must be pulled through a reader, and generally are used "read-only." The chips, on the other hand, can store and receive and transmit amazing amounts of information, and are "proximity" cards - simply passing within an inch or two of the receiver to make transactions. The implications are staggering. Parking ticket in NYC? Denied boarding in Dallas. Recent shotgun purchase at Wal-Mart? Real problems if you get pulled over for speeding. This is not just wild paranoia, all these agencies want a server-client relationship to these various databases.

Mattboy, don&#39;t just sit back and enjoy the singin... please put up at least a little resistance... when your rights are being minimalized.

And don&#39;t get me wrong, I don&#39;t support his views... but Jose Padilla IS a US citizen. Terrorist or not, regardless of any executive order or the patriot act - he is a citizen, and it is illegal to incarcerate him without charges, it is illegal to hold him without counsel, it is illegal to decide his fate in secret meetings and seal the results. I just happen to think the constitution trumps executive order, not the other way around.

[post=313048]Quoted post[/post]​

Oh my gosh... don&#39;t worry - I&#39;m very LOUD about my disgust with the direction in which the United States is going... to anyone who&#39;ll listen - and those who won&#39;t.