Required Id

[Jigs]

[Gilly bean QUOTE]I know in the state of Michigan you ARE required to carry either a state driver's liscence, or a state issued id card. [/QUOTE]

I am not admitted to the bar in Michigan (altho I have been in Fla for 42 years), but such is NOT the law in most other states. (Even where such statutes have been enacted, they have been held unconstitutional except for very limited circumstances). In many states there is not even a required "legal" name. In Florida for example, no statute deals with "legal' names. In Fla., as at the common law, a person may take any name he/she likes as long as it is not in the in pursuit of a fraudulent or criminal purpose. Neither do most states require a married woman to take her husbands last name--or prohibit the practice. A married woman's name in most places is a matter of custom, not law.

True in the real world, I will suffer great harassment and incovience from officious officials, both public and private if I refuse to recognize the name that is on my "documents", but that is a practical side of life, not what the law mandates. I am struck, even terrified, by how little the average citizen understands obout what we generally call our "civil rights", and how willing most people are to give them up to some ignorant policeman or official who shows a badge and makes some outragous demand.

For your information Gilly the government (even the state of Mich.) can constitutionally require registration and idenification of any kind only for a specific purpose where there is a clear government interest involved. That does not include among other things work history, financial information, medical hisory (other than inoculation records in certain limited circumstances) or most of the other things suggested in this absurd thread. That specificly includes by the way your SS#. The federal statute creating SS expressly PROHIBITs requiring that for ANYTHING other than matters relating directly to a SS purpose. Even the IRS has been able to piggyback on that # only because it is the SS collection agency.

Finally you have no obligation to even talk to a policeman unless you are a suspect in the commission of a crime. If you are a suspect, you are not under any obligation to tell him ANYTHING, not even your name pursuant to the 5th and 14th amendments to the U.S. constitution---the state of Michigan not withstanding.

 

[Mellon Collie]

Ummm, I think you missed post reply and hit new thread by accident.

 

[modest mouse]

I am struck, even terrified, by how little the average citizen understands obout what we generally call our "civil rights", and how willing most people are to give them up to some ignorant policeman or official who shows a badge and makes some outragous demand.

Well said Jigs. Many people have lost sight of what healthy skepticism is, which is unfortunate. A strong and effective government is one that is under question by its populace.

People often forget that the ultimate responsibility for what our government does is with us, the voters. (For those that dont vote, dont complain.)

It has nearlt always proven true that if you lay down, you will be walked on.

 

[Gilly Bean]

For your information Gilly the government (even the state of Mich.) can constitutionally require registration and idenification of any kind only for a specific purpose where there is a clear government interest involved. That does not include among other things work history, financial information, medical hisory (other than inoculation records in certain limited circumstances) or most of the other things suggested in this absurd thread. That specificly includes by the way your SS#. The federal statute creating SS expressly PROHIBITs requiring that for ANYTHING other than matters relating directly to a SS purpose. Even the IRS has been able to piggyback on that # only because it is the SS collection agency.
[/B]

I don't recall ever saying it wasn't thier right. In fact, I believe i said they already excersize that right.

I also said that I SUPPORT the right for certain things on the card, not saying that they already HAD that right.


If you are going to quote someone, please take the time to actually read what is said.

I have no problem with some things on the card. I have no problem WITH a national card. I have no reason TO have a problem with it.

It's only going to be a problem if paranoid people keeping making more out of it then is there.

In my opinion, they can already check my medical information. They can already find out my finachial history. They can get my SS number. They can do all that will little or no trouble.

Why all the bother over putting it all on one card?

I don't see a reason for work history, but hell, it's not like I sell drugs to kids, or anything that I would be ashamed of, or wish to hide, so I guess if they want that, than why the hell not?

And this 'absurd' thread isn't about what they currently do, it's about what they are proposing to do. That, and the paranoia of the people who also claim that the government is 'out to get us'.

You know what, people? If they havn't done a damn thing to you, then you can settle down. It's not left or right wing propeganda. It's not a breach of having us be illegally searched. Hell, most people would likely only have the information accessed a hand ful of times in thier lives.

If you have it done more then that, then it makes me wonder why.

 

[Jigs]

Dear Gilly. My computor must have made a mistake. I thought it copied your quote exactly.

I do agreee you and I are making different points. You are saying that it makes no difference, that the government already knows all about you (which may or may not be true but knowing how my government works, I doubt it), and that you don't care.

I am saying that this whole discussion is meaningless because no such card can be lawfully required pursuant to our exsisting constitutional law. Such a card as you 'support' is available to you at any print shop at your choice and if you wish to carry it you have every right to do so. (In fact most states, including Fla. do provide for VOLUNTARY ID cards containing information that varies from state to state).

You were under the impression, however, that a state legislature or Congress can constitutionally REQUIRE its citizens to register for, or carry a paper "ID" even in the absense of participation in some lawfully regulated activity. They can not, whether you 'support' such a thing or not. Even farther afield from 'identification' are such matters as an individual's medical and financial history, his doner status, blood type, etc. all of which are clearly outside of government regulation and protected from government intrusion by a now recognized constitutional right of privacy. Bless our constitution, and its protection of the rest of us from public 'support'.

You might be surprized how little information the government does have about you (or at least how little it can find). Witness what we have recently learned about the way the INS tracks aliens who are required have INS issued "ID cards" (visas). In another area of information discovery, I can personally testitify how difficult it is in many states now to obtain medical records even with a supeana.

Much of the information about you out there is not collected or maintained by the government but by private companies (ins., credit.,etc). They are of course not restricted by the US constitution and the information have in their data base is there only BECAUSE YOU GAVE IT TO THEM OR SAID THEY COULD HAVE IT when you applied fror a loan or an insurance policy. Many of those demands are unlawful, the leading such being that you do not have to give your SS # to anyone but the SS system and the IRS. I always refuse to do as a matter of principle and the people you think are so omnipitent always back down.

I am old enough to remember that the first thing Hitler and Lenin did on assuming power was to register their citizens and give them mandatory "ID papers."