Big Brother Is Watching

[Michael Harris]

To All:

I found this today while I was tryong to get the truth for my daughter. The just-out-of-high-school crowd is notoriously bad in interpreting the news when it affects them. This is about a first step toward a national identity card.

I see at least two ways to read the material:

1 - as a civil libertarian

2 - as an investigator

Try to read the article from both positions and see what it does to your understanding and tolerance of what has just happened.


Shades of Big Brother in license rules
By Sylvia A. Smith – Posted on Sun, Dec. 12, 2004

WASHINGTON – A driver’s license was nearly the undoing of legislation to revamp the nation’s intelligence operations.

This little piece of laminated plastic is an entree to much of American life: writing checks, buying booze, getting past security checkpoints at the airport, voting. Not to mention legally driving a car.

It was also one of two issues that caused members of Congress to butt heads for weeks and that delayed action on the intelligence legislation, forcing the lawmakers to come back to Washington for a lame-duck session.

The compromise that emerged requires the Transportation Department to tell states what information must be on driver’s licenses. No longer will states have the option of including a digital photo or not, a signature or not. Both will be required along with a list of other information, all of which you’d expect and all of which Indiana’s licenses already include: name, address, gender, date of birth, driver’s license number.

In addition, states will have to redesign their driver’s licenses to include machine-readable identity data that includes “defined minimum data elements,” which are not spelled out in the legislation.

Beyond that, the Transportation Department will tell states what kind of documentation they will have to require before a driver’s license can be issued.

What the legislation does not do is forbid states to issue driver’s licenses to undocumented aliens – an aspect that has made some conservative Republicans quite unhappy. They have vowed to introduce legislation next year to do just that.

The only thing that distinguishes the national driver’s license from a national ID card is that not everybody is required to get one. That’s a relevant distinction because if you value your privacy above convenience, you can decline to get a driver’s license. Is that a choice we want people to have to make?

Whether you are alarmed at the prospect of a national ID card is probably dependent on whether you think encroachment on privacy is only a problem if it involves you (not those possible shady characters you saw in the diner).

However, if you see a national driver’s license as a banana peel on the slick slope toward living in a show-me-your-papers country, you will probably be alarmed at nationalizing the cards. If it’s easy to keep digital photos in a database, is it such a big leap to imagine that there will be, sooner rather than later, a national bank of photos of every person with a driver’s license? Is that cause for concern?

Privacy advocates will also be highly distressed by that vague requirement for machine-readable data. This will be something like a bar code or magnetic stripe on your driver’s license that will include the same information that is on the card. But maybe it will include – fingerprints, perhaps. The legislation allows the federal more government to say what that will be.

The more troubling thing about the machine-readable data is that the technology makes it much, much easier to harvest your personal information.

It’s one thing to give your driver’s license to a clerk when you’re writing a check at the grocery so that a few identifiers can be jotted on the check. It’s another thing to have anyone who demands your driver’s license to be able to swipe it through a card reader and capture your information and send it to yet another databank.

Whether you are uneasy about the promised legislation to block states from issuing licenses to undocumented aliens probably gets to your values about immigration rather than anxiety about privacy.

Some among us insist we shouldn’t allow illegal aliens in the country, and we shouldn’t make it easy for them to get U.S. identification (via a driver’s license). The counter argument is that American businesses need the labor that aliens – legal or not – provide. Instead of pretending we can somehow stop foreigners from coming into the country, we should make them legal residents, possibly through the legislation to create guest worker status as President Bush proposed.

That discussion sidesteps the reality that undocumented residents would probably be able to get the new driver’s licenses fraudulently, anyway, and if they couldn’t, they’d probably still drive. Does having unlicensed drivers on the road make anyone safer?

In fact, do any of these changes make us safer from terrorism? It’s debatable.

If you assume that anyone with nefarious intentions would first obtain a driver’s license and would not have the means for getting forged documents (such as a birth certificate), then maybe you’re heaving a sigh of relief. That would be a naïve sigh, however.

A 31-year veteran of The Journal Gazette, Sylvia Smith has covered Washington for 15 years. She is the only Washington-based reporter who exclusively covers northeast Indiana. Her e-mail address is sylviasmith@jg.net, and her phone number is 202-879-6710.

[Thomas W Tanner]

Cynic that I am, it will make no difference if we have a National ID, a National Driver's License or a National bar code tatooed on our arm. The Government will do whatever the Goverment wants to do no matter what the "common" man wants. There's too much money behind the "big wheels" for the "common man" to fight. Since I'm a Vet, the Government already knows more about me than I know about myself (I had a Top Secret Clearance), they have everything from my prints to my blood type & picture. I'm getting off my soap box now, for I could go on about this for hours. "What me worry?"...heck no, I just live day by day & hope for the best.

Tom...

[Melvin Leonard Houck]

These things will continue to happen until the American version of Oliver Cromwell comes along. This, in time will happen.

[Michael Harris]

Thomas,

Interesting comments.

There is a difference between a national standard for DLs and a national DL. I am a states' rights advocate from my very core. I see DLs from all over and some of them are pathetic - hard to read, have no useful information, and are easy to forge. These poor DLs are of little help in fighting identity theft and terrorism. To that end, a natinoal standard would be good.

Now. if the governments (states and feds) share all our information between and among them, we have lost personal liberities. I am against too much information. How much is too much? I will look at that in the near future.

If we go with a national standard DL, we do not have to give Big Brother our information until we are old enough to drive and wish to operate a motor vehicle (legally). We can opt to not get a DL. Not having a DL (or age of majority card) means that we cannot use airplanes, cannot cash checks in stores, and maybe not even get a bank account. Many people will opt for this to stay out of Big Brother's sight.

A national identity card - at birth - is completely different. We would have no way of avoiding it. Now I start to get ill.

I have seen bar-coded SSNs on the back of the neck. I think that would be the place - not the arm. Arms can be lost.

[Michael Harris]

To All:

Start looking at this issue as a civil libertarian and write down your arguments against it.

Now, look at the issue as an investigator. You are trying to fight identiy theft and terrorism; you are looking for deadbeat dads; you are looking for 14-year old runaways; the list goes on. From this perspective, the issues should be different. This is what I am looking for - the balance between civil liberties and the public good.

[Thomas W Tanner]

To All:

Start looking at this issue as a civil libertarian and write down your arguments against it.

Now, look at the issue as an investigator. You are trying to fight identiy theft and terrorism; you are looking for deadbeat dads; you are looking for 14-year old runaways; the list goes on. From this perspective, the issues should be different. This is what I am looking for - the balance between civil liberties and the public good.

Michael, please don't get me wrong; I'm a civil libertarian to my core as well. I'm just cynical enough to know that government can change/approve/rectify anything at any time with the stroke of a pen without referendum. As a CL, I'm against it...as PI, I'm not sure I'm against it. Can there ever be a balance between between civil liberties & the public good? I'm not sure. To do one is to infringe on the other.

[Michael Melanson]

If government asked us one day to give up all our rights then there would be a tremendous uproar, but if you take those rights away slowly little by little, in the name the war on terror usaully to protect our free and beautiful country, from evil and dictator like organizations than one morning we will become the beast from which we once ran from. Try to find both the good and bad that can come from establishing laws such as this

[Michael Harris]

If government asked us one day to give up all our rights then there would be a tremendous uproar, but if you take those rights away slowly little by little, in the name the war on terror usaully to protect our free and beautiful country, from evil and dictator like organizations than one morning we will become the beast from which we once ran from. Try to find both the good and bad that can come from establishing laws such as this
Michael,

You are seeing the problems with this kind of legislation. I doubt that the lawmakers are interested in taking away our Constitutional rights, but the result of this kind of legislation does just that.

We need to look at the potential impact of laws from every possible point of view and see if it really is worth the risks.

My estranged wife had a grandmother who felt that the police should have the right to tap anyone's phone without a warrant. Her reasoning was that if you had nothing to hide, then this was not an intrusion. It certainly intrudes on my right to privacy. If you are a person who does not say anything personal on the phone (is there anyone like that?), then you will not be embarrassed by the publication of your phone calls. This is not the point - we have to have some privacy, even if we do not use it.

Big brother is watching.

[Mark Conte]

If you can't beat them, join them.
I would love to be a part of it, after all thats why they call them BIG BROTHER.
Someone needs to look after the the bad guys as well as the good.

M.A.C.

[Dale Cohen]

I can see the good and bad side of the issue. I am all for privacy. I am just not convinced at this point that It is a good idea. Perhaps with more info and thought I might change, but for now I do not agree with it.

[Mark Conte]

I'm not sure anyone wan'ts to here this.
but I will tell you any way. We have lost our privacy
many years ago we simply where uninformed.
pick up a book called inside the C.I.A. then read inside the F.B.I
I think this will give you a different out look.

[Jan Conklin]

In light of Big Brother's colossal failure to use effectively the huge amounts of information it already has on millions of us, and the gargantuan piles of data it collects around the clock which continue to be either manipulated, misread, misjudged or simply ignored, I do not see where we should give up ANY more of our civil rights. Indeed, we should have those which have been sneaked out from under us in the name of "emergency" restored and the knaves who stole them locked up.

If BB cannot do more than a half-baked job of handling what's already on its plate, how is it going to help to pile more there? The only result must be more abuse and misuse, and the little guy (that's us, remember) always pays.

Something that peels away more layers of our privacy and liberty is not worth the potential ease in tracking down one more deadbeat dad. There are plenty of tools at the disposal of the truly well-intentioned right now; only the lazy, sloppy or sculduggerous need our entire lives served up to them on a silver platter.

I feel so strongly about this! I think I better go take a nap.

/jan

http://www.jcnaturals.com/animations/Lazy_cat.gif

[Mark Conte]

Hello Jan,
Are you up yet? I want you to know that was put togather well.

M.A.C.

[Jan Conklin]

Why, yes I am, you betcha! Any time you want to say nice things I'll be wide awake and paying attention - thanks very much. Feel better after that ver-r-y long nap, too, but I still feel strongly about civil liberties. In my opinion the founding padres would turn curly-queues in their graves if they saw what was going on with the constitution etc. at present.

Thanks again for your kind words. I've gotta work on the olde writing skills so that my investigative reports are clear and succinct. Never a moment's dilly-dallying, ya know? Onward & Upward!

/jan


http://www.jcnaturals.com/animations/Martian_flys_by.gif

[Chad Haltom]

Everyone,

If giving alittle to get a little is a tradition than I think that we all knew this was coming. As soon as the Freedom of information act was granted the handcuffs we call central goverment got alittle tighter. We give up one privacy issue to reveal another. "National Do Not Call Registry". As long as there are citizens to protect and barriers to watch, as citizens we will be the one "UNDER THE MICROSCOPE." And probably in every aspect of our lives from work to play.

The states in which I performe private investigation still have blue walls. Blue walls are the political and law enforcement barriers that say we as investigators are violators of civil liberties. But when they get there homeowners insurance bill and wounder why the hike, we are now necessary. I feel that I jump through enough hoops to get to were I am. And I have the freedom to know whats on my F.B.I. file and were I stand out is attitude. The only freedom I have left to give is my life. And only I can give that away..

[Michael Harris]

Chad,

What are your views on the Patriot Act?

Does it help or hurt the PI?

What freedoms do you think we lose under the Patriot Act?

These are just food for thought. We need people who think about the give and take.

[Chad Haltom]

Michael,


My point exactly. We do need to think about the give and the take. To many people think that you cant have one with out the other. To put it simply thats crazy. Although you may gain alittle from one or the other you will lose as much if not more in the overall view. The Patriot act keeps people from hiding when they commit an offense or take advantage of the system. This is good and bad. Good because it makes us accountable for our actions but bad because we have no way of sheltering ourselves from those trying to use the information in the wrong way. But hey there is a brighter side to the story. We as american citizens take our civil liberties to the border. Even though the line to cross is in some cases are not straight, this doesnt give us the right only the ability to bend that line more or less to suite needs. I feel that our government doesnt always do whats in the best interest for us as a country but only for what adjenda they have to meet. Our founding government ment for us to have a voice. But what is a voice worth if no one is willing to hear.

In finishing, I would say that we need to see the take when we are looking at the given and decide if the worth is less or more.

[Michael Harris]

Chad,

Thanks! This is the kind of thinking that all of us in the IPIU need to do. Be critical in your thinking. Look at the issues from multiple points of view. Think through to the end.

My (long form) resume tells potential employers or clients that I think like a logistician (cradle-to-grave) and like a systems engineer (everything-is-connected-to-everything-else). This is what will keep us free.

[Sarah Williams]

If government asked us one day to give up all our rights then there would be a tremendous uproar, but if you take those rights away slowly little by little, in the name the war on terror usaully to protect our free and beautiful country, from evil and dictator like organizations than one morning we will become the beast from which we once ran from. Try to find both the good and bad that can come from establishing laws such as this

This is a huge concern of mine at the moment. I see different things being slowly taken away from me. Our current president is responsible for the outsourcing of my last job to India. Now he wants to let people from other countries stay in our country and take our jobs. If they aren't taking our jobs, they are driving down the wages because they will work for less. Bush once said, "Dictatorship is fine, as long as I am the dictator," not a verbatim quote but the gist is correct. And then there are things like the Patriot Act, which under the guise or even the intention of protecting us, makes citizens easier to manipulate, harrass, or mistakenly cause much grief. I see more and more of my freedoms slipping away.

Everyone who has not read "1984" by George Orwell needs to run out and read it so they can know exactly what Big Brother is.

[Kenneth Owens -]

I'm against anything that has to be put under my skin. It's not going to happen. I believe in God and I read the bible. If you want to stop terrorism than it's simple. Before anyone can come into the United States make them file for visitations months ahead of time. Then do a very deep background check on them in their country. See what type of person they are there before letting them cross our borders. Yes I know this is the land of the free, but now we have to be strict.

[Virgilio Williams 1]

This is a huge concern of mine at the moment. I see different things being slowly taken away from me. Our current president is responsible for the outsourcing of my last job to India. Now he wants to let people from other countries stay in our country and take our jobs. If they aren't taking our jobs, they are driving down the wages because they will work for less. Bush once said, "Dictatorship is fine, as long as I am the dictator," not a verbatim quote but the gist is correct. And then there are things like the Patriot Act, which under the guise or even the intention of protecting us, makes citizens easier to manipulate, harrass, or mistakenly cause much grief. I see more and more of my freedoms slipping away.

Everyone who has not read "1984" by George Orwell needs to run out and read it so they can know exactly what Big Brother is.
I would like to think that our government is sincerely considering our safety and well-being in drafting and passing the laws that infringe on our civil liberties. I don't believe they find joy in subjecting themselves (government,congress,etc...) as well as the people (ourselves) to all the scrutinies that these acts permit. Maybe there are bigger fish out there than al-qaida that drives this legislative engine. But by no means does it stop there, that is just the beginning. I see some sort of national identification sytem (maybe some biometric type device/system)as well as other social controls in our future. Should we welcome this as private investigators/trainees as a means to make our jobs easier thus making our wallets/purses fatter? Or should the civil liberterians in our midst be very concerned?

[Nasser Khan -]

Excellent posting. I have been approved for membership months back yet this is the first time I've been able to log onto the site as a member because of complications with my code. Anyway, the issue you present is one of great importance. Civil liberties are being publically slashed left and right in the name of fighting terror or whatever else. Yet, those with 'nefarious intentions' will always continue to operate because basically they are decided and where there is a will, there is a way. I personally feel that the most powerful counter- terrorism campaign would be aimed at undermining a potential terrorist decision's to act through education, as opposed to the current campaign which focuses on terrorists' methods which will always change.

[Chad Haltom]

I would like to think that our government is sincerely considering our safety and well-being in drafting and passing the laws that infringe on our civil liberties. I don't believe they find joy in subjecting themselves (government,congress,etc...) as well as the people (ourselves) to all the scrutinies that these acts permit. Maybe there are bigger fish out there than al-qaida that drives this legislative engine. But by no means does it stop there, that is just the beginning. I see some sort of national identification sytem (maybe some biometric type device/system)as well as other social controls in our future. Should we welcome this as private investigators/trainees as a means to make our jobs easier thus making our wallets/purses fatter? Or should the civil liberterians in our midst be very concerned?
Be very careful of what you expect from any member of the political party in handling civil liberty for the people. What you have to understand is that even those that make the laws are affected by that law in some way. We should I feel be more worried about terrorist living umong citizens as "Normal People" The ability of those who commit acts of terrorism to blend in leaving little traces of their past to link them to the future. Freedom has its cost and reward. What we feel so strongly to protect may help those who are trying to hurt Western Cultured Civilization. Based on beliefs. Or misunderstanding of those beliefs. This is evident in our beliefs. One in particular Seperation of Church and State. Its the way you take action that makes puts you in a catogory. Money >Power

[Deverne Girdler]

did you see the one on freedom of info there should be the balance for th goverment
and the peoples right to know. if we lose the right to the the info then we lose.
iam far from a civil lib. our rights not for sale or trade to anyone or any nation.
our founding fathers set our nation of goverment of the people . be speech, guns,
chruch. the peoples right to know we donot need total disturst of the people. and
also on creidt headers. check out black book for pi's at yahoo groups
deverne girdler
5593

[Tiffany Eichor]

I would like to agree and disagree with various opinions in this thread. I agree that DLs exhibiting national conformity with digital pictures and easily readable print on them are a good idea. However, a personal barcode with all of my private information on it gives me the horrors. How many people lose their DL every year? With the technology available today it would be very easy for someone to steal/find DLs and scan them into a computer. From there, they could create all kinds of chaos. Before long, someone will think it's a good idea to put one of those computer chips in every DL so it can be found easily when you lose it. It is a short trip to the government using that to track people. I don't want to live like the people in some foreign countries (e.g. South Africa) who have restrictions on where and when they do things. If I want to go to the store at 1:00 am to buy ice cream, I don't want the government stopping me. This may sound ludicrous to some of you, but there is a fine line between protection and oppression.

[Michael Harris]

To All:

This is a bit extreme, but it serves to illustrate what could happen if we let things get out of control. We actually have too many laws in place right now to let this happen.

http://www.adcritic.com/interactive/view.php?id=5927

[Michael Harris]

... but there is a fine line between protection and oppression.
To All:

Tiffany has a good point here. I only quoted the small peice that I want to bring to your attention.

[Jan Conklin]

Tiffany's point is absolutely spot on; and who among us right now is willing to trust a heavy handed government to respect a fine line? It is more than apparent that ours doesn't "do nuance" (I'm sure we all heard that statement early on.)

I repeat my constant objection to further intrusion into our lives: the government and its various law enforcement branches have more information being fed to them by the minute than they can ever attend to - in fact that's their most commonly used excuse, it appears. "Well yes, we had the info, but it was on a desk with a ton of other info. And nobody was reading it."

Add to that the protectionism at high gov't levels for certain nations we KNOW aid and abet our sworn enemies, because of big money, friendship, big business, etc., and it's a wonder we're still here in one piece at all.

Thus warnings are ignored or buried; known terrorists enter the country, even board planes tho their names have been flagged for years; etc. etc. All the so-called authorities need to do is pay attention to what they've already got. There are far-reaching measures in place that keep getting mucked up. Less privacy and fewer rights for law abiding citizens will never be the answer.

/jan

[Steven D Mahan]

Michael, So True I Had Made A Visit To The Hospital To Visit A Friend. At The Sign -in Desk They Swipped My Drivers Licence And It Gave Them My 411

[Cheryl Bliton]

I thought this was the land of the free. Did our ancestors not come over here from another country to have some freedom and some say in their lives. What have we become? We really need people voted in the congress who have better insite as to what the american people want. It almost feels like the big brother neeeds to know to much.
Or am I off track? :confused:

Cheryl Bliton

[Stacey Williams]

I think we need to clear the house and the senate. We need to get rid of the fat cats. We need to look out side the box, I think that terror needs to be addressed, out side the country. Dont wait till it hits home (9/11) concentrate on that, not the people inside the U.S., the government knows about the people in this country.
Make the people that want access thru our boarders give the right info, before they enter. To bad if it takes them a while and is a hassle. Yeah give us your poor and your hungry... but first! prove you are not a terrorist! How about a world I.D. card? dont have one? ACCESS DENIED ! A national I.D. will not stop the terror. How about the government hiring more boarder agents, Im not talking one here, one there. I live on a boarder and it has approximatly one agent for every 2 to 3 hundred miles, hello ! whats wrong with this picture? I can get a scanner for 50 dollers
and read your info from a distance, and im a nobody. My 2 cents worth.

______________
Stacey Williams
Badge#10508

[Steven D Mahan]

Stacey, That Was Pretty Much To The Point,i Hear That The South Border Has Paid Attention To Your Idea. I Was Watching The News And The Citizens Patrol Has Stepped In And Formed Thier Own Border Patrol.
They Are Armed And Seem Organized.now For The Rest Of Our Borders.

[James Kazmirski]

Having these citizen patrols definitely aids border patrol in their jobs, but not for nothing...I'd be quite frightened to see these people, especially them being armed. Rogue militias usually only lead to more problems than what they're worth. They're called vigilanties, and in many places, if not all, is illegal.

[Daniel Mayer -]

I feel the same way Thomas Tanner does--I was also in the service for four years with a Top Secret clearance and I agree there is nothing the Government doesn't know about me. Our Government has always done what they want, when they want and their intrusions in our life will continue as long as we live. With everything that has gone on in this country for the past 4-5 years its amazing that the Government has time to think about things like this.

Dan Mayer :eek:

[John Corry--]

Having these citizen patrols definitely aids border patrol in their jobs, but not for nothing...I'd be quite frightened to see these people, especially them being armed. Rogue militias usually only lead to more problems than what they're worth. They're called vigilanties, and in many places, if not all, is illegal.

James,
The people responsible for securing the borders are not doing their job. Civilians are now so fed up with this failure that they are:
1) observing illegal border crossing activity
2) documenting that activity and reporting it to border patrol
3) drawing media attention to the problem of insecure borders

That they are armed is simply common sense. Would you rather go camp in the desert, border regions where illegal immigrants, gang members, criminals, smugglers and generally nasty folks are hanging out a) able to defend yourself or b) unable to defend yourself?

Maybe what you're overlooking is that the kind of men who have the guts and fortitude to bear arms in defense of themselves and others are also the kind of men who show up for volunteer border patrol duty.

[James Kazmirski]

James,
The people responsible for securing the borders are not doing their job. Civilians are now so fed up with this failure that they are:
1) observing illegal border crossing activity
2) documenting that activity and reporting it to border patrol
3) drawing media attention to the problem of insecure borders

That they are armed is simply common sense. Would you rather go camp in the desert, border regions where illegal immigrants, gang members, criminals, smugglers and generally nasty folks are hanging out a) able to defend yourself or b) unable to defend yourself?

Maybe what you're overlooking is that the kind of men who have the guts and fortitude to bear arms in defense of themselves and others are also the kind of men who show up for volunteer border patrol duty.

Are those responsible for securing the borders not doing their job, or is it the simple fact that a) There's not enough of them, and b) the government is not giving them the tools they need? Never will this country be able to secure the borders 100%. I have been to Texas and Arizona, along with Mexico, and have seen certain parts of the border secured by a very large wall. Is it 100% effective in those areas? Of course not. I have worked alongside border patrol agents, US Customs, and Immigration on the border on many occasions. Customs/Immigration is meant to work the ports. Border Patrol's job is in between the ports. It's quite obvious, that there are not nearly enough agents to patrol the amount of space required. It does not mean they are not doing their jobs.

I am not overlooking the fact that they are brave to stand up to those types of people either. What may seem to be the right thing to do doesn't make it right; Although, I can't say that I wouldn't do the same if I were in their shoes.