FREE

  • Thread starter Thread starter jerome.slinger
  • Start date Start date
(e-mail address removed) spammed:
*WHACK*
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as a free lunch.

Abuse complaint has been and can be sent to:

mailto:[email protected] (network hosting website referenced in spam)

Don't waste your time complaining to Google, the company that just
doesn't care.
 
John Corliss said:
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
Click to expand...

Of course there is; I ate one just th other day.
Abuse complaint has been and can be sent to:

mailto:[email protected] (network hosting website referenced in spam)

Don't waste your time complaining to Google, the company that just
doesn't care.
Click to expand...

What was the BI of the message, about which you complained? You do know
what a BI is, now, don't you?

Much better.
 
Andy Mabbett said:
In message <[email protected]>, John Corliss
<[email protected]> writes
Click to expand...

Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
Click to expand...

WHY??
What have you got to hide??
Everything about you is on record somewhere anyway!
I can't wait for them to be introduced. If I want credit, my card will prove
who I am and I'll get it, no problem.
If I get pulled over by the police, show my card and I'm off, no need for a
producer.
When I renew my passport, my card will verify who I am.
I'm lost as to why any genuine and law abiding citizen would have any
objections, other than to protect their "civil liberties" (I do giggle when
I hear those 2 words). The only reasons I can think of for not wanting one
is either you have something to hide, or you are just plain awkward and
argumentative.
 
Maynard said:
WHY??
What have you got to hide??
Everything about you is on record somewhere anyway!
I can't wait for them to be introduced. If I want credit, my card will prove
who I am and I'll get it, no problem.
If I get pulled over by the police, show my card and I'm off, no need for a
producer.
When I renew my passport, my card will verify who I am.
I'm lost as to why any genuine and law abiding citizen would have any
objections, other than to protect their "civil liberties" (I do giggle when
I hear those 2 words). The only reasons I can think of for not wanting one
is either you have something to hide, or you are just plain awkward and
argumentative.
Click to expand...

I've to giggle when i hear "I don't have anything to hide". Everybody
has something hide. *Everybody*. And very few people are or ever will be
anything close to *law abiding citizens*.
This ID cards schemes can easily be abused. Just wait and see.
 
FirstName LastName said:
I've to giggle when i hear "I don't have anything to hide". Everybody has
something hide. *Everybody*. And very few people are or ever will be
anything close to *law abiding citizens*.
This ID cards schemes can easily be abused. Just wait and see.
Click to expand...

The funny thing is, I don't have anything of any relevance to hide. Ok, so I
did 50 in a 30 limit today, hardly makes me public enemy number one. I have
no debts, pay my mortgage every month, have no convictions (other than the
odd parking ticket) and generally don't have to look over my shoulder. And
thanks to freeware, even my computer software is all legal. If you take
minor technicalities into consideration, then I am nowhere near law abiding,
but in the general scheme of things, I and most people pretty much are. I
read Andy's website before my original post, and all I could see were minor
technicalities and weak arguments rather than any hard proof that anyone
should be able to refuse one. I'm not saying he is wrong to stand up for
what he believes in, but I can't see any strength in his argument.
I agree it will be abused, but it's got to reduce the current level, which
has got to be a step in the right direction. I had £950 stoppages last
month, how much could be saved by rooting out the spongers and spent on more
deserving cases? And I don't mean another Jag for Prescott!

Dave
 
WHY??
What have you got to hide??
Click to expand...

Nothing. Anyone who gives up liberty for security desrves (and ends
up getting) neither.

How many terrorists have the new airport security measures caught - in
over 4 years? (That's millions of people being inconvenienced - for
not one single result.)

What have I got against all this nonsense? All the time and
inconvenience (and many, many billions of dollars every year) it costs
for no more result than it makes the government look as if it's "doing
something" - while all it's "doing" is perpetrating a farce at our
expense.
 
Al Klein said:
Nothing. Anyone who gives up liberty for security desrves (and ends
up getting) neither.

How many terrorists have the new airport security measures caught - in
over 4 years? (That's millions of people being inconvenienced - for
not one single result.)
Click to expand...
So because I've never collected on my home owners insurance policy it's OK
to cancel it?
 
Andy Mabbett said:
....by not wasting money on the false security of an ID card system?
Click to expand...

Sorry Andy, but I have to disagree. I think it will benefit the innocent.
This country does far to much for the guilty and not enough for the victims.
If it is done right it will pay for itself, give it a chance.

Dave
 
Al Klein said:
Nothing. Anyone who gives up liberty for security desrves (and ends
up getting) neither.

How many terrorists have the new airport security measures caught - in
over 4 years? (That's millions of people being inconvenienced - for
not one single result.)

What have I got against all this nonsense? All the time and
inconvenience (and many, many billions of dollars every year) it costs
for no more result than it makes the government look as if it's "doing
something" - while all it's "doing" is perpetrating a farce at our
expense.
Click to expand...

The real criminals with access to the best resources will always have a way
to beat the system. Stop all the minor petty crooks and fraudsters and
millions will be saved over night. Where's the liberty? All the info is
available to the authorities, why not have it all at hand rather a long
drawn out saga of producing and investigating.
I just can't work out where you are coming from. The government will always
spend our money on things we may not agree with, but being picky will not
change them. There are more positives than negatives here, be a half full
man and not a half empty.

Dave
 
Maynard said:
The real criminals with access to the best resources will always have a way
to beat the system.
Click to expand...

Dave;

"What have you got to hide??" and "The real criminals...," it sounds as
though you have a lot of faith in your government's ability to mete out
justice.

Across the puddle, there are a lot of us who mistrust our government's
ability to avoid abuse. One statistical rationale for this mistrust:
Since 1992, 175 citizens of the US /who were awaiting execution/ were
exonerated. (see http://www.innocenceproject.org/). These people were
exonerated in spite of the government.

Add to this mistrust; the fact that an unfetterred and continued
concentration of power by the administrative branch of the federal
government increases the rate and incidence of abuse. For example:

The RICO Act: Allows for the confiscation of real property by
government (law enforcement) agencies *and* the disposal thereof
/unless/ defendants can prove said real property was not acquired with
illegal funds. (Guilty until proven innocent.)

The Real ID Act: Allows for real-time monitoring of movement of
individuals w/o court order. (Contrast w/amendments 2,4 & 9)

The Patriot Act: Allows for suspension of writ of habeus corpus. (see
amendments 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Dave, in your world, the only people who should fear national id cards
are those who have something to hide, "criminals," as it were. In your
world, innocents don't get picked up and aren't denied due process. Or
if they are, maybe they're quickly released and given an apology. Maybe
that's how it works where you're from.

That's not the case here.

A national i.d. in the United States would accelerate the concentration
of power into the administrative branch of the federal government
*without* providing concomitant checks and balances to protect
constitutionally guaranteed rights. That's a problem, even for
law-abiding, tax-paying, convenience-loving citizens.

You assert that criminals and those who have something to hide are the
only ones who should fear a national i.d. On this side of the pond, at
least, it's a facile assertion.

regards,

-Craig
 
Craig said:
Dave;

"What have you got to hide??" and "The real criminals...," it sounds as
though you have a lot of faith in your government's ability to mete out
justice.

Across the puddle, there are a lot of us who mistrust our government's
ability to avoid abuse. One statistical rationale for this mistrust:
Since 1992, 175 citizens of the US /who were awaiting execution/ were
exonerated. (see http://www.innocenceproject.org/). These people were
exonerated in spite of the government.

Add to this mistrust; the fact that an unfetterred and continued
concentration of power by the administrative branch of the federal
government increases the rate and incidence of abuse. For example:

The RICO Act: Allows for the confiscation of real property by government
(law enforcement) agencies *and* the disposal thereof /unless/ defendants
can prove said real property was not acquired with illegal funds. (Guilty
until proven innocent.)

The Real ID Act: Allows for real-time monitoring of movement of
individuals w/o court order. (Contrast w/amendments 2,4 & 9)

The Patriot Act: Allows for suspension of writ of habeus corpus. (see
amendments 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

Dave, in your world, the only people who should fear national id cards are
those who have something to hide, "criminals," as it were. In your world,
innocents don't get picked up and aren't denied due process. Or if they
are, maybe they're quickly released and given an apology. Maybe that's
how it works where you're from.

That's not the case here.

A national i.d. in the United States would accelerate the concentration of
power into the administrative branch of the federal government *without*
providing concomitant checks and balances to protect constitutionally
guaranteed rights. That's a problem, even for law-abiding, tax-paying,
convenience-loving citizens.

You assert that criminals and those who have something to hide are the
only ones who should fear a national i.d. On this side of the pond, at
least, it's a facile assertion.

regards,

-Craig
Click to expand...

From what I've seen and read of the Iraq war, I'd trust my government more
than yours. The Clinton/Lewinsky saga comes to mind. I think the main reason
they are being introduced here is to control imigration and benefit fraud.
I'm not sure it would be used in the same way over here as over there. It
takes quite a few court orders for any property to be confiscated here. If
there is a doubt, then the confiscation cannot go ahead. As you point out,
our countries are quite different, and the use of ID's can't really be
compared.

Dave
 
Maynard said:
From what I've seen and read of the Iraq war, I'd trust my government
more than yours.
Click to expand...

Sure. I would too. As long as I don't appear too mid-Eastern (eg Mr.
Menezes), too black (eg Duwayne Brooks) or too Irish (eg Guildford
Four). But, let's back up a minute: Last I remember, the UK's up to
its knickers in the Iraqi war as well...and only after Blair's
government "sexed up" intelligence reports.
The Clinton/Lewinsky saga comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Although I'm not sure how this relates to the Iraq war, this "saga's"
legacy is quite mild in comparison with the Profumo affair, which
actually brought down the British gummint.
I think the main reason they are being introduced here is to control
imigration and benefit fraud.
Click to expand...

Funny that. The reason(s) for the British ID depend on when the Home
Office is justifying it. In the beginning, it was anti-terrorism. That
was shown to be not workable. Only now has the reason been reduced to
benefit & immigration fraud(1). But then this is the same Home Office
that asserted the ID would be "voluntary," only to be proven a
collective liar by the House of Lords, no less(2).
As you point out, our countries are quite different, and the use of
ID's can't really be compared.
Click to expand...

For clarification: I do not point out "...the use of ID's can't
really be compared." In fact, I assert otherwise. Dave, I'm guessing
we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I'm open to jumping on the
National ID bandwagon but, there's gotta be a better reason than
"because I trust my government."

regards,
-Craig

(1) Blunkett, the original cabinet official responsible for pushing
through the British ID system had to resign, in part, because of
immigration fraud, done for the sake of his lover's nanny. This leads
to probably the best rationale for a British ID: Fraud will decline when
only officials are able to commit it.

(2) Lord Phillips of Sudbury said the description of ID card plans as
voluntary "stretches the English language to breaking point".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4781302.stm
 
The quote is: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." You will note that
there is plenty of room for tradeoffs between safety and liberty (at least
as far as Franklin was concerned.)

Norm Strong
 
The quote is: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." You will note that
there is plenty of room for tradeoffs between safety and liberty (at least
as far as Franklin was concerned.)

Norm Strong
Click to expand...
Duly noted Norm;

Fwiw, you're thread-editing has munged together the posts from a number
of us, none of whom are responsible for the resulting "quote" in its
entirety.

regards,
-Craig
 
Maynard said:
When I renew my passport, my card will verify who I am.
I'm lost as to why any genuine and law abiding citizen would have any
objections, other than to protect their "civil liberties" (I do giggle when
I hear those 2 words).
Click to expand...

You can giggle now, but the UK is sliding towards a police state. And
that's nothing to giggle about.
The only reasons I can think of for not wanting one
is either you have something to hide, or you are just plain awkward and
argumentative.
Click to expand...

It's fairly simple ... people are opposed to ID cards because they fear
it's the thin end of the wedge. The government might use that power
either maliciously or unwisely.

Given the amount of corruption that government official have (Jowell
being the latest latest one, "allegedly"), I think that it is right for
people to be suspicious of those in power.
 
Mark Carter said:
You can giggle now, but the UK is sliding towards a police state. And
that's nothing to giggle about.


It's fairly simple ... people are opposed to ID cards because they fear
it's the thin end of the wedge. The government might use that power either
maliciously or unwisely.

Given the amount of corruption that government official have (Jowell being
the latest latest one, "allegedly"), I think that it is right for people
to be suspicious of those in power.
Click to expand...
Yea Mark, when will the Government start talking about their
Civil Responsibilities.
The way they `lead` by example, it`s little wonder Britain is
falling apart at the seams.
 
Back
Top