h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Because its less of a bother to lose than your passport, and because people like you keep obstructing the government from producing some sort of universal ID we can all use to prove our age.

I don't have a car, I have a driving licence.

I don't have a car, I don't want to learn to drive as public transport's always been good enough for me, so I don't really see the point in getting a driver's license. I think most people in my situation tend to think that way.

Are you aware that your little plastic driving license isn't actually good enough to drive on ? You still need the old paper license because otherwise you could have been banned, and unless the person asking to see your license has a mobile reader and access to the online database they won't know.

In other words its not fit for purpose which is pretty typical of government IT.

I would love to discuss why I'm against ID cards in detail, but I am constrained from doing so.

Instead I'm offering social arguments and asking questions. The only advantage I can see in an ID card system would be in control of employment. This is what you NI insurance card SHOULD be, but currently all you have to do is ask for an NI and they give you one.

Good morning McKay

<< I would love to discuss why I'm against ID cards in detail, but I am constrained from doing so >>

Why, and how ?

Novo

>>>Are you aware that your little plastic driving license isn't actually good enough to drive on ? You still need the old paper license because otherwise you could have been banned, and unless the person asking to see your license has a mobile reader and access to the online database they won't know.

Yup, but someone should tell the car rental agencies that - I rent cars fairly frequently (in both the UK and France) and they've never bothered asking for the second half of the licence - so for all they know I might have already been banned.

"these people don't have cars - why should they get a driving license"

Um... because they want to go into places that require them to have one? Seems obvious to me. It's not as if getting one is hard or particularly expensive. Simple choice - get a license and gain admission, or don't get one and drink somewhere else. Either way, don't whine about it.

Personally what has worried me more just recently isn't the possibility of being forced to have an ID card, or even the possiblity of being forced to carry it on pain of punishment. It's the possibility that soon it may become an offence punishable by a £5,000 fine to not answer questions when stopped in the street by a policeman.

SoRB

>>>"It's the possibility that soon it may become an offence punishable by a £5,000 fine to not answer questions when stopped in the street by a policeman"

Yikes! What happened to 'you have the right to remain silent' then?

A point of pedantry maybe, but it's not always easy to get a provisional license. I had one refused me in 2001, a clear two years after my last brush with epilepsy, once the DVLA had written to my doctor. I dread to think what they found out. I've pretty much given up the prospect of learning to drive, though I've not had a seizure since 1999. Maybe it's for the best.

But if ID cards carry a greater level of data than the basics it could open up a hornets' nest of potential for ersatz sus laws. The government are still trying to legislate for detention and forced treatment of people suspected of having personality disorders, before they put a foot wrong - detain terror suspects for even longer than 4 weeks without charge; there's an increasing mistrust of people seen in public with a *camera*.

I don't want to carry something around if it's going to bring my history of depression and substance misuse up for every copper with a scanner. It's taken me to my 30s just to hold down a job.

"What happened to 'you have the right to remain silent' then?"

Two answers to that.

First, you only get told "you have the right to remain silent" when you're ARRESTED. That's not what they're talking about. They're talking about making it an offence to not answer questions if a policeman simply stops you in the street. No arrest, no reading of rights, you will HAVE to tell him who you are, where you've been, where you're going and anything else it occurs to him to ask, or face a BIG penalty, even if you're not arrested.

Second, it's been at least ten years since people in the UK had an uncomplicated right to remain silent on arrest. The current wording is "You have the right to remain silent, BUT it may harm your defence if you fail to mention something you later rely on in court."

Civil liberties erosion is already well advanced. This is just the latest thing.

SoRB

Novo - certain aspects of my work inhibit my ability to discuss some subjects.

Amongst other things I have to filter what I say to ensure that what I'm talking about is 'in the public domain.'

I previously said something in a h2g2 conversation that was repeated on another website - which led to an e-mail being sent stressing the need to careful. Fortunately the person didn't quote his source.

Thanks McKay,

Understood

Novo

The news that 'allegedly' up to 10000 driving tests have been taken by someone on behalf of another gives an excellent reason for at least photographic ID Cards.

Not too surprising that in the list of name involved in this practice there aren't many Smiths or Browns, but a lot with names ending on O or A. Presumably the same group who bring" enormous gains to our economy", except insurance

Novo

They've got to show photographic provisional licences at the moment so how would showing photographic ID cards make any difference?

But that is EXACTLY what a photo ID driving licence is.

They were actually able to impersonate others even with a photo of the other eprson on the licence.

It is more power to the people who want biometric ID cards as 'obviously, now simple photo iD cards are not good enough.'

Both biometric, and more simplier photo ID cards will be hugely benifical. Once they are introduced, they will provide absolute, unequivical unquestionable and uncounterfaintable evidence that the person holding their ID card is who they say they are. Because so much belief and reliance will be put on to the cards, this will make organised crime so much easier. Non of the hastle of having to forge coutnless documents in order to create a faulse ID, just one simple card. The notion of identity theft will be better too, as once biometric/id cards are introduced, it will be possible to more fully steal someones ID and easily frame them up for the chrime/chrimes taht the individual wants to comitt. Just the very notion that the 'new' ID/biometric cards will be so soudnproof and foolproof in terms of security and preventing iD theft etc., is there biggest downfall. The notion that hey will have any effect on 'terrorism' (I'm sure this was the origional reasons given for their intor4duction in the first place), is laughable and so blatiently not true that its a thumbs up to the tabloid press for their being able to instill such a bonkers notion in peoples heads...
Let insanity preveail, I'm all for them why not.

The criminals will just forge the biometric cards and put their prices up.

What's needed is effective punishments for the cheats doing this. Instead of a fine, (which the criminal just looks upon as an overhead), jail the impersonator and ban the person who was meant to be sitting the test sine die.

The problem with that is the prisons are full and they're letting criminals out faster than they're putting them in

Presumably they were not being checked. Or the Examiners simply didn't ask to see the appropriate Provisional. Shows how out of date I am, I didn't know provisionals had your picture on them

Novo

Judging by some of the names, deportation might be in order.

Novo

Except you can't judge by the names of course...

Novosibirsk, that sounds pretty foreign to me, are you sure you should be on a BBC website?



sprout

You mean this isn't Mockba TV ?

Novo