Should we all Carry Identity of who we are. ?

B

Bodd

Is time as a country we start to think about a cashless society and carrying identity

I think this will lead to a fairer less dangerous country.

Bod
 
Sponsored Links
We already do have and some carry identity - drivers license, passport, bank card, birth certificate, citizen card for the kids who want to get a drink.

Why do you think it will be less dangerous? I genuinely don't know and not having a dig!
 
Sponsored Links
I heard somebody suggest the other day that all Irish people be micrchipped as a solution to frictionless borders.

So just have a microchop instead of identity card. Some American companies have done it to employees.
 
Cashless society will come, I hope ID cards never do. Huge risk of Identity theft with one universal form of ID
 
We already do have and some carry identity - drivers license, passport, bank card, birth certificate, citizen card for the kids who want to get a drink.

Why do you think it will be less dangerous? I genuinely don't know and not having a dig!
The notion of compulsory identity cards has never been dropped (apart from a period after WWII), just 'mothballed' from time to time.

The latest attempt to start the ball rolling again is by introducing a 'trial' voter identity system to tackle a 'fraud problem' that is negligible!

But you ask about the danger?

If everything you do is linked to a single number on a database, then the chance of fraud / error / political engineering is multiplied.

Anyone remember the builders who were denied work because their names were put on a database simply because of their union affiliations and they were blacklisted?

You may think we live in a democracy, but denial of any form of rights /services could become routine in the future by a not so 'benign' government who might wish compliance!
 
Last edited:
You misunderstood. I asked why ID cards would make this a less dangerous country as said in Bodd's original post.
 
ellal, what evidence do you have that the fraud problem is negligible? It's one person, one person. Whatever can be done to eradicate students voting twice, or husbands voting on behalf of their wives should be welcomed by any democrat.

I recognise certain quarters of the political spectrum (and the press that represents it) may 'suffer' disproportionately and those same quarters are the most vocal about allowing such fraud to continue. Ultimately, all quarters suffer if electoral fraud is permitted to continue - Mugabe would not have agreed though.

Nozzle
 
ellal, what evidence do you have that the fraud problem is negligible?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43245969

"While 337 allegations of electoral fraud were made across the UK, the majority - 207 cases - resulted in no further action and a further 82 were "locally resolved".

Based on the data recorded by police forces, there is currently no evidence of any large-scale cases of proven electoral fraud relating to the polls held during 2017," the Electoral Commission analysis says.

Only one person was convicted over 2017 'double voting' claims"

So what is your definition of 'negligible', nozzle?

PS. The UK 'electorate' was 45,766,000 as of 2016 - you do the maths! ;)

 
You misunderstood. I asked why ID cards would make this a less dangerous country as said in Bodd's original post.
Apologies.

I was pointing out why IMO it would make it more 'dangerous' - for the vast majority that is!
 
Voter fraud. Straight from the Republican playbook. Some people are so gullible.
 
To Carrie ID would be optional:

One thing most of us don't leave home without. Thats our phone.

No longer will we be able to buy pay as you go phones.

All our ID will be on that phone, you cant buy a phone without agreeing to ID.

You would need Phone to get on public transport ,buy fuel, food etc ect.

a bit Nanny state but it would stop alot of crime

I know it won't happen but hey ho
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top