Close Topic Options

Are Government Id Systems Lawful?

We hear much today about Government ID systems.

But what purpose do they actually serve?

How have they worked in other countries, in the present or past?

Can man really make an ID system that is impossible to fake?

And, most importantly, can they ever be lawful?


Dubhdara.

Lawful Systems Id Government Are

I don't think so, a man cannot create an ID that is impossible to fake, there are 'businesses' out there out of it.


What do you mean if they can ever be lawful? what do you exactly refer to?

Are Government Id Systems Lawful? History & Civil Business Politics

By lawful, as opposed to legal, I mean do compulsory ID systems violate
natural law.

In other words, are they consistent with those rights which we possess which predate government?

Yes, I agree - what man can make, man can fake.

Dubhdara.

Lawful Systems Id Government Are

It depends on the country but I do believe every government has a responsibility concerning about the safety of their citizens therefore any kind of identification that may help to catch criminals or avoid it, I'm all for it.

Lawful Systems Id Government Are

I'm not sure what you mean by it depending upon the country, but yes governments do have the purpose of protecting their citizens' life, liberty and property.

But do ID cards protect liberty if they infringe upon it?

Do ID cards really bring safety? How can they if they can be faked? Would ID cards have done anything to stop 9/11? What does the history of ID cards show?

Do governments have the authority to compel their citizens to carry ID cards? If so, where do they get this from?

Dubhdara.

Are Government Id Systems Lawful?

dubhdara, I agree that ID cards become an infringement on liberty. By requiring everyone to have ID readily available at all times, the government is saying, in effect, that the person must prove innocence at any time.

And, this has already come to the US, as a Nevada rancher was thrown in jail for refusing to comply with a policeman's order to "produce his papers." The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of the policeman.

Are Government Id Systems Lawful

The way I see it there are at least 4 reasons why I must concur with Nighthawk's view that ID cards are an infringement of liberty:

Principle #1: Governments receive their just powers from the governed

As an individual I do not possess the right to stop someone going about their daily business. I do have the right to stop someone who is, or decidedly appears to be, seeking to violate my rights. This right itself emanates from my right to self-defence.

Those policing in my (and others") absence may therefore exercise this same power to stop suspects; but just as I cannot stop or make demands of anyone for any other reason, so neither can those acting as agents of the government. Why? Because they receive their authority from the individual. Something that is therefore wrong for an individual to do, is also wrong for a group of individuals to do - and that includes government.

And yet with compulsory ID cards comes the concomitant unlawful increase in police powers to stop someone and demand identification without any good reason for doing so.

Principle #2: The Right to the Presumption of Innocence

Why is it imperative that the police be able to show that they have a good reason for stopping someone? Because then they can be held to account. Without this safeguard citizens will be subject to the arbitrary whims of rulers directing the police for their own ends, to harass certain groups or individuals and generally oppress. The populace would have no comeback. The police will not be restrained by the knowledge that they will have to prove anything, because they won't have to prove anything (this began to be a problem in Britain after the last World War, when ID documents still continued to be demanded by police).

What does this mean in effect? It means everyone is held to be a potential criminal; presumption of innocence, long enshrined in the Magna Carta, is infringed. Relations, trust and goodwill break down. It is another step toward the freedom-destroying philosophy of corpus juris.

Principle #3: The Right to Anonymity and Privacy

Unless entering into a legal agreement with someone, I do not have the right to demand of anyone that they tell me their name or any other detail about themselves. Based on Principle #1 above, I cannot therefore delegate this authority to government because I do not myself possess it.

By printing information on an ID card or making it a means by which a central database can be accessed, this right is lost and, furthermore, opens the individual up to all manner of government targeting. It is not widely known that ID cards provided the means by which the Nazis were able to identify Jews, yet those ID cards were issued long before Nazism arose - indeed, in a time when those who received them thought no ill of present or future government. (one might add the massacres in Rwanda as well, the differing tribes were also identified by use of ID)

Principle #4: The Right to Free Speech

Part of the right to say what you want is the right to not say what others want. In other words, the right to silence. However, with a central database collecting such information as your political affiliations, religion, ethnicity, ad infinitum, the right to silence is all but quashed. You must tell them everything they want. Why is this a threat to liberty? Because all of us are a part of some group or section of society that will someday be in the government's line of fire.

So I've answered my own question

Dubhdara.

Are Government Id Systems Lawful Politics Business Civil & History

First of all, each country makes there own laws, so what you have as a right in one country does not follow in all countries.

Second, just because a country issues ID cards and says you must carry them does not mean that they are giving law enforcment the right to stop you without reason. I have to carry a drivers license when I drive, but the police cannot stop my car just because they want to and ask me for my license. They still must have a valid reason for stopping me. If they do stop me, then I must have my drivers license and I must show it to them.

Already I must have some form of government ID to do certain things. In the US, I must have a drivers license to drive. If I want to buy alcohol I need some kind of ID given out by a governmental agency if I don't have a drivers license. These forms of ID are currently given out on the state level and so there are as many different rules about their issuance as there are states. I see no problem with making one global database and one uniform identification card from the federal government rather than from each individual state. If I want to travel between countries I must have a passport.

I don't see the problem.