From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Thu Oct 25 2001 - 11:17:54 MDT
Randy Smith wrote:
>
> Those who choose not to have The Citizenship Card could always...leave!
>
> >From: "Technotranscendence" <neptune@mars.superlink.net>
> >
> >I couldn't have said it [much] better myself.
> >
> >From: Joe Duarte joe_duarte@hotmail.com
> >
> >Shawn asks whether National ID Cards, driver's licenses, etc. violate
> >rights. When investigating corruption, we are told to follow the money.
> >When investigating, or evaluating, a proposed government measure, we must
> >follow the force.
> >
> >A compulsory national ID card would _require_ that a citizen (1) go to an
> >office and take all the necessary administrative steps to have the card
> >issued, and (2) carry the card about their person at all times. They would
> >be required to do this of course because there would be a threat of force
> >hanging over them if they did not comply. When a government demands an
> >explicit, positive action from citizens, and provides for coercive
> >punishment for those who are uncooperative, that government is initiating
> >force. There is no other force present, or crime committed, in this
> >scenario - only the government's. This applies equally to driver's
> >licenses, a license to do business, or a concealed carry permit. The > >government has no right to _permit_ anything, for all is permitted in
> >a free society, all peaceful activity at least. In issuing a national
> >ID card, the government is basically issuing a permit to live -
> >specifically, to live and conduct one's
> >daily business with slightly less harassment than those who do not
> >have such a card. But it is the government, not a human being,
> >that should require a permit.
Ah, but this is a bit incomplete. I refer you to Article 1V of the US
Constitution, primarily Sections 1 and 2 which deal with the 'Full faith
and credit' and 'privileges and immunities' clauses. These are the
lynchpins of the bank of trust that the citizenship has in their fellow
individuals.
There is no basis for a government requiring that a person get a permit
in order to exercise their natural human rights, as those rights exist
irrespective of the existence of that government. However, under the
'full faith and credit' clause, Congress is empowered to regulate how
the federal and state governments are to determine who is and is not a
citizen residing in the several states.
While being a citizen or not is irrelevant to an individuals basic human
rights, it is highly relevant to whether one can exercise the privileges
and immunities of being a citizen. A citizen, for example, is immune to
deportation, while a non-citizen is not. Being able to operate dangerous
equipment, like a motorized automobile, an aircraft, or a steamship, is
a privilege that citizens must pass a threshold of qualifications to
hold. Being able to carry a concealed weapon is considered in many
states to be a privilege that only citizens can have (while otherse
consider it a right that only citizens have).
The difficulty is delineating between rights and privileges. Just
because we live in a free society does not mean that every action is a
right. Essentially you could lay the boundary at the line between
swinging one's fist and hitting another's nose. Being able to smack
someone else in the snoot is a privilege that you can obtain only with
the permission of the snoot-holder. It isn't your right. Being able to
pollute is a privilege you can obtain via the permission and payment of
fees to the elected/appointed representatives of the rest of the people
who's surroundings you pollute. It isn't your right.
Similarly, placing increased risk of injury and/or death on others by
operating dangerous equipment demands permission to exercise a privilege
(the sole exception being that equipment covered under the 2nd
Amendment).
Finally, Article IV only covers the rights, privileges, and immunities
of citizens of states of the Union. It recognises no rights of
non-citizens, therefore it is the Congress' job to impose some means of
allowing the reliable determination of which group an individual belongs
to, so as to allow the individual to be treated in the proper legal
manner as befits their status as a citizen or non-citizen.
Refusing to do this will result in all of us being treated like
non-citizens, and our society of trust is destroyed.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:11:38 MST