From: VirgilT7@aol.com
Date: Fri Jul 03 1998 - 09:13:24 MDT
In a message dated 7/2/98 11:49:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
davelook@gsinet.net writes:
<< Thanks for pointing some of the more obvious problems with this
reasoning.
By this way of thinking, the govt should have bugs in everyones homes to
protect
us from every concievable harm. After, if you're not breaking the law, what
have you got to worry about? Making the govt even *more* efficient at
tracking every
move makes me shudder. Haven't we all read 1984?
>>
You're comparing a national identification card, basically the equivilant of a
state I.D. card or drivers license, to 1984? Are you kidding me? And the ID
cannot make the government more efficient at tracking every move simply
because, first off, you don't use ID to do everything, in fact you don't use
it to do most things, and many of the things you DO use it for don't involve
your number being sent to some map where your movements are plotted in real-
time. This paranoia over an ID card is silly. Frankly, an ID card is
extremely useful.
I'm sorry that I didn't see the post that you quoted and responded to it
directly, but a government that governs least does not necessarily govern
best. To make that principle, often quite useful, dogmatic and apply it
blindly to every conceivable service government could provide is simply
foolish. In our society we have need for a reliable form of identification.
And to have the government provide simply does not violate any rights. It
does not give the government power to violate any rights. So what's all the
fuss about, besides getting worked up over wild predictions of an Orwellian
future? Note, of course, that it seems rather implausible that whether or not
we have such a future ahead of us hangs upon the issuance of a card form of
government identification.
Andrew
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:16 MST