On 5/8/2011 11:32, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Here in Utah, the drivers license or state ID is scanned and stored at
> stores that sell liquor if they decide to card you (which is a judgment
> call).

OK.   I never saw that before.  But then, I haven't been young enough to 
card since long before the whole terrorist thing started.

> But again, if you don't prove who you are (which is why it's a photo ID),
> then there's no way to correlate the data on the ID to the person using
> the ID.

Sure. There could be a card with nothing but your photo and your age. It 
doesn't prove who you are any more than standing in front of the person does 
with your bare face hanging out.  I don't need to provide ID to prove I'm 
old enough to buy beer. Balding and starting to grey is sufficient.

The photo ID only proves who you are because it *also* includes demographics 
unrelated to your age. Your driver's license not only proves your name and 
address to the guy carding you, and provides your age, it also proves you're 
allowed to drive, and says whether you're an organ donor. None of those 
features are relevant to the transaction except the age.

> Like Arizona.<scnr>

I think the law there, while it may be being applied in a way at odds with 
what it actually says, is not unreasonable. It basically says if you don't 
have a driver's license, the cops get to check if you're an illegal 
immigrant. Since illegal immigrants can't legally get driver's licenses, 
driving without a license is a good sign that you're an illegal immigrant, 
at least there.  In theory, if the cops stop you and you *do* show ID, 
that's the end of the matter. But they don't get to stop illegals just to 
ask for ID any more than they would be allowed to stop me. (Which isn't to 
say they wouldn't sometimes be allowed to, but they'd actually need a reason 
in both cases.)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Coding without comments is like
    driving without turn signals."

Post a reply to this message