On Sun, 08 May 2011 11:42:42 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> 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.

Yeah, and here that is fairly new as well; they changed the drivers' 
licenses and state IDs about the time they removed the private club 
requirement for most places serving alcohol.

>> 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.

Well, it has to be something issued by the state, too.  You can't create 
an ID as well - the ID has to be created and verified by a trusted 
authority.

> 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.)

I have to admit that the law has been tempered a bit since the initial 
proposal, but mostly I was making a joke. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message