![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 5/8/2011 9:06, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 07 May 2011 23:28:15 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2011 19:56, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> or not (like buy cigarettes or alcohol), having your identity verified
>>
>> No, that's my point. You only have to prove how old you are, not who you
>> are.
>
> But one's age is one property of one's self. If your identity can't be
> verified, then how does one know the information on this 'ID' is yours
> and not somebody elses?
That's why I said "in practice"...
> I don't think it's a matter of recording it or not.
If they don't record your name or address, then the ID isn't needed to do
what you're doing. Just proof of age. They're using the card not to identify
you, but to determine your age. They haven't identified you if 5 seconds
after they look at your ID they don't remember your name, any more than
they've already identified you by looking at your face.
> To issue a state ID,
> you have to prove who you are - without that proof, the ID is meaningless
> and the state won't issue it.
Oh, well, sure. But you don't have to prove who you are to buy alcohol. You
only have to prove how old you are. You don't have to prove who you are to
drive - you only have to prove you have a driver license. In practice,
nobody is going to issue a photo ID with only your age on it and not your
name and address, but the *law* doesn't say you have to provide ID. But if a
state issued ID with just your picture and your birthday, you could buy beer
with that. And other IDs can be used instead. (I can imagine, for example, a
grocery near a college taking college ID with a photo as proof of age to buy
beer.)
Contrast with, say, immigration control, where you actually *do* have to
prove who you are. Or (getting back to the original point) countries where
the police can ask you at any time to prove your identity.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Only two weeks until the End of the World
Date: 8 May 2011 12:29:20
Message: <4dc6c4e0@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 5/8/2011 0:48, Warp wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] san rr com> wrote:
>> Of course, you need a passport to get back
>> into the country if you leave(*)
>
> That would be unconstitutional here. You can't stop a citizen from
> entering the country.
Well, that's probably the case here. And given our national nuttiness about
terrorists, it's possible you wind up in some sort of trouble for not having
your passport.
My point wasn't that you don't get in without the passport as much as it was
"the purpose of a passport is to get in." Each ID is issued for a particular
purpose, and there are very few forms of ID issued as "this is ID that
doesn't come with anything more than just ID." States will issue this sort
of thing if you ask for it, but it's a convenience for dealing with places
(like bars) that might want to see ID that don't issue their own.
> (Of course if you try to enter the country with some other form of ID
> than your passport, it will probably take longer than the usual 10 seconds
> it takes with a passport. I don't know what it would involve, but probably
> more scrutiny, perhaps even paperwork. If you don't have *any* form of ID,
> it will probably take a lot longer to prove your citizenship in some other
> way. However, constitutionally you are allowed to enter the country as a
> matter of course, if you are a citizen. The constitution does not mention
> passports as a requirement.)
I would guess it's similar here, even tho our constitution doesn't
specifically provide for that.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Darren New <dne### [at] san rr com> wrote:
> My point wasn't that you don't get in without the passport as much as it was
> "the purpose of a passport is to get in."
I though the main purpose of passports is to travel abroad. You shouldn't
need a passport to get *back* to your own country. (It might be the most
*convenient* way, but certainly not a necessity.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 5/8/2011 9:54, Warp wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] san rr com> wrote:
>> My point wasn't that you don't get in without the passport as much as it was
>> "the purpose of a passport is to get in."
>
> I though the main purpose of passports is to travel abroad. You shouldn't
> need a passport to get *back* to your own country. (It might be the most
> *convenient* way, but certainly not a necessity.)
The visa lets you go somewhere. The passport lets you come back. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Only two weeks until the End of the World
Date: 8 May 2011 14:32:13
Message: <4dc6e1ad@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Sun, 08 May 2011 09:25:30 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>> I don't think it's a matter of recording it or not.
>
> If they don't record your name or address, then the ID isn't needed to
> do what you're doing. Just proof of age. They're using the card not to
> identify you, but to determine your age. They haven't identified you if
> 5 seconds after they look at your ID they don't remember your name, any
> more than they've already identified you by looking at your face.
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).
> > To issue a state ID,
>> you have to prove who you are - without that proof, the ID is
>> meaningless and the state won't issue it.
>
> Oh, well, sure. But you don't have to prove who you are to buy alcohol.
> You only have to prove how old you are. You don't have to prove who you
> are to drive - you only have to prove you have a driver license.
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. So you do have to prove who you are in order for the ID to be
useful. I couldn't use my wife's ID to prove that I'm her age any more
than she could use mine to prove that she's my age.
> In
> practice, nobody is going to issue a photo ID with only your age on it
> and not your name and address, but the *law* doesn't say you have to
> provide ID. But if a state issued ID with just your picture and your
> birthday, you could buy beer with that. And other IDs can be used
> instead. (I can imagine, for example, a grocery near a college taking
> college ID with a photo as proof of age to buy beer.)
>
> Contrast with, say, immigration control, where you actually *do* have to
> prove who you are. Or (getting back to the original point) countries
> where the police can ask you at any time to prove your identity.
Like Arizona. <scnr>
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Jim Henderson
Subject: Re: Only two weeks until the End of the World
Date: 8 May 2011 15:02:17
Message: <4dc6e8b9@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 5/8/2011 12:02, Jim Henderson wrote:
> 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.
You're still conflating accidental identification with the purpose of
looking at the ID in the first place.
I don't need ID to prove I'm old enough to buy alcohol. Nobody cares who I
am. I don't get carded at all, because simply showing my face is enough to
prove I'm old enough.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 08/05/2011 8:31 PM, Darren New wrote:
> I don't need ID to prove I'm old enough to buy alcohol. Nobody cares who
> I am. I don't get carded at all, because simply showing my face is
> enough to prove I'm old enough.
Quote from the Daily Mail.
"Grandmother Tina MacNaughton-Jones, 47, refused a bottle of wine in a
Waitrose supermarket in Worthing, West Sussex - because she could not
prove she was over 18. Her 22-year-old daughter then produced a driver's
licence to buy the bottle but she, too, was turned down over fears that
she would pass the alcohol on to her mother"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247925/Girl-told-ID-buy-QUICHE-Tesco-looked-21.html
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Darren New
Subject: Re: Only two weeks until the End of the World
Date: 8 May 2011 16:08:06
Message: <4dc6f826@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On 5/8/2011 12:45, Stephen wrote:
> Quote from the Daily Mail.
You're quoting a british tabloid that doesn't get respect even in Britian,
about a topic where we're specifically talking about the USA?
Plus, it's a news story. It would be like quoting a news story about a
motorcycle hitting a semi and killing the semi driver without hurting the
cyclist to prove that cycles are safer than trucks. The reason it's in the
paper is that it's such an absurd situation, so illogical and ridiculous to
everyone who reads it that it's amusing.
>
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247925/Girl-told-ID-buy-QUICHE-Tesco-looked-21.html
Plus that link doesn't go with your quote, but the linked article proves my
point even more. She got carded for quiche, which is equally absurd. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |