RealID. Complex issue, on many levels. Overkill? It might be… I’m embarrassed to say that I haven’t been following it as closely as I could have. One thing that I have determined is that this whole push for RealID is being made in spite of our open southern border and that only leads to more complexity… I got at least one thing to say about the whole thing: stop blaming Republicans for the success of this bill.
…this started over in WWdN.
One thing that needs to be addressed, even before the RealID bit, is our southern border. I mean, here we are trying to protect ourselves from illegal immigrants and terrorist with the RealID act – or so we’re told – and we can’t even control our own border? What the hell is that about? Oh yes… That’s about politics – I forgot. Politicians are terrified that the ever-growing Hispanic population will be pissed if they enforce the law and block unlawful crossings.
Now what the fuck is that about?!
I’m all for immigration. Honest. Wouldn’t be in this nation if it wasn’t for immigration. But I was a part of a lawful migration. I know, because I did some research on it at one point. So, I’m not saying close the border; I’m saying control the border. When you’ve got [roughly] 11 million illegal immigrants in the nation… Shit, man, that’s a huge number to fling into a population without any form of control. And why should any group be pissed about controlling the flow of illegal immigrants? Is it racial motivated? It can be twisted it into that – like everything else can – because there are only two nations involved: the US and Mexico. Obviously, if we acted to regulate immigration – like it’s supposed to be – on the southern border, it would only impact Mexico… Obvious case of racism. Yep. We don’t have this problem with the Canadian border, so obviously it’s anti-Mexican. *snort*. What a crock of shit that argument would be. Maybe it’s the cooperative government in Canada and the controlled border that prevents a problem with Canada… Mexico has neither and has had neither the last few years.
So then, why are groups depending them? I don’t know. Honestly, I don’t. Some say human rights, or civil rights, or blah blah blah, but IT’S AGAINST THE FUCKIN’ LAW. That’s gotta come into play here doesn’t it? We’re not saying “get out”; we’re saying “come in through the front door; don’t hop the fence or come through a window”. It’s the law for feck’s sake.
Don’t like the current policy? Lobby to get the law changed. That’s what a democracy is about, right? Get yer voice heard. Don’t support a government that’s turning it’s head, while the law just simply isn’t enforced, just because it suits you… And then get pissy when they finally address the law! That’s out and out anarchy.
And this whole push for RealID is being caused by this flow of illegal immigration, if you want my honest opinion… Everyone is fearful of foreign terrorists getting in the nation to make mischief – that’s the bottom line. If the government will be criticized for enforcing the law by a large part of the US population – and the God knows the media would start burning crosses if we clamped down on the border! – they are going to attempt to solve the problem on the other end. If we can’t stop people from coming in, we can identify who is supposed to be here and who isn’t. Foolhardy, but this is the end result that has come out of this debacle. To me, that’s what’s sparked the whole push for RealID… And there will be instant reaction to this: New York state has already told its DMV offices to NOT ask for identification when issuing drivers licenses (which will be an illegal state act, once this bill gets signed) no matter what federal law gets signed… That should spark an instant reaction, hands down.
Frankly, I simply want to know where my updated WA Driver’s License is… Hm. I need to look into that.
But, here’s the point of the whole Rant… People have been flapping theirs mouths off about this – and yes, Wil, I have to include you in this; you’ve bought into biased reporting on this one – about Republican this and Republican that. How it’s the Republican drive to control our lives and that they’re obviously evil etc, etc etc. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I’m saying it’s the wrong argument to use in this debate kids: this passed unanimously in the Senate. 100 to 0. If the news reports are accurate, of course. Not often that a body of 100 people will shout out in one resounding voice… Given that there’s still at least 40 Democrats in the Senate, they were a voice in this chorus, whether you like the “song” or not.
As usual, people blindly use the wrong arguments to support their cause and in the process they hurt the cause they’re supporting: I’m more inclined to be for RealID now, after reading this whole thing, than I was hours before, because once again people have tried to turn it into a “They suck, so we’re better, because they suck!” type of thing… Nice job!
7 thoughts on “Yet Another Argument Being Waged Wrong”
Yeah, I agree!!
And the absence of trolls on this thread must mean that people have read a bit about the bill and said “Oh… well then. Guess we need to shup now!” :)
You’re making the assumption that RealID will somehow stop illegal immigration: there’s absolutely no reason to think that will happen. All it will do is to ensure that only one form of ID needs to be forged.
But for that you also get: significant invasion of privacy, identity theft made easier, and a huge unfunded cost.
In the end, proving identity doesn’t do anything for security. Read Bruce Schneir’s excellent essay on the subject.
Actually, the point is that RealID came out of the need to stop illegal immigration. And it’s trying to fix the wrong end of the problem. Thanks for agreeing with me in that RealID won’t help the problem.
As to the rest of the stuff, it sounds like you’d be arguing that we don’t need any form of ID at all – all of the same stuff that you’ve just described can be applied to passports… do we need to get rid of those too?
As I said: proving identity does nothing to improve security. To improve security, you must divine intent. Identity does not equal intent.
There are valid reasons to require identification: to prove ownership of something (or membership), for example. Those reasons are not the intent of this legislation.
Right. So. Why are ya still arguing with me if you agree with me? :D