Cable Forum - View Single Post

07-07-2003, 20:23

Oh gods, here we go with the ID card debate again...

Let's take a few critical points:

1) "So what's the problem? We carry lots of ID all the time".

Generally true, however in the UK we have a fundamental right to "go about our lawful business without let or hinderance". (A "let" is a "permission")

We do *not* have to carry ID and we cannot be *required* to identify ourselves to anyone, not even the Police unless they have reasonable grounds for asking. (And "I think you're not carrying an ID card" is *not* reasonable grounds!)

2) But the government says they won't be compulsory and they have no plans to make them compulsory.

Again, true. There again, this government also said that they had no plans to increase taxes...!

3) They will prevent crime.

Err, how? What crimes will they prevent? Burglary? Mugging? Driving without licence or insurance? Nope.

They *may* be able to cut down on eg Benefit Fraud, but since the majority of the country aren't *on* benefits, it seems like a big sledgehammer to crack a small nut. They may also be able to cut credit and debit card fraud, but let's just look at that in the next point...

4) Ah, but they'll make life easier when you do need to identify yourself.

Possibly true. Not long ago, when I opened a new business account, I had problems because, as I don't drive and don't have a passport, I had no "photographic ID" which was needed (despite the fact that there were six people in the bank who could have identified me by sight!)

However let's just follow this along a moment. It could cut down on credit card and debit card fraud if you have to present your ID card with your credit card. But what this means is that *every* time you want to buy something, be it fuel for your card or your weekly shopping you could be *required* to prove who you are! But if the cards aren't compulsory to carry and you didn't bring yours along, are they going to refuse the transaction??

5) Ah, but the only people who worry about that are the crooks. After all, if you have nothing to hide, why should you worry?

Well, actually what I worry about is every time I hear that argument I see a basic and fundamental right being eroded a little more.

*EVERYBODY*, even those who have been convicted of crimes and subsequently been released from jail, has the right to be PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!

Pardon me for shouting, but that right is one that too many people seem to take for granted.

The "if you have nothing to hide" bunch, however, even if they don't *realise* they are saying, want to reverse that right so you are "presumed guilty until proven innocent". By their logic, if I don't want an ID card, I must have "something to hide", therefore I am guilty and *I* have to prove my innocence!

That would turn our entire system of justice on its head throw away an extremely precious right.

6) Ok, but you'd only be asked for your ID if the Police had reason to believe you were a criminal.

Really? I suggest, then, you take a look at the application of the "Sus" laws from the 1980s where the Police could stop someone "on suspicion" of them being criminals.

Unfortunately a lot of people seemed to be being stopped solely on the grounds of being "suspiciously black". Even in France, where they have ID cards and the rules say you're not allowed to do this, a disproportionate number of people who are stopped and asked for ID are of North African/ Algerian descent (and that includes black British tourists).

So, tell me again, how good ID cards are for us all...

07-07-2003, 20:23	#43
Graham Guest Posts: n/a	Oh gods, here we go with the ID card debate again... Let's take a few critical points: 1) "So what's the problem? We carry lots of ID all the time". Generally true, however in the UK we have a fundamental right to "go about our lawful business without let or hinderance". (A "let" is a "permission") We do not have to carry ID and we cannot be required to identify ourselves to anyone, not even the Police unless they have reasonable grounds for asking. (And "I think you're not carrying an ID card" is not reasonable grounds!) 2) But the government says they won't be compulsory and they have no plans to make them compulsory. Again, true. There again, this government also said that they had no plans to increase taxes...! 3) They will prevent crime. Err, how? What crimes will they prevent? Burglary? Mugging? Driving without licence or insurance? Nope. They may be able to cut down on eg Benefit Fraud, but since the majority of the country aren't on benefits, it seems like a big sledgehammer to crack a small nut. They may also be able to cut credit and debit card fraud, but let's just look at that in the next point... 4) Ah, but they'll make life easier when you do need to identify yourself. Possibly true. Not long ago, when I opened a new business account, I had problems because, as I don't drive and don't have a passport, I had no "photographic ID" which was needed (despite the fact that there were six people in the bank who could have identified me by sight!) However let's just follow this along a moment. It could cut down on credit card and debit card fraud if you have to present your ID card with your credit card. But what this means is that every time you want to buy something, be it fuel for your card or your weekly shopping you could be required to prove who you are! But if the cards aren't compulsory to carry and you didn't bring yours along, are they going to refuse the transaction?? 5) Ah, but the only people who worry about that are the crooks. After all, if you have nothing to hide, why should you worry? Well, actually what I worry about is every time I hear that argument I see a basic and fundamental right being eroded a little more. EVERYBODY, even those who have been convicted of crimes and subsequently been released from jail, has the right to be PRESUMED INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY! Pardon me for shouting, but that right is one that too many people seem to take for granted. The "if you have nothing to hide" bunch, however, even if they don't realise they are saying, want to reverse that right so you are "presumed guilty until proven innocent". By their logic, if I don't want an ID card, I must have "something to hide", therefore I am guilty and I have to prove my innocence! That would turn our entire system of justice on its head throw away an extremely precious right. 6) Ok, but you'd only be asked for your ID if the Police had reason to believe you were a criminal. Really? I suggest, then, you take a look at the application of the "Sus" laws from the 1980s where the Police could stop someone "on suspicion" of them being criminals. Unfortunately a lot of people seemed to be being stopped solely on the grounds of being "suspiciously black". Even in France, where they have ID cards and the rules say you're not allowed to do this, a disproportionate number of people who are stopped and asked for ID are of North African/ Algerian descent (and that includes black British tourists). So, tell me again, how good ID cards are for us all...