Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
*HONK* Sorry, but wrong (oh, and once again we see the logical fallacy of the "False Dilemma")
There is a *fourth* choice. You and lots of other people contact your MP and express your disagreement with the proposed laws *BEFORE* they are introduced.
Because it would *not only* require you to prove who you are, but also, by implication mean that if you could *not* prove who you are when required, you do *not* have the right to stand on the street, since you could then be arrested for failing to identify yourself!!
PS if you find my "lengthy posts" so tiresome, why don't you edit out the parts that you aren't replying to?
PPS Oh and for all those who think that the government's plans are a great idea and are going to be a roaring success that will be brought in without any problems, here's a cautionary little story for you...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/08/mi5_it_budget/ |
Actually, if you re-read my post a little more carefully, you will see that I used the past tense - laws that have been introduced. That, by implication, infers that it is too late to stop them being introduced. Wrong again *HONK*
But you see, what I didn't realise, and what you have taught me, is that it's all just a big conspiracy...
Let's get real, shall we? There are very few good things this Government has done, and many bad. More often than not you can look into their actions and see that they are doing it more for their own good than for the country's. But the ID card system would be great, not just for the authorities, but for the population as a whole. Sure, there are some that would oppose it, but then they may have reason to... After all, assuming anonymity can (I imagine) be very useful for some people. But then some people eg maybe who work for the Inland Revenue? may feel the need not just to go about their work, but to use other people's password to look into things that don't concern them. Why would they do that?