[IP] more on 4 more plus comment on Gilmore vs DOJ
Begin forwarded message:
From: david d zuhn <zoo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: August 17, 2004 9:34:04 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [IP] more on 4 more plus comment on Gilmore vs DOJ
[For IP, as you like]
I also am not feeling "oppressed" merely because an airline asks for my
ID. However, I do tend to feel that there is merit in John Gilmore's
complaint.
I agree, but not on the basis of whether this provides security or not.
Many of the arguments here focus on whether or not this can provide
security, while I understand the case to be about secret laws. The
airlines say that the requirement for ID is based on a law, but no
one will document the law.
If the law is a public law, then it can be subject to the usual
checks and balances provided by our system -- we can choose to
live with it and show ID, or we can choose to amend or repeal it via
further legislation.
But as the law today (apparently) requires certain forms of government
issued ID, what's to stop The Powers That Be from changing the law,
in fashion as arbitrary as the initial creation of this law, to require
a new form of ID (say, the biometric passports) rather than what is
suitable today. And as things stand now, we have no way to influence
those arbitrary decisions, and that's what I understand is being fought.
This law sucks rocks, but primarily in its secrecy.
david d zuhn, zoo AT stpaulterminal.org, http://stpaulterminal.org
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/