Gateway to future - or less freedom?

[Overnet User]

Story : http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=416382

Passengers travelling through Stansted Airport have been among the first in the UK to use new facial recognition technology as part of a major trial of the system. Laura Jean Morris finds out how the new scheme has been received.

TRAVELLERS holding new-style biometric passports are being urged to "cut the queues" at immigration and use new facial recognition gates at Stansted Airport.

The gates, one of only two trials of the technology in the UK, were brought on-line in December as part of a Border Agency trial run in conjunction with Stansted's owners, BAA.

It has been so successful, seeing more than 160,000 passengers take part, it has been extended to October. Plans for further airports to take part in the change-over are afoot.

[tolow2ce]

You guys are so screwed.

[jokster]

britains new immigration police

[Paladwyn]

Personally I don't see much wrong with this...it would cut waiting lines, and the only people that would have to worry, are the ones that have something to hide.

[tolow2ce]

and the only people that would have to worry, are the ones that have something to hide.

Hello george bush. This from a place that has squat for civil rights. From the far left in the US: I would sooner die than live with the likes of you. Really, if I had to live there or the UK I would be dead or locked up. As bad as this country has gotten, Ill give my life for my Constitution.

[Paladwyn]

All it is...is a quicker way to identify people as they walk through customs, really...I honestly don't see the bad thing here. It infringed on people's privacy by how? But making their already public face to be recognized by a machine and not by the person having to take their ID and visually look at them?

All I hear is people starting to cry everytime they come up with new technology...I can't see how this could take any freedoms away from people, except from those who have criminal records, or have been red flagged. I could care less about Constitutions or having less civil rights than the mighty USA, I just don't see this being a bad thing.

I would like to see somebody tell me why this technology would be cutting freedoms?

[tolow2ce]

All it is...is a quicker way to identify people as they walk through customs, really...I honestly don't see the bad thing here. It infringed on people's privacy by how? But making their already public face to be recognized by a machine and not by the person having to take their ID and visually look at them?

All I hear is people starting to cry everytime they come up with new technology...I can't see how this could take any freedoms away from people, except from those who have criminal records, or have been red flagged. I could care less about Constitutions or having less civil rights than the mighty USA, I just don't see this being a bad thing.

I would like to see somebody tell me why this technology would be cutting freedoms?

Someone would have to have a clue what freedom and person privacy is, in order to see how it cut your freedoms. I know you don't have a problem having the exact same rights as a criminal, that's clear. It is also clear that you don't mined being treated like a criminal. You go ahead and love your extensive Gov data bases, maybe you'll get flagged for being a member of slyck. Again, it was simple minded people like you who put hitler into power. You would also feel right at home living in NK and China. Hey check out your databases http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17952 Give me your name and address, I have a list Id like to put you on.

[MrFredPFL]

please stop the namecalling. the fact that you strongly disagree with someone on a subject you consider important doesn't entitle you to ignore the decorum we try to maintain here. thanks.

[Paladwyn]

You are identified every time you try to fly on a plane, they take your passport, which has all your information. So, instead of some guy standing there, holding your picture up and identifying if it's you, and if he thinks you may be in the wrong, then sends you off to a little room where you get grilled? This is somehow better than having a machine do it for them?

You name what civil right would be removed in the US on such a thing? The only reason why they don't do this in the US yet, is the fact the technology hasn't been exactly perfect. Perhaps if they had such a setup, the terrorists wouldn't have been able to bypass security so easily with a fake mustache and hijack a plane.

Regardless what list you are already on, all this is doing is taking the job of identifying an individual away from the security guards and put it in the hands of the machines.

From your posts, you are deeply against this, but I suspect it has alot more to do with your background than it does to do with privacy. Are you somebody who tries to hide their identity for some reason and need to get on a plane? If you are, then you shouldn't enter an airport.

The list is already made...why would me giving my personal information change anything? So the machine would see me...big deal, I'm a stand up citizen in the country of Canada, personally I have absolutely nothing to fear, I would be granted a passport and allowed to go on an airplane in a heartbeat, and regardless if a machine took my identity or not, it doesn't change who I am.

Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are out to get you

[tolow2ce]

You are identified every time you try to fly on a plane, they take your passport, which has all your information. So, instead of some guy standing there, holding your picture up and identifying if it's you, and if he thinks you may be in the wrong, then sends you off to a little room where you get grilled? This is somehow better than having a machine do it for them?

It is absolutely better than a machine that gets it wrong mor that 30% of the time.

You name what civil right would be removed in the US on such a thing? The only reason why they don't do this in the US yet, is the fact the technology hasn't been exactly perfect. Perhaps if they had such a setup, the terrorists wouldn't have been able to bypass security so easily with a fake mustache and hijack a plane.

Nothing at the moment, except in some states that tech is rendered illegal, but there will be many lawsuits all the way up to the supreme court, involving the fourth and fifth amendment. The laws put in place will limit facial recognition to a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed or will be committed, you can carve that into stone.Facial recognition is not here, you said it.
All of the illegal constitutional nightmares put in place by george bush in the name of terrorism, will get him legally hanged one day on the WH steps, you can take that to the bank.
mustaches??? WTF are you talking about? Are you talking about the fact that 20lbs will render that tech useless. Facial hair will also do so, regardless of what you say, until you can prove otherwise. If I grow a beard, there is no points of reference for that machine to recognize.

Regardless what list you are already on, all this is doing is taking the job of identifying an individual away from the security guards and put it in the hands of the machines.

Says..... you, or would the gov of the US that is responsible for suspending habius corpus, posse comitatus, illegal spying on Americans, starting an illegal war, torture, illegal detention centers and taking a country of laws and turning it into a country of people decide what extent of that tech is used? Um just you I guess.

From your posts, you are deeply against this, but I suspect it has alot more to do with your background than it does to do with privacy. Are you somebody who tries to hide their identity for some reason and need to get on a plane? If you are, then you shouldn't enter an airport.

I for one can see the forest from the trees, a passport is one thing. privacy matters such as a national ID card, facial recognition tech, DPI and human tracking devices anything that limits my personal freedoms, privacy, human rights, I have carved a canyon in front of where I stand. My background, Ill always be innocent until proven guilty, even If that right has to be taken by force.

You on the other hand dont see limiting the rights of the innocent, to the rights of the guilty is immoral and Anti American on top of that. Oh, to catch the terrorists... give me a F*cking break!! Been there done that(half assed).

The list is already made...why would me giving my personal information change anything? So the machine would see me...big deal, I'm a stand up citizen in the country of Canada, personally I have absolutely nothing to fear, I would be granted a passport and allowed to go on an airplane in a heartbeat, and regardless if a machine took my identity or not, it doesn't change who I am.

Right and like the UK you have no right to your own ass, literally, your bum. It doesnt change who you are, or the country you live in, enjoy!!! Its utter madness if you think such tech will be limited to airports, in the UK or canada.
There are members of non violent groups that have been put on the no fly list, what makes them any different that you? There are mistaken identities that have been put on no fly lists. What makes you so special? In any case you would be no different than obl trying to get on a plane. Instead of limiting such tech to criminals you have been wrapped into the web right along with them. For what? Terrorist surveillance? Ehh you can keep that sh*t!!

Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are out to get you

Illegal spying??? WTF are you on about?

[multivariable]

My political views hover slightly to the left of centre.

Is that why I find extreme left-wing nutjobs more annoying than the conservative variety?

[tolow2ce]

My political views hover slightly to the left of centre.

Is that why I find extreme left-wing nutjobs more annoying than the conservative variety?

Commies and fascists have never been a fan of personal freedoms, that would be why.

See here

[Paladwyn]

It is any different than the fact that a machine gets it wrong rather than a human? To me, not really...other than the fact that it's another machine taking the job of another human.

So I just can't see any difference, if some security guard checks over my passport, eyeing my up and down...making sure it's me, perhaps suspecting something and then going to the computer, where the database currently exists already, if you are already on that list you will be denied access.

So in your eyes, it's perfectly ok to have a human doing facial recognition, just not a machine? I could see this being a problem in public areas, but an airport is private property.

Are you also against security cameras as well? Just out of curiosity.

To me it sounds that you necessarily aren't afraid of the technology, but the list itself, theri methods for generating this list and the ability to be identified if you are on it. This is evident from the fact that you mention about being placed on these lists for even non violent organizations. The facial recognition does not place you on these lists, it's just another tool to help see if you are. Frankly, as an ordinary citizen, if you ARE on a no-fly list, I wouldn't want you on the plane...and perhaps you shouldn't be.

I'm not some nutjob from any wing, left or right...I'd probably place myself pretty much in the middle, with thei neat ability to be able to make up my own mind about different things, without being restrictive to a point of view that I am forced to keep. I am very much against the airports searching your laptops and electronic devices without a warrant, but I am willing to give them a bit of a break with this technology. It's non invasive and entirely passive. Though, I suppose if I was a person that starts calling everybody who disagrees with their point of view a "commie or fascist" I would also be the type to not be able to have a thought for myself, having to adhere to the views even if they might no necessarily be right.

Ah the joys of being somebody who has the ability to think for themselves.

The paranoia thing stems from the fact that it would seem you feel the government is out to get you.

[tolow2ce]

It is any different than the fact that a machine gets it wrong rather than a human? To me, not really...other than the fact that it's another machine taking the job of another human.

Yea a human can be held responsible. Chances are the human is not going to detain an innocent person. Chanses are the human is not going to let obl on a plane, its probable that could happen with a machine.

So I just can't see any difference, if some security guard checks over my passport, eyeing my up and down...making sure it's me, perhaps suspecting something and then going to the computer, where the database currently exists already, if you are already on that list you will be denied access.

The US government has been trying to pass National ID cards, The us government has been supping airports with no fly lists. Its naive to think all this tech will do is scan your face and check info on your passport.

So in your eyes, it's perfectly ok to have a human doing facial recognition, just not a machine? I could see this being a problem in public areas, but an airport is private property.

Right, it is private property with GOV officials working there on my dime.

Are you also against security cameras as well? Just out of curiosity.

Not when they are located on private property. A public cctv system would be target practice.

To me it sounds that you necessarily aren't afraid of the technology, but the list itself, theri methods for generating this list and the ability to be identified if you are on it. This is evident from the fact that you mention about being placed on these lists for even non violent organizations. The facial recognition does not place you on these lists, it's just another tool to help see if you are. Frankly, as an ordinary citizen, if you ARE on a no-fly list, I wouldn't want you on the plane...and perhaps you shouldn't be.

I actually have a constitutional right to travel.

Innocent people who's government considers them potential terrorists. Really, you don't have a problem with this? commies don't have a problem with this either, aye.

I'm not some nutjob from any wing, left or right...I'd probably place myself pretty much in the middle, with thei neat ability to be able to make up my own mind about different things, without being restrictive to a point of view that I am forced to keep. I am very much against the airports searching your laptops and electronic devices without a warrant, but I am willing to give them a bit of a break with this technology. It's non invasive and entirely passive. Though, I suppose if I was a person that starts calling everybody who disagrees with their point of view a "commie or fascist" I would also be the type to not be able to have a thought for myself, having to adhere to the views even if they might no necessarily be right.

Who called you a nutjob, that was someone trying to make a lame attempt at name calling or post count (ask me if I care) Oh, let the Hypocrisy fly at slyck.

So because I disagree with you on this matter, I have no free thought. Maybe you should rethink that one, your thoughts on this matter seem a bit narrow.

I just got called a nutjob, I was stating a fact commies and fascists have no respect for personal rights and the people who do, drive the commies nuts. Maybe you need to take another look at your believes of free thought. Center means you have free thought??? WTF?!?! Chances are it means, not really having a thought.

Ah the joys of being somebody who has the ability to think for themselves.

The paranoia thing stems from the fact that it would seem you feel the government is out to get you.

I like big government, I have a problem with authoritarian government. So show me how I haven't had a authoritarian government the past 8 years. Maybe then your assumptions may mean something and not just a way for you to label.

We were hours away from a dictatorship.

[Fartingbob]

Chances are the human is not going to detain an innocent person.

Human error. Ever head of it?

Chanses are the human is not going to let obl on a plane, its probable that could happen with a machine.

Its used as an aid. Any suspicions get referred to those who do it now. And face recognition is very accurate, especially under such controlled conditions. It picks out the facial features and the distance and proportions are compared to the passport. 2 people who look alike to the human eye may have very different proprtions that this method will detect.

[Paladwyn]

If you would listen, you would actually see me mention that once again, it's not the technology..but the list itself that you are against.

To say that a human will never detain an innocent person is a bold faced lie, try to come up with better. The machine isn't going to detain you at all, merely have somebody have to do a deeper check.

Is it naive to think that's all it will do? of course, but if that person seems to think that you are of suspicious nature, it is also naive to think they will just let you go on through with just the info on your passport. Your entire travel history is kept on log, if you ever had a problem trying to cross the border, they will question it almost every single time, ask my old supervisor. He gets harassed and detained every single time trying to go into the US, he is innocent...merely caught up in the fact that an American didn't like him.

You did accept it as private property, good and I agree that public camera are also a no-no, but ones on private property are justifiable.

I just don't like being referenced as a commie or fascist or Hitler, just because I don't see the big issue. I'm a person willing to listen to an argument and make up my own mind, I'm not bound by the left and right wing mentalities, I do have my own mind...I sit on the fence, completely aware that each side..each political party has things I like and things I don't, and I'm not afraid to say it. Just because I would have labeled myself as liberal or conservative, doesn't mean I have to follow it to the letter. I understand the need for security, but I also have my opinions on where the line needs to be drawn, and I'm willing to give them this technology, but I would ask that they take away the searching of laptops without a warrant. I don't mind the people at Walmart making sure the canoe I'm taking out has been paid for, but they better not ask to look in my bags without a warrant.

Sometimes I do have a problem with 'the list' and how the maintain it, but once again...this is just a tool used for aiding in the procedure, not to mention speeding up the lines. Is it infallible? hell no, but then again..nothing is.

[tolow2ce]

If you would listen, you would actually see me mention that once again, it's not the technology..but the list itself that you are against.

I'm against the dropping of nukes regardless of what country does it. I don't have a problem with this tech i never said i did, what I have a problem with is its implementation.

To say that a human will never detain an innocent person is a bold faced lie, try to come up with better. The machine isn't going to detain you at all, merely have somebody have to do a deeper check.

I never said a human will never detain a innocent person, WTF!!! The machine will have you detained until one of the 2 people working there can do the job right, like it should have been done the first time.

Is it naive to think that's all it will do? of course, but if that person seems to think that you are of suspicious nature, it is also naive to think they will just let you go on through with just the info on your passport

What is the machine suppose to tell you about a person??

Is it naive to think that's all it will do? of course, but if that person seems to think that you are of suspicious nature, it is also naive to think they will just let you go on through with just the info on your passport. Your entire travel history is kept on log, if you ever had a problem trying to cross the border, they will question it almost every single time, ask my old supervisor. He gets harassed and detained every single time trying to go into the US, he is innocent...merely caught up in the fact that an American didn't like him.

Believe me, if someone has some calling from god, its going to take more than looking at a suspicious person. They will be one of the most innocent looking people. There are hundreds of gravel roads to canada, I can drive back and forth and not see a boarder agent. I can recall the US thought they where so smart tapping phones. What the dumb asses didn't understand is the treat to this country isn't that damn stupid. Sell your liberty for a little security.

You did accept it as private property, good and I agree that public camera are also a no-no, but ones on private property are justifiable.

I just don't like being referenced as a commie or fascist or Hitler, just because I don't see the big issue. I'm a person willing to listen to an argument and make up my own mind, I'm not bound by the left and right wing mentalities, I do have my own mind...I sit on the fence, completely aware that each side..each political party has things I like and things I don't, and I'm not afraid to say it. Just because I would have labeled myself as liberal or conservative, doesn't mean I have to follow it to the letter. I understand the need for security, but I also have my opinions on where the line needs to be drawn, and I'm willing to give them this technology, but I would ask that they take away the searching of laptops without a warrant. I don't mind the people at Walmart making sure the canoe I'm taking out has been paid for, but they better not ask to look in my bags without a warrant.

Well good, I spend most of my time arguing with the left, even though the right is this countries biggest threat. I sit on the left, I see things I like on both sides too.... ?? Id like to see walmart grow rockets and fly to the moon, it makes me sick that they have the same rights I do. none the less its private property, and I have the right to use cameras. does the US government get to legaly use them, is the argument. It is such a small matter now, this seadling needs to be pulled by the roots. As for you being a commie, I was making a comparison. As for you being a pacifist ( you said you where a centrist), Those are the people who put hitler in power.

Sometimes I do have a problem with 'the list' and how the maintain it, but once again...this is just a tool used for aiding in the procedure, not to mention speeding up the lines. Is it infallible? hell no, but then again..nothing is.

Why do you think your enemy is none thinking, This tech will not stop one real threat. Its only one step from a police state.

[Paladwyn]

I know that list exists, and there are people on it that don't deserve to be...but that isn't the issue here, the issue here is using facial recognition technology to aid in the identification of people in the airports, I would assume it's only to be used as they enter the gate area, which is one of the highest security areas in the airport.

This technology would save time, it's inevitable. The average ID inspection would take a minute per person if done right. Technically, they SHOULD check your passport and enter the information into the computer to check your background anyways, but all this really takes place as you place your ticket order. They make sure you aren't on the no-fly list. Regardless, they really should check everybody out as they pass through. They generally don't have a problem if the passport is legit, and everything looks ok... however, due to human laziness they don't go the route of checking the passport with a computer on every person, purely because it takes too much time...and frankly, humans can be corrupt, this is the weak link. Pay off a person to let you through, and you are golden.

This would easily do a quick check on your face, hit the database, make sure you are who you say you are. If it has a problem, then some dude will pull you aside and check you out. Now, you are thinking...you could pay off the guy to let you through just the same, true...but his involvement will be on record, as the incident will be on record, and the officer would be to, once again...I'm just assuming, it's how I woulda done it anyways. The machine would be able to see a line of people as they walk in, no questions asked unless it has a problem with something.

You would be pulled aside if you were on the no-fly list, regardless if it was a machine or a human, so on that note...once again, it really makes no difference in my eyes if the technology was used for the above purpose or not, except for the fact that you may catch a few more people trying to slip through.

[NocturnalVagabond]

I never said a human will never detain a innocent person, WTF!!!

umm, yeah ya did

Chances are the human is not going to detain an innocent person. Chanses are the human is not going to let obl on a plane, its probable that could happen with a machine.

[tolow2ce]

I never said a human will never detain a innocent person, WTF!!!

umm, yeah ya did

Chances are the human is not going to detain an innocent person. Chanses are the human is not going to let obl on a plane, its probable that could happen with a machine.

Umm read it again, I never said a human will never detain an innocent person.FFS! Gambling on a sure thing, are ya?

[tolow2ce]

I know that list exists, and there are people on it that don't deserve to be...but that isn't the issue here, the issue here is using facial recognition technology to aid in the identification of people in the airports, I would assume it's only to be used as they enter the gate area, which is one of the highest security areas in the airport.

You assume one thing and I assume another, but ill play.

This technology would save time, it's inevitable. The average ID inspection would take a minute per person if done right. Technically, they SHOULD check your passport and enter the information into the computer to check your background anyways, but all this really takes place as you place your ticket order. They make sure you aren't on the no-fly list. Regardless, they really should check everybody out as they pass through. They generally don't have a problem if the passport is legit, and everything looks ok... however, due to human laziness they don't go the route of checking the passport with a computer on every person, purely because it takes too much time...and frankly, humans can be corrupt, this is the weak link. Pay off a person to let you through, and you are golden.

Your still assuming this tech actually works and that it is legal. How is your tech not a weak link, you seem to think its fool proof. Then your telling me the human stops and talks to suspicious people. Not anymore, right? Do you actually think a machine can distinguish facial characteristics better than a human. Even finger print matching must get the final word from a human. Something as simple as finger print recognition, what better key than an actual key. and thats exactly what this is, criminal finger print matching. except there wont be any criminals, just the ones you treat like criminals.

This would easily do a quick check on your face, hit the database, make sure you are who you say you are. If it has a problem, then some dude will pull you aside and check you out. Now, you are thinking...you could pay off the guy to let you through just the same, true...but his involvement will be on record, as the incident will be on record, and the officer would be to, once again...I'm just assuming, it's how I woulda done it anyways. The machine would be able to see a line of people as they walk in, no questions asked unless it has a problem with something.

But what about suspicious people?? If I had access to money I could walk right through you machine as someone else. A smile A frown to date, render this tech useless. Whos to say that it will actualy warn a human of a possible conflict. What OS does it run on???

You would be pulled aside if you were on the no-fly list, regardless if it was a machine or a human, so on that note...once again, it really makes no difference in my eyes if the technology was used for the above purpose or not, except for the fact that you may catch a few more people trying to slip through.

I wouldn't mine this tech if governments would play no part. If you know your history you know governments abuse powers like this. No thank you its not worth it. To easy, maybe, but why don't you just hire enough competent people. I know we need the jobs...

Again the US government has their sticky little fingers in this cookie jar. They keep fuckin around they are going to find the lid slammed shut.

[tolow2ce]

Human error. Ever head of it?

Ever used an OS?? or a browser?

Its used as an aid. Any suspicions get referred to those who do it now. And face recognition is very accurate, especially under such controlled conditions. It picks out the facial features and the distance and proportions are compared to the passport. 2 people who look alike to the human eye may have very different proprtions that this method will detect.

Even a smile? thought not. what about a profile? have you never heard of a hacker? How about an rfid hacking? You do know that machine is going to be sending out tons of code.This is not a safe tech.

Any suspicions?? it can pick up suspicions?

[NocturnalVagabond]

I never said a human will never detain a innocent person, WTF!!!

umm, yeah ya did

Chances are the human is not going to detain an innocent person. Chanses are the human is not going to let obl on a plane, its probable that could happen with a machine.

Umm read it again, I never said a human will never detain an innocent person.FFS!

Read it again yourself you dumb fuck.
You wrote: Chanses (sic) are THE HUMAN IS NOT GOING TO DETAIN AN INNOCENT PERSON.
Granted you did say 'chances are', but if that's your fallback, talk about piss-weak hair splitting.
You wrote it, got called for it, now accept it.

Why don't you grow the hell up a bit and try joining the rest of us in the real world. Or better yet, go away and come back when you move out of your parents' basement and get your own place. Of course it will take some time for you to settle in, since I'm sure you'll spend the first week checking for commies under the bed and in the closet.

Human error. Ever head of it?

Ever used an OS?? or a browser?

Pity you ever did.


paranoid dickhead


Here's some information for you. This technology is NOT A DATABASE. The databases already exist, eg license photos, passports, etc. All this does is match the face you put in front of the 'camera' with what is on file, by combining the various source data. And as for fake beards changing your facial features, then you obviously have no understanding whatsoever of the technology you are criticising. Facial hair changes your appearance in the eyes of other people, but points of reference in facial features, such as bone structure etc, DO NOT CHANGE.
As for the accuracy, NO ONE has tried to tell you it is perfect. That is why it is being trialled. The technology is admitted as in development, and one of the reasons for the trials is to increase it's success rate.

And as for Paladwyn's repeated question, to which we still have not seen an answer from you, Can you name what civil right would be removed in the US on such a thing?
We are all waiting for your clear, concise answer ...

And here's another question, while we're on this sorta subject, why are you so against National ID cards? Please don't spew any more rhetoric about 'human rights' or 'violated privacy', how about an actual answer as to EXACTLY why they are a bad idea?....

[tolow2ce]

Read it again yourself you dumb fuck.
You wrote: Chanses (sic) are THE HUMAN IS NOT GOING TO DETAIN AN INNOCENT PERSON.
Granted you did say 'chances are', but if that's your fallback, talk about piss-weak hair splitting.
You wrote it, got called for it, now accept it.

Why don't you grow the hell up a bit and try joining the rest of us in the real world. Or better yet, go away and come back when you move out of your parents' basement and get your own place. Of course it will take some time for you to settle in, since I'm sure you'll spend the first week checking for commies under the bed and in the closet.

Ever used an OS?? or a browser?

Pity you ever did.


paranoid dickhead


Here's some information for you. This technology is NOT A DATABASE. The databases already exist, eg license photos, passports, etc. All this does is match the face you put in front of the 'camera' with what is on file, by combining the various source data. And as for fake beards changing your facial features, then you obviously have no understanding whatsoever of the technology you are criticising. Facial hair changes your appearance in the eyes of other people, but points of reference in facial features, such as bone structure etc, DO NOT CHANGE.
As for the accuracy, NO ONE has tried to tell you it is perfect. That is why it is being trialled. The technology is admitted as in development, and one of the reasons for the trials is to increase it's success rate.

And as for Paladwyn's repeated question, to which we still have not seen an answer from you, Can you name what civil right would be removed in the US on such a thing?
We are all waiting for your clear, concise answer ...

And here's another question, while we're on this sorta subject, why are you so against National ID cards? Please don't spew any more rhetoric about 'human rights' or 'violated privacy', how about an actual answer as to EXACTLY why they are a bad idea?....

You got some personal problems don't you?? Learn to read maybe!! Try to practice having some sort of coherent discussion, that may help you! If your looking for me to respond to your torrent ramblings, try again! your telling me to grow up and move out of my parents basement! ROFLMAO

[NocturnalVagabond]

If your looking for me to respond to your ramblings, try again!

hehehe... knew you would find a way to avoid the real issues in your argument.
Just can't answer direct questions, huh?

Let me guess - first year college student, looking to 'stick it to the man' ? Don't actually have a reason to gripe about the system, but figure if you throw the rhetoric around loud enough and wide enough, people will think you know what you are on about ? 'I want my Human Rights' ... 'Violates My Privacy' .... blah blah blah.... the only thing you left out was 'Save The Whales' and 'Protect The Children'

And people like Fred wonder why Americans are ridiculed the world over - it's because of morons like you who make so much damn noise in a desperate need to be noticed and validated, you drown out the ones worth listening to.
Probably some deep-seated mother/father issues involved. Usually is.


But anyway, I'll pass on this thread now. Your repeated babbling without any substance to it has made this whole thread moot.