I always thought this was more of a NWO brainchild top down control scheme. Why is Trump resurrecting it?
A National Real ID, as envisioned under the REAL ID Act, raises concerns about privacy, bureaucratic burdens, and potential for misuse. While proponents argue it enhances security, critics point to the risk of creating a centralized database accessible to various entities, increasing the likelihood of data breaches and identity theft. Additionally, the Act's implementation could lead to higher costs and administrative hassles for both states and individuals.
Here's a more detailed look at the potential implications: Privacy Concerns: Data Consolidation: REAL ID would create a national database of personal information, potentially making it easier for both government and private entities to track and access individuals' data. "Machine-Readable Zone": The act mandates unencrypted "machine-readable zones" on ID cards, allowing anyone with a barcode reader to skim personal information. Expanded Use Beyond Security: The Act's proponents claim it's for security, but there are concerns that REAL ID cards could be used for various purposes, potentially expanding government surveillance. Administrative and Economic Burdens: State Implementation Costs: States would face significant costs to redesign driver's licenses, update databases, and train personnel, with little federal funding support. Higher Fees and Hassles: Individuals could face higher fees and longer wait times at DMVs, as well as bureaucratic difficulties related to obtaining and using REAL ID cards. Increased Identity Theft Risk: The creation of a large, centralized database could make it an attractive target for identity thieves. Potential for Misuse: Surveillance Society: REAL ID could contribute to a surveillance society by facilitating routine tracking and monitoring of individuals. Private Sector Data Collection: Businesses could collect and sell data from REAL ID cards, potentially creating for-profit databases without the same privacy protections as government data. Weakened Security: While proponents claim improved security, critics argue that REAL ID could create vulnerabilities in the identification system and may not effectively deter criminals or terrorists. Other Considerations: Constitutional Concerns: Some argue that REAL ID infringes on states' rights and the principle of federalism. Lack of Benefit: Critics question whether REAL ID will actually enhance security or create unnecessary costs and burdens without a significant benefit. In conclusion, while proponents tout the potential for improved security, critics raise serious concerns about privacy, administrative burdens, and potential for misuse of the REAL ID system. The Act's implementation could have far-reaching consequences for individuals and state governments alike.
It's not the tool, It's about who's using it and for what purpose.
In the wrong hands, it's exactly what you fear.
I don’t see the purpose of it either way. My drivers license should be fine to travel with.
Here in NY, any new driver's license is "Real ID" compliant. I wonder how many states will have that automatically done.
All 50 have implemented it. I forget what the date is that it has to be complied by,
May 07 2025
https://www.dhs.gov/real-id/real-id-faqs
Thank you u/DRan.
For what it is worth, I've had a REAL ID Driver's License for many years now.
I understand all of the concerns, and they are all valid.
My PSA on this is simple.
Your smartphone already does way more than a REAL ID will ever do. Not only does everyone's smartphone have all of the personal information everyone is worried about being shared via REAL ID, everyone's phone is already hacked. Every single retail phone that everyone owns already has backdoor software installed for the gubmint to grab whatever they want.
In addition to having personal info, our "smart" phones also record everything from mics, cameras, IPs, GPS, and personal health info.
We've already given our privacy away for all of these things.
Rhetorically...
Did you install any apps or games on your device? If you read the terms of use and privacy policy, then you already know you gave all your rights to your personal info away to zombify yourself with the games on your phone.
Not all of us have or ever had smartphones. Though I do realize some of my so called private conversations have been recorded on other people's smart phones.
Your friends, neighbors, and colleagues have smart phones.
Your car tracks you via GPS.
Traffic cams are only increasing and will be ubiquitous. They see your license plates and log them.
Private security cams are at nearly every business.
Your neighbor's ring and bink cams watch you go by.
Your home internet provider knows where you go and what you do online. So does your utility company who has told most homeowners in the fine print that they are installing their own hotspots so they can check their meters, ahem, spy on you.
Your credit cards track your position as you go around spending money.
Facial recognition is being used more and more.
I'm pretty sure I could keep on going.
For those off the grid, satellite surveillance is ubiquitous and high definition for the IC. Those off the grid are especially watched.
And the surveillance state no longer relies on warrants or people to run their system. They have the Five Eyes spying on each other to get around warrants and AI to run the whole operation.
You nailed it ,, don’t forget about our smart appliances . I had to go to Home Depot to get a new dishwasher and the one I picked out I bought the insurance for it , just get tired of the dishwasher breaking after a couple years, the guy was telling me yeah this is great because you have the insurance and it makes it simple because the ins company can find out what’s wrong with it before we they get to your house . I said what are you talking about , he explained to me that with the smart appliances somehow they can go in electronically and figure out what’s wrong with them , kind of I guess like an Alexa thing they can spy inside your house. I immedietly said , screw thst , I don’t wsnt this model , he looked at me crazy and said … they are all like that . Same as my washer and dryer , unless I wanted to find used ones, I had to buy the smart ones, it’s all Home Depot had at time that didn’t take 6 months to get in stock !
It’s depressing! No privacy!
They’re pushing it hard in KY, but for now you can choose to stay with the old style.
You won't be allowed to fly post 5/7.
Yes you can... If you have a passport or a military id, you can still travel. I have to order a new birth certificate before I can get a star id, and the guy at our dmv said "you have until 2027 before you need to renew your license, if you have a passport or military id you can still fly". Basically, telling me I still have time to get the star id. I don't have a passport (never been out of the country so never needed one), but I do have a retired (spouse) id. Not that we have plans right now to fly anywhere.
Here's a link to tsa, Acceptable Identification at the TSA Checkpoint...
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/identification
you can with your passport
Or go onto a military base. I got mine so I could attend my son’s Marine bootcamp graduation.
I’m fine with that.
Same in PA.
I’ll just get some gang tattoos on my face and carry a red folder, that should get me a free flight to wherever I want to go.
In Washington state it's called an "enhanced driver's license (or ID)", I got one 5 years ago.
Same here in CA.
Edit: that said, driver’s licenses are purely for commerce. If you aren’t carrying people or goods for profit there is no need to have a driver’s license to travel privately in your automobile, or whatever the correct legal term for a non-commercial car is these days. SCOTUS tested and true. You can travel privately with only a passport. Extra knowledge and UCC steps required if you don’t have your citizenship status in order but still 100% doable.
BTW, DMV registration is also only for commercial use. A license plate on your car is only necessary for doing business not private travel.
My car is NOT a "Motor Vehicle"
USC Title 18, § 31 9(6) - Definition of "Motor Vehicle": "The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers and property, or property or cargo."
USC Title 18, § 31(10) - Definition of "Commercial Purposes": "The term "used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of the persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking for profit."
So your car, SUV, or motorcycle is only a "commercial vehicle" if you are getting paid to "drive" it. If you are only using it to travel around to go to work, school, groceries, or any other private reason then it IS NOT A "MOTOR VEHICLE".
Here is the dilemma, when the government started requiring the commercial vehicles to be registered and licensed it made that a regulable activity for that purpose. They made everyone else believe it was the same for the general public. The police, you and all your friends are taught that you are always 'operating' a 'motor vehicle' which are both commercial regulable activities.
May the state change the definition of a word or term (MOTOR VEHICLE) from the original meaning (USC Title 18, § 31 (6) to another definition to fit their own needs? NO:
CRAIG v. MISSOURI, U S 29, 410 The state cannot change the meaning of “motor vehicle” and “driver” to fit their own needs: "Is the proposition to be maintained, that the constitution meant to prohibit names and not things? That a very important act, big with great and ruinous mischief which is expressly forbidden by words most appropriate for its description; may be performed by the substitution of a name? That the constitution, in one of its most important provisions, may be openly evaded by giving a new name to an old thing? We cannot think so.” […The State] cannot change the name of a thing to avoid the mandates of the Constitution.]"
What the United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, says here is that the state cannot change the meaning of “person traveling” to “driver”, and they cannot change the name or term of “private car,” “pickup” or “motorcycle” to “Motor Vehicle”. C
U.S. SUPREME COURT AND OTHER HIGH COURT CITATIONS PROVING THAT NO LICENSE IS NECESSARY FOR NORMAL USE OF AN AUTOMOBILE ON COMMON WAYS
“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.”
Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135 “The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” –
Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784 “… the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference… is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979) “citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.”
Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009 “The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .”
Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963). “The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.”
Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966). “A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.”
Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41. “The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.”
Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236. “The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971) “The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.”
House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166. “The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.
Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666. “The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.”
Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468. U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 2 2 “A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159;
Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670 “There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456 “The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.”
American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200 Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions: “(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways…” 10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit. “A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.”
International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.’”
City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62 Ohio App. 232 “Thus self-driven vehicles are classified according to the use to which they are put rather than according to the means by which they are propelled” – Ex Parte Hoffert, 148 NW 20 ”
The Supreme Court, in Arthur v. Morgan, 112 U.S. 495, 5 S.Ct. 241, 28 L.Ed. 825, held that carriages were properly classified as household effects, and we see no reason that automobiles should not be similarly disposed of.”
Hillhouse v United States, 152 F. 163, 164 (2nd Cir. 1907). “…a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon…” State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516, Willis vs. Buck, 263 P. l 982;
Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82 “The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived.”
Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163 “the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business… is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all.” –
Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781 “Every Citizen has an unalienable RIGHT to make use of the public highways of the state; every Citizen has full freedom to travel from place to place in the enjoyment of life and liberty.” People v. Nothaus, 147 Colo. 210. “No State government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways… transporting his vehicles and personal property for either recreation or business, but by being subject only to local regulation i.e., safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring licensing, vehicle registration, or forced insurances.”
Chicago Coach Co. v. City of Chicago, 337 Ill. 200, 169 N.E. 22. “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). U.S. Supreme Court says No License Necessary To Drive Automobile On Public Highways/Streets No License Is Necessary Copy and Share Freely YHVH.name 3 “The word ‘operator’ shall not include any person who solely transports his own property and who transports no persons or property for hire or compensation.”
Statutes at Large California Chapter 412 p.83 “Highways are for the use of the traveling public, and all have the right to use them in a reasonable and proper manner; the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen.” Escobedo v. State 35 C2d 870 in 8 Cal Jur 3d p.27 “RIGHT — A legal RIGHT, a constitutional RIGHT means a RIGHT protected by the law, by the constitution, but government does not create the idea of RIGHT or original RIGHTS; it acknowledges them. . . “ Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914, p. 2961. “Those who have the right to do something cannot be licensed for what they already have right to do as such license would be meaningless.”
City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 City of Chicago v Collins 51 NE 907, 910. “A license means leave to do a thing which the licensor could prevent.” Blatz Brewing Co. v. Collins, 160 P.2d 37, 39; 69 Cal. A. 2d 639. “The object of a license is to confer a right or power, which does not exist without it.”
Payne v. Massey (19__) 196 SW 2nd 493, 145 Tex 273. “The court makes it clear that a license relates to qualifications to engage in profession, business, trade or calling; thus, when merely traveling without compensation or profit, outside of business enterprise or adventure with the corporate state, no license is required of the natural individual traveling for personal business, pleasure and transportation.”
Wingfield v. Fielder 2d Ca. 3d 213 (1972). “If [state] officials construe a vague statute unconstitutionally, the citizen may take them at their word, and act on the assumption that the statute is void.” –
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “With regard particularly to the U.S. Constitution, it is elementary that a Right secured or protected by that document cannot be overthrown or impaired by any state police authority.” Donnolly vs. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 US 540; Lafarier vs. Grand Trunk R.R. Co., 24 A. 848; O’Neil vs. Providence Amusement Co., 108 A. 887. “The right to travel (called the right of free ingress to other states, and egress from them) is so fundamental that it appears in the Articles of Confederation, which governed our society before the Constitution.”
(Paul v. Virginia). “[T]he right to travel freely from State to State … is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.” (U.S. Supreme Court,
Shaprio v. Thompson). EDGERTON, Chief Judge: “Iron curtains have no place in a free world. …’Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the Constitution.’
Please link to the SCOTUS case. Would be useful for educating normies.
Comment edited. I got cut off due to comment character limit. have many more SCOTUS and other higher court cases.
post em all, why not?
Just like Florida...Real ID "MIGHT" be cumbersome to some, HOWEVER, the "GOLD STAR" in the UPPER RIGHT HAND CORNER IS WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR ALONG WITH a picture and a holograph picture...THOSE CANNOT BE FAKED IN ANYWAY!!!!!
Because we are Citizens of the State in which we reside. Not US Government Property , as the 14th amendment & "Our Democracy" would have you believe.
Except for the fact that any illegal can get a driver's license (and then go vote.) You have to prove who you are before you can get a Real-ID. There's something to be said for this.
its just another way to convince you to give up your rights to privacy for the greater good, why not just make it so illegals cannot get licenses? or make their license some real id bs
Really, there isn't any data that they don't already have:
Birth certificate, Social Security data, current driver's license data, Marriage License, Tax records, Passport data...
Your drivers license IS NOT SUFFICIENT because illegals can get them, along with a free register to vote application
then maybe ILLEGALS shouldnt be able to get drivers licenses, or theirs should have a star on it !!
That's what I wish would c9me of all of this!
I remember when I didn’t need an ID to travel maybe prior 1990ies still wonder what Fucking business is Uncle Sam to know what I’m doing especially when Uncle Sam has allowed so much of our tax dollars piss away
Sometimes the tool is the purpose; i.e. there can't be any other purpose than the tool.
The purpose is to decrease liberty, full stop. That it is also intended to provide "security" is a secondary effect. There are other things we can do to keep illegals from voting in our elections. That this loss of liberty is being explained away to "keep illegals from voting" is, according to my research, exactly what Controlled Opposition looks like.
In other words, that we are losing personal liberties for increased securities, but are being told it's "for a good reason," is pure Cabal.
From my perspective, this is some fucked up shit.
It’s also easy to get one by accident, even for people who are aware of this act and dislike it.
One of the methods I was thinking about for requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote is paring the requirement of the presentation of a United States permanent resident card (Green Card) for persons who lawfully migrated into the United States and for those who born in the United States, their own birth certificate that is issued in the United States or one of its territories and in addition, their parent's birth certificates (if they were also born also in the United States) or a green card for both of their parents in the event the parents lawfully and legally migrated to the United States.
Having a green card does not give you the right to vote. It allows you to live in the US as a legal immigrant. Once you obtain citizenship, they take your green card away and give you Naturalization Papers.
we have an Awakening, folks!
I could say the same about a regular old driver's license.
In fact, I do say that
Full stop
You're not wrong. Even the Birth Certificate is fuckery. As is the SSN. The SSN, for example, was created by Rockefeller to control the population, part of the Eugenics program.
I won’t except that excuse. It’s the same thing with neural link. Sure it’s in elons hands and he might be a good guy but you simply cannot make the tech secure enough to insure it doesn’t get used by “the wrong hands”. Real ID infringes upon privacy and as such should be discarded end of story.
In the right hands, is national voter ID
Correct, and Congress just passed the SAVE Act which requires ID that proves citizenship (Real ID) to vote… Convenient timing.
It is the legal name fraud in effect, creating a strawman for you real self, capturing the spirit into a dead corporate legal fiction.
It makes me sad to think they diminished and caught the spirit of Barron Trump. Nobody is safe if he isn't.
A plain driver's license does the same.
I'm not getting a Real ID. I do have to travel within the US so I'm renewing my passport which will be sufficient in lieu of a REal ID.
What TSA ?
The TSA at airports
My hopium just oozing out
Passports and real IDs are the same thing basically. One just let's you travel internationally.
is the real id not more American than a passport?
did you mean to reply to me with that? read what? You replied to a question with questions, lol. Im not sure what age you are but did you just call a stranger a name? lol. Don't do that. It's a sign of weakness.
also, imo, real i.d. is more american than a passport.
i have both. am retarded as hell. lol
I just told you! ..as hell!
and calling names is done when one is at a disadvantage. Thus, a sign of weakness. No worries, mate! You're fine!
If you get a DL, you will get a Real ID....
most states have a choice, i opted out. License says **NOT a federal ID on it .still worked for voting.
Why would you opt out.... It just required showing your birth certificate....
cuz he don know what e's doin'
This here says NJ does:
(https://www.nj.gov/mvc/realid/)
I read it... You're the one being a paranoid asshole. You afraid to show your birth certificate? Bit off a little bit too much fear.... Fuck off asshole
I didn't miss anything.... Except that you're a fucking pansy who is afraid to get a real ID cause the boogeyman might see you....
Grow the fuck up loser....
You will not be able to fly without your passport then- to include state to state travel
Who cares
enfranchised people
just more restrictions on our freedom.
In my opinion, your cell phone is more of a privacy concern than something like REAL ID. The government already maintains a central database for taxes and passports. Your cellphone, on the other hand, is a walking microphone. Apps with access to gyroscope (motion) data can pick up audio in the room if left on hard furniture that will have micro vibrations when someone talks. Most browsers and apps can freely request gyroscope data access.
THIS!!!
I always thought "voter ID" was a trojan for general purpose ID. The way I see it, you should not need ID to vote, just send the ballots to citizens who ask for them, and for the illegal immigrant problem you simple deport them. Voting where you are not entitled to? large fines, half paid by the party who the vote was given to.
They recently made ID required to vote in the UK, but they still have postal votes that get gamed.
ALL efforts to issue governement "general" ID should be resisted, because before you know it, youll need it to login to your computer or phone or be getting asked for it in the street. They would be looking for biometrics too, and then you will have facial rec on every shopping mall, or police doing dragnets to get you for political speech violations or whatever they decide to have in the future. They will be fining you for having a dirty car or whatever and just apply the fine to the ID which won't work until you pay it (or just debit directly from your bank).
The profiling abilities will be profound too. They could round you up just for being someone who "looks like" they might not be totally obedient. It would be the END of those little hacks that make life worth living for the canny. Resist it.
NO. No more mail-in ballots.
Absentee ballots are fine because you have to request them, and are supposed to have a good reason (like you are in the military out of state - or if you live in a state big enough you have to be 100 or more miles away from your polling station). They can also be for special cases where someone can't get to their station due to illness/hospitalization/work trips/etc). I had to vote absentee for 10 years while I was in the military. It sucked because even if the good guys are in charge the military ballots are almost never counted since the races are usually won before they ever get to our ballots.
Pure mail-in ballots are EASY fraud because these idiotic states just mail them everywhere. Some places get ballots for the current occupants and the last several that have long since moved.
I should have said "send vote card" not ballot. That's what UK used to do, then you take the card to the village hall, get a ballot in exchange. Fraud was difficult because there were polling stations in every village or "ward" in larger towns etc. The people there would soon twig if the same person was coming in repeatedly.
I agree postal votes are not a good idea.
We have those in Texas. I get mine every year and keep it in my wallet. The sad part is, I've tried to use it when I go to vote but they always tell me they don't need it. The good part is - they say they just need my ID.
The only thing the card is good for is it tells me my precinct number, so I can look it up online and see what my ballot will look like (initiatives, candidates, amendments, and local stuff particular to my area).
if you havent dine anything "wrong" , then there is nothing to fear, productive citizen. You will receive social credit points when I confirm your identity is desireable".
REAL ID is simply a federally regulated ID card- meaning each state that issues must follow certain criteria- no ave joe can get one- it's not as tough as a passport, halfway in between- and they have existed for 10+ years- any random asshole can get a drivers license or ID card in Washington state- you cannot fly with it- drivers license and ID cards are COMPROMISED, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS SHIT- Don't want one? Get a passport-
When I renewed my DL, I had to show my birth certificate and get the "gold star" on it. Isn't that the "Real ID"?
Yes.
Dont see the big deal? prove your name and BD, prove your address. or, am I missing something?
You guys do realize this isn't a "Trump thing" right? These were approved WAY back in 2005 by CONgress. They were supposed to go into effect years ago and the mandatory date kept sliding because states kept ignoring it.
Some of the takes on this I'm seeing here are crazy. Especially the ones where people say they will just use their passports to travel everywhere. Think about that for a minute. You don't want to give the govt the info needed to get a REAL-ID but you already gave it to them to get the passport (which has an RFID chip in it).
EVERY state is required to have a REAL-ID compliant driver license - it's not an opt-in thing - it's a federal law.
If you're worried about giving the govt info, they have had it since you were born and the birth certificate was issued. They have it if you ever got a passport. If you were in the military. If you ever signed up for any credit card/loan/mortgage or anything similar because it has been hacked and sold many times over. Hell - many of the older people on here probably had their social security numbers written everywhere, including many states that used the SSN as the driver license number.
I get the sentiment though. I hate giving my ID to anyone. I had to do a background investigation once to go do a pen-test for a certain stock/commodity exchange in the US, and tried everything to avoid giving them my SSN because I didn't trust that they would protect it and destroy it when my investigation passed. When I got onsite and started working (at night so the exchange was closed) I happened to find my paperwork on the floor in the area where everyone went to get their "doctor coats" they wore on the trading floor to look important. I found my whole team's info sitting on a table. I took all of it back to Texas with me and gave it to our VP so he could deal with it. I told him if he didn't, I would - and that meant someone would be sued. I know we got apologies and the guy at the exchange was fired, but I don't know if anything else was done.
The reason it kept getting slid is because of the millions of illegals in the country that would lose their IDs and won't be able to do plantation slave labor and voter fraud.
My truth is that I no longer worry about a damn thing because I will not comply with anything that I don't want to do. Period. Freedom is a choice. What will they do? Kill me? I'm saved. Family? They're saved. No fear! EVER! 🙏
How did bathhouse Barry Soetoro get an ID with the name Obama?
He knows a guy.
I prefer the state be between me and the fed. What would happen if a state wanted to secede and the implications the individual was a 'federal' citizen? No thanks, can of worms. Keeps you safe just like a covid mask.
If they use it for voter ID, then I'll support it.
This is complete bullshit. There is no extra ‘cargo’ about your behaviors. It’s a mag strip not magic.
So illegals undocumented cannot get Real ID No travel or access to federal building. So I assume social security, welfare…
Correct
However that applies to federal. They can still apply for local aid.
I think the real ID requirements will vary by state. Some will require it upon DL renewal. I got my real ID years ago, my state made it a requirement upon renewal. I just had to show them the same info I did when I got the standard DL. I just had to show it again.
Same here, I had to show the same documents that I did the first time that I got my license many years ago. Proof of who I am & where I live.
Nope the rid is federal they have to meet federal requirements to get it.
My state was strict for the standard DL. I got aggravated because I had to bring the same docs that I provided when I cot the standard.
They are in my state as well. The only difference is we require one proof of address the rid requires two.
I was given the option here in MO last July, chose a regular ID. Though it may be different this year.
In my state it's optional a lot of people just get it if they travel and it helps for people working on the military bases if they aren't military. I got it because I have family out of state and until recently I loved flying but with all those crashes this lady is staying grounded lol.
Whenever you see government issued papers or for example, your driver's license or state issued ID and your name is spelled in all capital letters, well.... That's bad. When I heard that Trump is pro real ID it made me wonder about who or what Trump really wants for us.
Do you even know what a real ID does?
It's the exact same thing as a regular ID except you have to prove your legal status, ie. bring a passport, birth certificate, green card, etc
It's designed so illegals can't get IDs anymore.
I'm aware of that but there's more to it. RFID
There are no RFIDs in Real IDs.
You're thinking about Enhanced DLs.
https://www.dhs.gov/enhanced-drivers-licenses-what-are-they
One potential problem with the real ID compliant drivers licenses being allowed as IDs for voting purposes is that several states issue drivers licenses to illegals!
With the real id you are required to prove your legal presence in the country. It makes license and ID requirements uniform, instead of varying from state to state. Sauce...me lol it's literally my job to know this.
When I lived in CA a few years ago, you could apply for a driver's license online, and one of the questions was, "Are you a U.S. citizen?", so you could just check that if you were an illegal. So then illegals with such a drivers license would seem to be able to use that as proof they were a citizen to vote. They already had online voter registration, so I assume it was all tied together.
Yes, however with Real IDs it actually requires you to prove that. They give you a list of documents that you have to bring in order to confirm your legal status.
The anarchists and libertarian retards roll around thinking that if only the government would just go and never look at anybody that everything would be peachy keen and great. Wrong. You put real ID power in the hands of the deep state, next you know we're all living in a police state. You put real ID power in the hands of the white hats? The next thing you know you have legitimate, defensible election results. Choose wisely.
I can't tell where you stand on it, but I'm wondering how we EVER can verify citizenship for voting without providing a birth certificate as proof? And why is it a big deal to have to provide one proof of address (your electric bill doesn't mean they suddenly can tap into your bank account)? Social security number needs to be provided in MANY scenarios, also when applying for public benefits, etc. so they have all that info on a LOT of people already. Maybe I'm missing something? To get a passport, you need to give the govt everything but your firstborn child. What is the difference?
Nah, not really. If you have a passport you're in already baked into the Real ID program and everything connected to it. Same goes for other cards one might find in their pocket.
Not to mention, regardless if you have a Real ID or not.... we've been contributing data for many years to these nefarious programs and dystopian hypotheticals that OP lays out. Everything is collected and connected online.
Fear of the dark? Nah fren... anons are filled with light! Walk and talk proudly without worry. If you fear a knock at the door because you recently upgraded to a Real ID, I got news for ya. It's not because of the shiny new plastic card.
EXACTLY!!!
It's a digital ID for the new blockchain currency coming when the fiat dollar does.Not far off now.
It means we're supposed to STAND AGAINST IT. Give Trump the mandate to oppose it! Make this the new "vaccine position" that he got booed at rallies over! REAL ID IS NIGHTMARE FUEL. The only people in America who should be subject to such tracking are government employees!!!!! This is a violation of our rights!
Explain the nightmare. It’s a DL that you have to prove citizenship to get and has standardized security features so that no state can have weak security on theirs.
https://greatawakening.win/p/19Ax7OGi6n/you-know-with-all-this-talk-abou/c/
https://www.eff.org/issues/real-id
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety” Benjamin Franklin.
Proof of citizenship, social security# card, birth certificate and bank statements or utilities bill as form of verification.... Basically could just turn it into voting ID
Exactly. How else are we supposed to verify citizenship, etc. for voting? Having people trucking around a notarized copy of their birth certificate at the polls every year is a lot more iffy imho. Birth Cert doubles as proof of citizenship. I don't see how verifying your actual address is so terrible??
I still have my fake ID; however, I’m not enamored with boarding a Boeing jet anytime soon anyway. Kinda makes me feel young again, having a fake ID and not participating in post-Facebook lifelog 2.0.
Had to get my license that is real ID compliant, which consisted of bringing birth cert, social security card, utility bill with address, and previous driver license. All stuff the government already has on me.
I purposely avoided getting the real id, my license says *not a federal ID. I figure I won't be traveling unless I get a passport * edit: Ive been a citizen for 50 years I don't feel I need to prove anything to them... I agree with you
I got mine before covid. Twasn't easy. Birth certificate and marriage license (which I couldn't find so had to pay the state of VA big bucks to send in a hurry). When my state started handing drivers licenses to illegals like candy to kids, it infuriated me.
In Vermont it is supposed to change next month, but I still have a choice to not get one. If you have a passport, you do not have to get one, and the only reason I would need it would be to go to Canada, or to fly on a plane. My son should get one, but I have no plans to fly anywhere. My drivers license is still accepted as ID for operating a vehicle, to prove ID. Since way back I did not want my identity known to any Government agency, I even put off getting a drivers license till my 30's, when employers began to demand them. I had dreams of living an undetected, unnumbered life, for years my ss # and proof of address was enough. Pardon me, but I am not losing my religion, there are so many signs that the mark of the beast is nigh, I will take that seriously.
If you are typing this, you are already marked by the beast. All our electronics gathers data 24/7 by regular corporations, let alone NSA, CIA and co. They already have your 100% profile down to what time of the day you go the bathroom on server somwhere in AZ.
Real ID is a regular ID with the exception that you have to prove your legal status. It has not biometrics, no face scans, etc
Just like voter ID is a scam toward AI controlled future National ID.
Why need voter ID if we kick out every illegal, secure our border and voting registery?
Because otherwise democrats will just mail in 1 million unverified ballots and return to the status quo.
Devils advocate here: all the things you worry about are already the reality, that reality just isn't overt or published in any real way(secret of-book lists, rather the rule than the exception)..
That said proving who you are is kind of an integral(no matter how unfortunate) reality when it comes to all the benefits that comes with a functioning society(illegals getting handouts and money they have no real claim to is the flipside to this....)
So a real-ID compliant card VS genetic identification or some such........
Lots of things will still be possible without any ID and an effort is likely to be made(It certainly should) to make that the case with as many things as possible(phasing out ID requirements for many things may be in the future cards as things actually start working but until there are no illegals and similar problems around separating one from the other is an unfortunate necessity)
Real-ID for critical stuff only(voting would be one.....)
Tack on you must present a Voter ID to vote and…..it ded.
I wonder what A.i. is finding out about the statistical tenor and intensity, or amplitude, of this thread. that is what I wonderr
Some 10 years ago I was in a brief about digital IDs. Said to be key in eliminating all types of fraud. The plan was to roll out encrypted cards capable of storing health, banking, verified identification and more. Protected by some eight layers of encryption and biometrics so if separated from the owner the possibility of unauthorized use was practically non-existent. Said to be implemented though the SS system, knowing at the time, it needed to be cleansed and upgraded. This is not new, in fact the system was created six years before the brief and shelved for future use. I'll leave to you experts to debate over that .
It's been promoted for years now. There have been posters at the DMV for years. All that's happening now is enforcement. No flying, not even domestic, no crossing into Canada. etc. I do wonder if a passport over rides the requirement?
Whatever they’re sellin, I ain’t buyin.