Government identification? "Unnecessary and tyrannical" (1913).
"A tool for political surveillance and repression" (1921).
"A dangerous step... which could be used to control and monitor citizens" (1936).
FACT: Any 'schema' in the wrong hands can be abused. But, in the right hands? PANIC!
(media.patriots.win)
🚔 Crime & Democrats 💸
Submission statement: all of the hysteria about real ID has been around literally for over 120 years. The fact is That, in order for a nation to serve its citizens, it's government has to make sure those services go only to those citizens that are paying into the system. The schema itself, whatever form of identification they choose to use, has to serve that system. That's the only important thing.
The sword cuts both ways. It is largely due to the vigilant among us (looking at you, frogs) that we stand here today and are not living in a totally dystopian UK style police state.
In my view, real ID does not go far enough. And it will go farther. And here, hopefully, very soon. As you can see from the image attached to this post, The concept of having to prove citizenship in order to vote, while also claiming that there's no fraud in the system at all, has Democrats scared shitless. Let's go for that. When they squeal, when we catch flack, that's how we know we're over target.
What will keep us safe? Look back at what Q said. INTERNET BILL OF RIGHTS.