[ExI] Immaculate Election
atymes at gmail.com
Mon Jan 18 18:22:41 UTC 2021
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 7:42 AM Dave Sill via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 10:10 AM spike jones via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> Americans have the right to refuse any form of personal identification.
>> Currently it isn’t used even for in-person voting in California. Many
>> activities do require identification, such as driving, but voting does not.
> Having an ID and being required to produce one are not the same.
The thinking is, if people are required to have an ID at all times, it is a
reasonable imposition to require that they produce it at any time. (This
can include having an RFID chip on said ID, and carrying said ID to not
block said RFID - e.g., don't carry it in a Faraday cage.)
> Article 4 of the constitution forbids the government from requiring
>> identification just to exist.
> Can you be more specific? I don't see it.
I think he meant Amendment 4: "The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be
Wherein "provide ID or you're arrested" constitutes an "unreasonable
search" of the person for ID. See above for how laws requiring producing
ID at any time just because you're assumed to have it, stems from being
required to have ID.
The reality is, even if everyone's supposed to have an ID, a lot of people
* The poor who are constantly too busy to get an ID.
* Those who simply forget (and make other bad life decisions that harm no
one but themselves).
* Accident and theft victims (which can be anyone).
* Assuming the ID must be valid as registered by some electronic system,
said system can be hacked - or, if the cop wants an excuse to arrest
someone who has not otherwise committed a crime (for instance, a black
person being in a neighborhood that a racist cop wants to keep white), the
cop can sabotage an ID reader and then (technically correctly) claim the
reader said the ID was fraudulent.
* Immigrants who find their application for IDs taking much longer than the
law mandates. They're legally required and presumed to have IDs, but they
haven't actually been issued IDs due to no fault of their own and there is
nothing they can do about it.
This would create a new class of criminals, who have done no other offense
to society. That itself is the problem being objected to.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat