Here we go again. The STUPID COWARD for everyone.... again:
Here's what I said idiot:
To which you replied:
It's all there for all to see. Do you even know what a thread means? What a stupid cunt. You're laughable. I really feel sorry for you now...well, maybe not.
Actually most everyone disagreed with me. What I said, but you're too stupid to understand and too much of a coward to actually quote , was this...
Maybe it's you who should stop posting the racist crap and move on to another THREAD. I'm starting to get tired of educating a stupid cunt like yourself for free.
As a early Christmas gift to audiopollution I'm not going to reply to you. Actually just repeating what you wrote is enough.
No I'm arguing that government issued photo ID's shouldn't allow for identity theft or false identities to be used. Thus illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to get them without an extensive background check.
Nick
Please, make up your mind. First you said you didn't want the government getting in your business (and neither do I.) Now you say you want an extensive background check for getting a photo I.D. That's the wrong direction to take this.
Ease restrictions on drivers licenses while reducing their validity in areas where they were never intended to have any use.
Please, make up your mind. First you said you didn't want the government getting in your business (and neither do I.) Now you say you want an extensive background check for getting a photo I.D. That's the wrong direction to take this.
Ease restrictions on drivers licenses while reducing their validity in areas where they were never intended to have any use.
I know you are doing this on purpose. You are smarter than that statement.
You know I said I don't want legal immigrants and citizens being forced to take these steps. They already have a license, social security card, etc.
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
This system would be impossibly expensive to implement and offer virtually no benefits. An agnostic system would be better and cheaper.
I know you are doing this on purpose. You are smarter than that statement.
You know I said I don't want legal immigrants and citizens being forced to take these steps. They already have a license, social security card, etc.
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
Nick
What determines that someone is an illegal immigrant?
Wouldn't a thorough background check have to be completed on each and every applicant before they are considered for a drivers license?
Remove the slack that has allowed a drivers license to become more than a drivers license.
This system would be impossibly expensive to implement and offer virtually no benefits. An agnostic system would be better and cheaper.
Again how would it be better when people an give false identities and board planes with them?
If someone is here legally, they went through a background check to gain their legal immigration status. If someone is going to get the same benefit while still being illegal, shouldn't we at least have the same expectation? Shouldn't we get any say about safety even while forgoing the patrolling and enforcement of our own borders?
What determines that someone is an illegal immigrant?
Wouldn't a thorough background check have to be completed on each and every applicant before they are considered for a drivers license?
Remove the slack that has allowed a drivers license to become more than a drivers license.
The background check is performed via the documents you must present when getting your drivers license for the first time. If you have to present a social security card, then you had to present your birth certificate from the United States to get that Soc Sec Card and prove you are who you say.
Likewise legal immigrants have to undergo a background check when attempting to migrate or stay for an extended reason in the United States. It was part of their application for a visa.
Since the illegal immigrant never obtained any paperwork to be allowed here. They never got a background check. They should be required to do so to get a license.
The background check is performed via the documents you must present when getting your drivers license for the first time. If you have to present a social security card, then you had to present your birth certificate from the United States to get that Soc Sec Card and prove you are who you say.
Likewise legal immigrants have to undergo a background check when attempting to migrate or stay for an extended reason in the United States. It was part of their application for a visa.
Since the illegal immigrant never obtained any paperwork to be allowed here. They never got a background check. They should be required to do so to get a license.
Nick
Thanks for clearing up some more questions I had. I'm glad there are at least some people here who take the care to respond with intelligence.
I speculated in an earlier post that you agreed with me that drivers licenses were a poor way to identify travellers, but I didn't get a response. I don't want to assume that you do agree with me, and I definitely want to know your thoughts on this.
I think I've made clear my thoughts on the validity of drivers licenses as positive ID for anything other than driving. Although there would be additional cost for US citizens to each apply for (and receive) a passport, I think the amortized cost of said passport is a miniscule amount to pay for greatly increased air security.
Thanks for clearing up some more questions I had. I'm glad there are at least some people here who take the care to respond with intelligence.
I speculated in an earlier post that you agreed with me that drivers licenses were a poor way to identify travellers, but I didn't get a response. I don't want to assume that you do agree with me, and I definitely want to know your thoughts on this.
I think I've made clear my thoughts on the validity of drivers licenses as positive ID for anything other than driving. Although there would be additional cost for US citizens to each apply for (and receive) a passport, I think the amortized cost of said passport is a miniscule amount to pay for greatly increased air security.
I think the reason drivers licenses are used for more than driving is simply because they are a form of identification. When you get your drivers license in California, you have to present proof of legal residence or your social security card. You also have to present your birth certificate or something equivelent the first time. You can even use your passport to as proof to get your license.
Since it requires background information to get it people accept if as proof of that background information. Most people don't carry around their birth certificate, but since you needed one to get your license they accept that instead.
In California you fill out the same application to get a personal ID as you do to get a drivers license. The only difference is passing a driving test to drive. All the other background information is the same.
The should change that just so that an illegal immigrant can get a license. First they are acting illegally in being here. Second they most likely have a valid drivers license from their home country that shows they are capable of driving. Third if we do decide it should be at least as much work for them to get it, if not more since we are giving them documentation that likely allow them to act pretty much as a quasi-citizen. In return for that we should be able to ask a little something.
I think the reason drivers licenses are used for more than driving is simply because they are a form of identification. When you get your drivers license in California, you have to present proof of legal residence or your social security card. You also have to present your birth certificate or something equivelent the first time. You can even use your passport to as proof to get your license.
Since it requires background information to get it people accept if as proof of that background information. Most people don't carry around their birth certificate, but since you needed one to get your license they accept that instead.
In California you fill out the same application to get a personal ID as you do to get a drivers license. The only difference is passing a driving test to drive. All the other background information is the same.
The should change that just so that an illegal immigrant can get a license. First they are acting illegally in being here. Second they most likely have a valid drivers license from their home country that shows they are capable of driving. Third if we do decide it should be at least as much work for them to get it, if not more since we are giving them documentation that likely allow them to act pretty much as a quasi-citizen. In return for that we should be able to ask a little something.
Nick
I've been convinced that SB60 is a bad idea.
I'll concede that, under the circumstances that have allowed it become an widely accepted form of positive ID, allowing illegal immigrants to receive a drivers license is a severe problem.
If this outcome had been anticipated years ago, I'm sure that the Government would have enacted much stricter guidelines as to the forms of ID that are valid for specific activities.
Again how would it be better when people an give false identities and board planes with them?
How can they board a plane with false identities?
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
If someone is here legally, they went through a background check to gain their legal immigration status.
That's not true at all. I'm here legally and I've never been through a background check. There's no way to decide who gets one and who doesn't. It's all or nothing.
That's not true at all. I'm here legally and I've never been through a background check. There's no way to decide who gets one and who doesn't. It's all or nothing.
Bunge you may not have remembered it but you had to produce proof of who you were to get your social security number. Often you have to do this as well when you FIRST get your license. (not the follow ups) Maybe you don't remember taking your birth certificate down to the office, but you definately had to take some sort of proof as to who you are and verify it.
They can board the plane with a false identity because the Taxpayer Identification Number does not require any sort of proof that you are who you claim. It doesn't require a social security number, a birth certificate, a divorce decree, marriage license or anything at all.
You could literally make up an identity and get a license with it.
They can board the plane with a false identity because the Taxpayer Identification Number does not require any sort of proof that you are who you claim. It doesn't require a social security number, a birth certificate, a divorce decree, marriage license or anything at all.
You could literally make up an identity and get a license with it.
Erm. What?
Are you saying that a Taxpayer Identification Number is enough ID to get a drivers license? Or that it can also be used to procure other useful ID?
If that's the case, then the problem lies fully with the acceptance of such a shoddy piece of paper (T.I.N.) as proof of identity.
I'm becoming more wary of US Homeland Security with each passing post in this thread. There seems to be a lot of reform needed.
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
Nick, this is the key. It's better to make the drivers license lose some of its potential rather than try and make it sacred. Agnostic licensing.
You are missing the point. ILLEGALS should not get a LEGAL document. Giving them a LEGAL document CONDONES ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR.
Exactly.
But you guys are discussing something that will never come to pass.
If anyone of you in Los Angeles listen to KFI talk radio and specifically the John & Ken Show, you'd know that they are working directly with the people who started the Save Our License site to gather enough signatures to stop SB60 and put it to a vote by the people.
SB60 will get crushed when it is decided by the voters and rightly so.
Are you saying that a Taxpayer Identification Number is enough ID to get a drivers license? Or that it can also be used to procure other useful ID?
If that's the case, then the problem lies fully with the acceptance of such a shoddy piece of paper (T.I.N.) as proof of identity.
I'm becoming more wary of US Homeland Security with each passing post in this thread. There seems to be a lot of reform needed.
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
In California, with the just signed SB60, yes you can get a drivers license with just a TIN.
The problem isn't with Homeland Security. (although yes I do believe our own military should be put to use on our own borders) The TIN expressly says it is not to be used in the manner California has chosen to use it. The issue is with certain California Democrats who want to give illegal immigrants drivers licenses without them truly having to reveal true information about themselves. They loath to do so since they are illegal and another government agency (READ Federal INS) could deport them if they had, say a huge database that told where all of them lived)
So they want to get the license, but reveal no true background information including even there name if necessary.
Nick, this is the key. It's better to make the drivers license lose some of its potential rather than try and make it sacred. Agnostic licensing.
Why do you keep endorse solutions that put 99.5% of everybody in a worse position to take care of that .5%?
99.5% of everyone had to give some proof of who they are to get their license and they get to use their license as verification of that proof.
.5% of the people (illegal immigrants) don't wish to do this so the other 99.5% should do something different. This has been the theme of all your threads.
99.5% of the people aren't going to do something different. They are going to demand something different of the .5%.
You can screme tyranny of the majority, but this has to do with a group that has already broken the law and thus has no rights. They shouldn't mind having to actually verify who they are to get a document that gives them quite a few rights that come with documentation.
You are missing the point. ILLEGALS should not get a LEGAL document. Giving them a LEGAL document CONDONES ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR.
Actually BR, you're the one that's missing the point. An agnostic system doesn't give illegals a drivers license and it doesn't condone illegal behavior. All it does is give someone a license to drive if they can drive well enough (and are of age.)
I can't believe you're supporting the Feds putting troops at every DMV. It's impractical, expensive and intrusive. There is no good way to find out if someone trying to get a license is legal or not, unless you want to make everyone bring a SS Card, Birth Certificate and a mess of other papers. You're arguing for a larger, more expensive bureaucracy that harms legitimate citizens by intruding in their personal lives.
Quit trying to use the DMV to find anyone. Don't bother advertising the fact that anyone can get a license, just like right now no one advertises that an illegal can register to vote in thirty seconds.
Comments
Originally posted by Gilsch
Here we go again. The STUPID COWARD for everyone.... again:
Here's what I said idiot:
To which you replied:
It's all there for all to see.
Actually most everyone disagreed with me. What I said, but you're too stupid to understand and too much of a coward to actually quote , was this...
Maybe it's you who should stop posting the racist crap and move on to another THREAD. I'm starting to get tired of educating a stupid cunt like yourself for free.
As a early Christmas gift to audiopollution I'm not going to reply to you. Actually just repeating what you wrote is enough.
Originally posted by steve666
As a early Christmas gift to audiopollution I'm not going to reply to you. Actually just repeating what you wrote is enough.
I think it's good that you didn't even attempt a reply at that one.
Originally posted by trumptman
No I'm arguing that government issued photo ID's shouldn't allow for identity theft or false identities to be used. Thus illegal immigrants shouldn't be allowed to get them without an extensive background check.
Nick
Please, make up your mind. First you said you didn't want the government getting in your business (and neither do I.) Now you say you want an extensive background check for getting a photo I.D. That's the wrong direction to take this.
Ease restrictions on drivers licenses while reducing their validity in areas where they were never intended to have any use.
Originally posted by bunge
Please, make up your mind. First you said you didn't want the government getting in your business (and neither do I.) Now you say you want an extensive background check for getting a photo I.D. That's the wrong direction to take this.
Ease restrictions on drivers licenses while reducing their validity in areas where they were never intended to have any use.
I know you are doing this on purpose. You are smarter than that statement.
You know I said I don't want legal immigrants and citizens being forced to take these steps. They already have a license, social security card, etc.
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
This system would be impossibly expensive to implement and offer virtually no benefits. An agnostic system would be better and cheaper.
Originally posted by trumptman
I know you are doing this on purpose. You are smarter than that statement.
You know I said I don't want legal immigrants and citizens being forced to take these steps. They already have a license, social security card, etc.
The ONLY people who have to have their backgrounds probed, fingerprints checked, etc. are illegal immgrants and even then only if they want a license to drive.
Nick
What determines that someone is an illegal immigrant?
Wouldn't a thorough background check have to be completed on each and every applicant before they are considered for a drivers license?
Remove the slack that has allowed a drivers license to become more than a drivers license.
Originally posted by bunge
This system would be impossibly expensive to implement and offer virtually no benefits. An agnostic system would be better and cheaper.
Again how would it be better when people an give false identities and board planes with them?
If someone is here legally, they went through a background check to gain their legal immigration status. If someone is going to get the same benefit while still being illegal, shouldn't we at least have the same expectation? Shouldn't we get any say about safety even while forgoing the patrolling and enforcement of our own borders?
Nick
Originally posted by audiopollution
What determines that someone is an illegal immigrant?
Wouldn't a thorough background check have to be completed on each and every applicant before they are considered for a drivers license?
Remove the slack that has allowed a drivers license to become more than a drivers license.
The background check is performed via the documents you must present when getting your drivers license for the first time. If you have to present a social security card, then you had to present your birth certificate from the United States to get that Soc Sec Card and prove you are who you say.
Likewise legal immigrants have to undergo a background check when attempting to migrate or stay for an extended reason in the United States. It was part of their application for a visa.
Since the illegal immigrant never obtained any paperwork to be allowed here. They never got a background check. They should be required to do so to get a license.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
The background check is performed via the documents you must present when getting your drivers license for the first time. If you have to present a social security card, then you had to present your birth certificate from the United States to get that Soc Sec Card and prove you are who you say.
Likewise legal immigrants have to undergo a background check when attempting to migrate or stay for an extended reason in the United States. It was part of their application for a visa.
Since the illegal immigrant never obtained any paperwork to be allowed here. They never got a background check. They should be required to do so to get a license.
Nick
Thanks for clearing up some more questions I had. I'm glad there are at least some people here who take the care to respond with intelligence.
I speculated in an earlier post that you agreed with me that drivers licenses were a poor way to identify travellers, but I didn't get a response. I don't want to assume that you do agree with me, and I definitely want to know your thoughts on this.
I think I've made clear my thoughts on the validity of drivers licenses as positive ID for anything other than driving. Although there would be additional cost for US citizens to each apply for (and receive) a passport, I think the amortized cost of said passport is a miniscule amount to pay for greatly increased air security.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Thanks for clearing up some more questions I had. I'm glad there are at least some people here who take the care to respond with intelligence.
I speculated in an earlier post that you agreed with me that drivers licenses were a poor way to identify travellers, but I didn't get a response. I don't want to assume that you do agree with me, and I definitely want to know your thoughts on this.
I think I've made clear my thoughts on the validity of drivers licenses as positive ID for anything other than driving. Although there would be additional cost for US citizens to each apply for (and receive) a passport, I think the amortized cost of said passport is a miniscule amount to pay for greatly increased air security.
I think the reason drivers licenses are used for more than driving is simply because they are a form of identification. When you get your drivers license in California, you have to present proof of legal residence or your social security card. You also have to present your birth certificate or something equivelent the first time. You can even use your passport to as proof to get your license.
Since it requires background information to get it people accept if as proof of that background information. Most people don't carry around their birth certificate, but since you needed one to get your license they accept that instead.
In California you fill out the same application to get a personal ID as you do to get a drivers license. The only difference is passing a driving test to drive. All the other background information is the same.
The should change that just so that an illegal immigrant can get a license. First they are acting illegally in being here. Second they most likely have a valid drivers license from their home country that shows they are capable of driving. Third if we do decide it should be at least as much work for them to get it, if not more since we are giving them documentation that likely allow them to act pretty much as a quasi-citizen. In return for that we should be able to ask a little something.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
I think the reason drivers licenses are used for more than driving is simply because they are a form of identification. When you get your drivers license in California, you have to present proof of legal residence or your social security card. You also have to present your birth certificate or something equivelent the first time. You can even use your passport to as proof to get your license.
Since it requires background information to get it people accept if as proof of that background information. Most people don't carry around their birth certificate, but since you needed one to get your license they accept that instead.
In California you fill out the same application to get a personal ID as you do to get a drivers license. The only difference is passing a driving test to drive. All the other background information is the same.
The should change that just so that an illegal immigrant can get a license. First they are acting illegally in being here. Second they most likely have a valid drivers license from their home country that shows they are capable of driving. Third if we do decide it should be at least as much work for them to get it, if not more since we are giving them documentation that likely allow them to act pretty much as a quasi-citizen. In return for that we should be able to ask a little something.
Nick
I've been convinced that SB60 is a bad idea.
I'll concede that, under the circumstances that have allowed it become an widely accepted form of positive ID, allowing illegal immigrants to receive a drivers license is a severe problem.
If this outcome had been anticipated years ago, I'm sure that the Government would have enacted much stricter guidelines as to the forms of ID that are valid for specific activities.
Originally posted by trumptman
Again how would it be better when people an give false identities and board planes with them?
How can they board a plane with false identities?
Originally posted by trumptman
If someone is here legally, they went through a background check to gain their legal immigration status.
That's not true at all. I'm here legally and I've never been through a background check. There's no way to decide who gets one and who doesn't. It's all or nothing.
Originally posted by bunge
How can they board a plane with false identities?
That's not true at all. I'm here legally and I've never been through a background check. There's no way to decide who gets one and who doesn't. It's all or nothing.
Bunge you may not have remembered it but you had to produce proof of who you were to get your social security number. Often you have to do this as well when you FIRST get your license. (not the follow ups) Maybe you don't remember taking your birth certificate down to the office, but you definately had to take some sort of proof as to who you are and verify it.
They can board the plane with a false identity because the Taxpayer Identification Number does not require any sort of proof that you are who you claim. It doesn't require a social security number, a birth certificate, a divorce decree, marriage license or anything at all.
You could literally make up an identity and get a license with it.
That is the difference.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
They can board the plane with a false identity because the Taxpayer Identification Number does not require any sort of proof that you are who you claim. It doesn't require a social security number, a birth certificate, a divorce decree, marriage license or anything at all.
You could literally make up an identity and get a license with it.
Erm. What?
Are you saying that a Taxpayer Identification Number is enough ID to get a drivers license? Or that it can also be used to procure other useful ID?
If that's the case, then the problem lies fully with the acceptance of such a shoddy piece of paper (T.I.N.) as proof of identity.
I'm becoming more wary of US Homeland Security with each passing post in this thread. There seems to be a lot of reform needed.
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
Nick, this is the key. It's better to make the drivers license lose some of its potential rather than try and make it sacred. Agnostic licensing.
Originally posted by bunge
Nick, this is the key. It's better to make the drivers license lose some of its potential rather than try and make it sacred. Agnostic licensing.
You are missing the point. ILLEGALS should not get a LEGAL document. Giving them a LEGAL document CONDONES ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR.
The Feds should simply post a guard at every California DMV and arrest and deport every god damn illegal that tries to get a license.
Originally posted by BR
You are missing the point. ILLEGALS should not get a LEGAL document. Giving them a LEGAL document CONDONES ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR.
Exactly.
But you guys are discussing something that will never come to pass.
If anyone of you in Los Angeles listen to KFI talk radio and specifically the John & Ken Show, you'd know that they are working directly with the people who started the Save Our License site to gather enough signatures to stop SB60 and put it to a vote by the people.
SB60 will get crushed when it is decided by the voters and rightly so.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Erm. What?
Are you saying that a Taxpayer Identification Number is enough ID to get a drivers license? Or that it can also be used to procure other useful ID?
If that's the case, then the problem lies fully with the acceptance of such a shoddy piece of paper (T.I.N.) as proof of identity.
I'm becoming more wary of US Homeland Security with each passing post in this thread. There seems to be a lot of reform needed.
Granting drivers licences to illegal immigrants almost pales when you consider that anyone in the US can create a new identity for themselves with such ease.
In California, with the just signed SB60, yes you can get a drivers license with just a TIN.
The problem isn't with Homeland Security. (although yes I do believe our own military should be put to use on our own borders) The TIN expressly says it is not to be used in the manner California has chosen to use it. The issue is with certain California Democrats who want to give illegal immigrants drivers licenses without them truly having to reveal true information about themselves. They loath to do so since they are illegal and another government agency (READ Federal INS) could deport them if they had, say a huge database that told where all of them lived)
So they want to get the license, but reveal no true background information including even there name if necessary.
I can't support that.
Nick
Originally posted by bunge
Nick, this is the key. It's better to make the drivers license lose some of its potential rather than try and make it sacred. Agnostic licensing.
Why do you keep endorse solutions that put 99.5% of everybody in a worse position to take care of that .5%?
99.5% of everyone had to give some proof of who they are to get their license and they get to use their license as verification of that proof.
.5% of the people (illegal immigrants) don't wish to do this so the other 99.5% should do something different. This has been the theme of all your threads.
99.5% of the people aren't going to do something different. They are going to demand something different of the .5%.
You can screme tyranny of the majority, but this has to do with a group that has already broken the law and thus has no rights. They shouldn't mind having to actually verify who they are to get a document that gives them quite a few rights that come with documentation.
Nick
Originally posted by BR
You are missing the point. ILLEGALS should not get a LEGAL document. Giving them a LEGAL document CONDONES ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR.
Actually BR, you're the one that's missing the point. An agnostic system doesn't give illegals a drivers license and it doesn't condone illegal behavior. All it does is give someone a license to drive if they can drive well enough (and are of age.)
I can't believe you're supporting the Feds putting troops at every DMV. It's impractical, expensive and intrusive. There is no good way to find out if someone trying to get a license is legal or not, unless you want to make everyone bring a SS Card, Birth Certificate and a mess of other papers. You're arguing for a larger, more expensive bureaucracy that harms legitimate citizens by intruding in their personal lives.
Quit trying to use the DMV to find anyone. Don't bother advertising the fact that anyone can get a license, just like right now no one advertises that an illegal can register to vote in thirty seconds.