Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > You should take your own advice about reading before opening your mouth Eric. > > I asked for documented proof of the government spying on people > because they have a state issued ID and you replied with a statement > about the 'illegal domestic wiretaps'. >
That's an easy one: you get pulled over and the cop runs your record. Although I think you're drifting from the main point, and it's the point you ID mongers aren't getting: we already have our ID's verified and that's called a birth certificate or an immigration record. The "id" you're talking about is simply a derivative document of the facts a state should already know. Therefore voting should simply be a matter of providing any corroborating evidence that you are the person the state already knows about. While I think it's fine to have an "ID" as one form of that evidence, it shouldn't be the *THE ONLY* form allowed. As I've said, being so strict on corroborating evidence of state records is bureaucratically hyperbolic and therefore ridiculous. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:339418 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
