More problems for the ID card bill?

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by andyl

Not sure of your point here but I regard myself as law abiding and, along with very many others will not be getting an ID card.

I agree with you here, I don't see the point of the card or it's benefit, the content of my wallet identifies me pretty accurately. I would put you in the 20 of the 80/20 then.

Originally Posted by andyl

Not bloody speed cameras again! As you rightly say though, a perception. Interesting you should mention crimes that people feel impact them. When I pointed out that the British Crime Survey showed such crimes falling (with the important exception of violent crime) the forum seemed to go into denial. And for those that followed that thread, the Commercial Crime survey is now out and yes rates falling there too. Actually the police are saying they ar so stretched with the current threat that they cannot effectively pursue things such as murder enquiries.

The BCS and other surveys take reported data, there are questions as to whether reported data is accurate as much petty crime is not reported and violent crimes that are gang on gang type crime are also not reported.

Originally Posted by andyl

Most major European countries have implemented the Schengen agreement (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_r...gen/13508.stm). We haven't.

Yet we have a Schengen with Irl, so an Irish citizen can come here on their photo driving licence as ID (or perhaps even less (photo student ID card?). Schengen is only equivilant to removing border controlls between the states of the US, we still do not have any idea of who remains in the country, recording arrivals only, not departures (I'm thinking non EU citizens here as EU have permenant leave to remain), how can you measure migration when you only have facts on the inbound numbers?

Originally Posted by andyl

Agreed. And don't forget Afganistan etc.

Well thats OK then

Originally Posted by SMHarman

The BCS and other surveys take reported data, there are questions as to whether reported data is accurate as much petty crime is not reported and violent crimes that are gang on gang type crime are also not reported.

We'd best not let the debate about methodolgy surface again but the BCS is not based on reported crime which is why it is regarded as the most reliuable indicatir of trends among the crimes its surveys. It's research based on interviews with 50,000 people, representative of the population as a whole, on their experience of crime.

Yet we have a Schengen with Irl, so an Irish citizen can come here on their photo driving licence as ID (or perhaps even less (photo student ID card?). Schengen is only equivilant to removing border controlls between the states of the US, we still do not have any idea of who remains in the country, recording arrivals only, not departures (I'm thinking non EU citizens here as EU have permenant leave to remain), how can you measure migration when you only have facts on the inbound numbers?

Agreed again. Bizarre isn't it that despite thirty years of terrorist threat our border with Ireland remained open and yet Schengen hasn't been implemented for traffic from across the rest of the EU and beyond. And yes, no recording of outbound traffic is crazy - that is, I believe, due to change.

Well thats OK then

Luv and peace!

[ntluser]

The problem will be getting all the illegal immmigrants to get ID cards, which in themselves will identify the bearers as illegal immigrants.

Self-evident really. If the illegal immigrants were going to admit to it, which is highly unlikely,they would have done it by now and New Labour would be capitalising on it, which they are not.

Blair's security policy is an incoherent shambles.

Having a security policy implies that you know who is in the country and you know where they are and what they are doing. Given that we have over 570,000 illegal immigrants, I would call that a serious breech.

We have an ineffective police force.

Greater Manchester Police has a crime clearup rate of 9%. Leicester admit to having trouble with gang crime.Other police authories have poor clearup rates too.

We have a politically controlled Intelligence service.

This was apparent from the dealings with Iraq, where the Intelligence service did not stand up against the view put forward by the PM. We were told that agents lives were at risk but reports were based on "old", out of date intelligence. The David Shayler case also exposed the misdeeds ofthe service.

We have an Immigration Service, which can't be bothered to effectively check who is coming into the country.

570.000+ illegal immigrants speaks volumes.

We have judges who are completely out of touch with life in the real world and reluctant to send career criminals and terrorists to prison for long periods.

Read about legal cases in the papers and note the inconsistencies in sentencing. Note the specification by judges that only short sentences are served.

We have a prison service that is more interested in getting prisoners out than keeping them in.

We have a prison service that is too keen to release prisoners back into the community and gives time off for good behaviour, rarely requiring the prisoner to serve the full sentence.

And we have a Crown Prosecution Service which wastes vast amounts of public money prosecuting cases they can't win and not prosecuting cases which they could.

Look at all the cases in the papers where guilty criminals were found innocent because of a technicality, lack of evidence etc. that should have been spotted before they went to trial or where generally law-abiding citizens were prosecuted in a way that offended the public conscience.


I'm beginning to think that Guy Fawkes had the right idea!!

Well, Andy it's a free country...at the moment...and the Guy Fawkes idea might be the only way to get rid of Blair.

I doubt whether this will satisfy you, but I don't have the time to dig up every single case. I guess we will just have to agree to differ.

Ntluser. I fail to see how ID cards are going to address the issue you raise regarding illegal immigration so do you support them?

As for the rest of your points, remove the 'read it in the paper' evidence and what are you left with. Not an awful lot. I suggest you change your paperv to one that cover the issues in some depth instead of spouting offensive rubbish (anyone seen the Express recently?!).

Crime rates are falling (with the important exception of violent crime). Don't disagree that detection rates are poor. What's the solution? The Intelligence Services politically led. Hardly new. Immigration? Borders will never be watertight. We don't though have an embarcation count either - so we don't know how many people are leaving the country. Personally though I'd be more concerned about the nation's wealth being squirrelled off to tax havens, a subject mysteriously not covered in alarmist tones on the front pages of the Express..

Interesting to see how you're looking for Catholic extremists to overthrow the Government though

[ntluser]

I never supported ID cards because they don't address the issue.

In various discussions on Cableforum I have advocated:-

a) putting more police on the streets, thereby increasing the risk of criminals being caught
b) building more prisons to take career criminals and terrorists permanently off the streets to stop them re-offending
c) having harsher and consistent sentencing with the requirement that those convicted will serve the full term of their sentence and would have their sentences lengthened for bad behaviour or failing to learn an appropriate trade
d) having a CPS service that uses its common sense and prosecutes those cases where it is certain of a prosecution i.e. it has plenty of valid evidence supported by reliable witnesses
e) having a prison service that has better internal security and focuses more on rehabitating prisoners, detoxing those prisoners with drugs problems if necessary
f) having an Immigration/Coastguard service which effectively monitors and controls who comes into and exits the country
g) changing the law so that their aren't loopholes for criminals to exploit.

In essence to build respect for the law by sharply increasing the risk of criminals being caught and being severely punished.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

It is likely that you average law abiding(ish) citizen will fork out the £100 and get themselves the ID card they need to legally remain in their country of birth, thus the first 57m or so cards will be pretty easy to issue

I think that figure is *incredibly* optimistic!

A lot of people won't bother, another lot will actively refuse, more won't be able to afford it and some will do their best to evade the system altogether.

Not forgetting those who will attempt to fiddle the system and get *two* or more ID cards for various nefarious purposes!

Some people will be good little citizens and stump up the cash, but it's going to be a *very* long slog (which IMO will be a *very* good thing!)

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Graham

Not forgetting those who will attempt to fiddle the system and get *two* or more ID cards for various nefarious purposes!

Still peddling that old joke are you Graham?

[Rob M]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Still peddling that old joke are you Graham?

Nice one, here we go again.

Perhaps rather than simply attack Graham's post (or, attack the poster) you would care to discuss your own opinion and explain how/why it differs?

I'm guessing that your next post might be something along the lines of:

"I don't need to do that, I've already exaplined myself plenty of times"

In that case why did you bother posting in the first place?

This isn't just aimed at you either Xaccers, there's too many people here that are willing to simply attack a post (or poster) by dropping some sort of "landmine" comment which is obviously only going to divert the thread and turn it from a sensible (but often heated) discussion into a thinly veiled game of one-up-manship between two or three posters.

Graham doesn't need to do that, he's explained himself many times!

Sorry Raist, couldn't resist. Mind like a playgroup and all that. Still a bit lightheartedness surely won't go amiss given the day you're having!

[Rob M]

Originally Posted by andyl

Graham doesn't need to do that, he's explained himself many times!

I'm sure Xaccers has as well, in fact I think most of what can be said has been said

Originally Posted by andyl

Sorry Raist, couldn't resist. Mind like a playgroup and all that. Still a bit lightheartedness surely won't go amiss given the day you're having!

That's ok, I've got a mind like a sewer (Besides, I'll sort you out later )

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Nice one, here we go again.

Perhaps rather than simply attack Graham's post (or, attack the poster) you would care to discuss your own opinion and explain how/why it differs?

I'm guessing that your next post might be something along the lines of:

"I don't need to do that, I've already exaplined myself plenty of times"

In that case why did you bother posting in the first place?

This isn't just aimed at you either Xaccers, there's too many people here that are willing to simply attack a post (or poster) by dropping some sort of "landmine" comment which is obviously only going to divert the thread and turn it from a sensible (but often heated) discussion into a thinly veiled game of one-up-manship between two or three posters.

As has been mentioned several times before, and I do not mind mentioning it again, with the ID card scheme, you will no longer be able to use the "day of the Jackel" technique to obtain legitimate fake id.
The technique relies on obtaining the birth certificate of someone who's dead, and claiming it as your own, knowing that the death certificates are not linked.
However, under the ID card scheme, these two important pieces of information will be linked, so should someone attempt to use a birth certificate of someone who is dead, it will be flashed up as an attempt at fraud.
Also, with the biometrics, and the not so well thought out idea of having every go to centres to have their information (fingerprints/iris scans) recorded, once that has been done, you can't have it done again, so even if you were to claim a different identity, as soon as you recorded your biometrics the second time, it would flash up as already existing and you'd be caught.
The only thing people could do would be to make false cards that look like the real thing, so joining blockbusters under using a fake id will still be possible, but should these fakes be used in anything that requires biometrics then it will show that it is a fake card when the wrong data or no data is pulled from the database.

[Rob M]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

<Snip Xaccers' explanation>

Thank you.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Raistlin

Thank you.

My pleasure

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

you will no longer be able to use the "day of the Jackel" technique to obtain legitimate fake id.

Since the government has not actually stated *how* cards will be obtained, nor the data validated it's a bit early for categorical statements like this.

Also, with the biometrics, and the not so well thought out idea of having every go to centres to have their information (fingerprints/iris scans) recorded, once that has been done, you can't have it done again, so even if you were to claim a different identity, as soon as you recorded your biometrics the second time, it would flash up as already existing and you'd be caught.

The methods of obtaining biometrics, or, indeed, exactly which biometrics are to be use have also not been finalised yet, nor how "false positives" will be weeded out, nor how security will be maintained to stop people perhaps using contact lenses to get a fake iris scan or overlays on their fingertips to create false prints etc, consequently this is only speculation.

The only thing people could do would be to make false cards that look like the real thing, so joining blockbusters under using a fake id will still be possible, but should these fakes be used in anything that requires biometrics then it will show that it is a fake card when the wrong data or no data is pulled from the database.

This presumes that there will be a plentiful supply of card readers that can validate the information on the card and, of course, they will have to include biometric readers that can validate your iris/ fingerprint/ whatever. All of this will, of course, cost large amounts of money.

[BBKing]

asked for either a passport or drivers licence copy sent and copies of front and back of card

How is a photograph of a biometric ID card any better than a photograph of a passport or driving licence? I fail to see how £19bn of our money would help this situation much, which strikes me as very much the fault of the online company.

We have an Immigration Service, which can't be bothered to effectively check who is coming into the country.

Actually, they can't check who's going out effectively, because they're concentrating on stopping people coming in to hit Government targets. According to the Register, anyway, and they spotted the Eurostar loophole on 5/7/2005, so they deserve a bit of credit.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08...rity_analysis/

We have judges who are completely out of touch with life in the real world and reluctant to send career criminals and terrorists to prison for long periods.

Doesn't stand up to scrutiny, since we have the highest prison population in Europe, someone must be sending people to prison for long periods. There isn't enough space in prisons (which is often why people get let out, as you hint), but that's a different question, and besides I've gone totally OT.

Guy Fawkes was a Briton with a religious motivation who was trained abroad in terrorism, and following his plot an entire religious community was vilified and discriminated against for centuries. Funny how things change.