Information icon.svg Results for the 2023 RationalWiki Moderator Election have now been posted. Thank you for participating in this election, and congratulations to the winners!

Talk:REAL ID Act

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


what about those of us who, for one reason or another (like a horrible phobia of fiery car wrecks or simply no need for that damn thing) don't have driver's licences? Where would we get our REAL identities from? PFoster 19:38, 23 May 2008 (EDT)

Show us your papers please! Secret Squirrel 19:44, 23 May 2008 (EDT)
I'm pretty sure in California at least that at the DMV you can get an official state ID card which is not a driver's license. LiberalOfAnUnknownVariant (talk) 00:46, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I just experienced this for the first time, getting my driver's license renewed on Monday. All I had to do was show "proof of address", for which there were numerous documents that would qualify—such as a utility bill, a rental agreement, a bank statement, automobile registration, but not an old driver's license. I didn't have any of those with me when I was in line...but I did have my checkbook, which has my address on my checks. That worked. So really not that bad. -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I think most states have a state ID, which is basically identical to a driver's license, except that it doesn't let you drive. I've had a few friends that got them, so they could buy beer when they turned 21. I actually didn't get my license until I was 24, but I got my passport when I was 16, so I just used that if I needed ID for anything. Mcnamara12 (talk) 15:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
I've removed the "see also" to British ID cards as the horrible right-wing fascist Conservative British government junked them in 2010.--Weirdstuff (talk) 20:33, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Good news, and interesting but not surprising that it was the Tories who undid it. In the U.S., some states have passed legislation either denouncing REAL ID or prohibiting the implementation of it and effectively nullifying it. Then there are some states fully complying. The latter include California, New York, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Vermont, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and I'm about ready to throw up at this point. The states prohibiting implementation include Montana, Virginia, Arizona, New Hampshire, Georgia, South Carolina, Idaho, and Oklahoma. Someone remind me again why were we supposed to be voting for Democrats? Secret Squirrel (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Why do we have this article[edit]

Seriously. Just because Bush did it, doesn't mean it's bad. Bad justification aside, it's not unreasonable to have a standardized national ID system, is it? The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 03:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Well besides the costs to government it will also increase costs to businesses and make it harder to work. A similar system called E-verify was created to prevent undocumented immigrants from working here and it has failed. It will not make us safer and it will attack our privacy rights. It will also increase discrimination against immigrants and make it harder to be a trans person in America. The Brits have had the same proposals and Liberty has been against them for those reasons.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 04:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC) 04:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

'Proof of identity'[edit]

Can work both ways - you can 'prove' who you are not. And, given the non-communication interfaces in common use among government departments, there may well be fewer problems than some of these people imagine (especially if one uses 'multiple presentations' - full given name and shortened forms etc). Anna Livia (talk) 11:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Supporters of this are against government overreach yet this is government overreach[edit]

All the REAL ID is just a mountain of pointless bureaucracy that creates unnecessary problems for people. --Channel 48 EAS (talk) 23:23, 9 October 2021 (UTC)