against, the government offices aready keep losing details of its citizens,and ii wouldnt trust them with anymore, criminals will catch up in a flash and surpass it with near perfect copies,thus rendering the cards useless, and not fit for the purpose they were intended. another waste of money
It is just as easy to steal, clone and generally tamper with an I.D. card as it is with a credit card. The difference is, the amount of personal information stored on an I.D. card, a minimum of 50 items of information are proposed. A persons name, address, photograph and fingerprint are all that is necessary. Our government are not proposing an identity card, they are proposing a full and complete record of our lives stored on a microchip. There is no evidence that I.D. cards reduce crime in those countries that already have them, e.g. Belgium, Spain etc. In fact cyber and identity crime has increased in all countries using such cards. Some of the coutries which insist on compulsory cards regularly harass, discriminate against and deny services to individuals based solely on electronically stored information. I have the basic right in my country, Great Britain, to remain anonymous if I so wish. There is no evidence whatsoever that such cards provide additional protection to citizens. We have not had a centralized I.D. card system for around 50 years. We do not need one now. The only other country in Europe that maintained a centralized identity system was Germany, in the first half of the twentieth century. look what happened to their population when the system was in the hands of an unscrupulous government. I will not allow my inalianable right as a free British citizen to be erroded for the sake of totalitarian governmental control. I will never carry an identity card.
I think bringing in a dna data base is a good idea. If they take a babies dna at birth and enter it onto the system plus take everyone elses (i know some will slip through the net) when they visit the docs or call on them to make appointments it could help in reducing crime etc... whatdo you think???
Would this be a cost-effective way to nail criminals? The cost of building the database would be huge, and DNA evidence isn't as conclusive as people think. How would the DNA data be used? To look for genes that might detemine a person's predisposition to commit crime? With the database in place, would insurance companies insist on a gene screening for predisposition to certain dieseases before providing cover? Too many questions IMO. Of course there would be considerable debate on the subject before agreeing to introduce it. Hopefully.
