41–50 of 144 posts
> We used to make fun of the Soviet Union for its lack of freedom of travel ("papers please"). You only need ID not pre-authorization. You don't have to get Idaho to authorize your vacation and Nebraska to allow you transit.
And the US is actually pretty good about not requiring you to always have Federal ID on you, compared to European countries.
> We used to make fun of the Soviet Union for its lack of freedom of travel ("papers please"). You only need ID not pre-authorization. You don't have to get Idaho to authorize your vacation and Nebraska to allow you transit.
> You only need ID not pre-authorization. To the extent the federal government requires valid state-issued ID for travel but neither mandates states to issue ID nor prohibits states from rescinding IDs that they have issued, you in effect do need pre-authorization, even if the actual pre-authorization regime is fairly light touch, granted by default for long terms without specific travel plans, and rarely revoked.
There's a lot of FUD in the article. Most (all?) states have no requirement to carry or present ID to officers - you only have to give your name, and sometimes your address depending on the state. There's no Federal requirement to carry ID. To operate a motor vehicle you need a driver's licence...but your passengers don't. What about riding the bus? You can get on the local Metro, Bolt bus, or Greyhound w/o an ID. Hi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it weren't in the Constitution even travel by horse would require a license and be a privilege. Travel by horse isn't in the Constitution.
The constitution defines govt rights. It does not define citizen rights. Check the 10th amendment
How will having to carry ID turn a country into an authoritarian dystopia? Is it just an American thing?
I ask because I live in a country with an authoritarian past and we still have to carry ID everywhere and people just don't see anything wrong with that. Should I try to persuade them otherwise?
Comparing an ID with "travel papers" is silly. An ID is an identification device given to everyone who wants one. "Travel papers" are licenses to travel. IDs are a tiny restriction on your freedom. Travel papers are a major restriction on your freedom. The stupid airfare taxes are a much bigger restriction on our freedom, IMO.
Three words: No Fly List. There is no transparency to that process, no way to find out if you're on it, no appeal, no recourse. That's tantamount to license to travel if not worse.
It's a black list compared to a white list (travel papers). This makes a huge difference as the default is that you are allowed to travel. Instead of having to convince some bureaucrat that you should be allowed to travel, the government just blocks a relatively small number of people from traveling. Only 500 Americans are on the list. So 1.5 x10^-4 percent of Americans are limited by it.
Also, no fly list only applies to one method of travel. You can still drive, train, or walk anywhere you want.
I've never had my ID checked to ride on a Greyhound bus.
http://papersplease.org/
Their other activities seem more productive, such as investigating what information the TSA and DHS keep on your travels, but which problem is it at the core here? The fact that the TSA asks to see my passport when I fly, or that the store that info along with my departure/arrival locations?
> We used to make fun of the Soviet Union for its lack of freedom of travel ("papers please"). You only need ID not pre-authorization. You don't have to get Idaho to authorize your vacation and Nebraska to allow you transit.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step ...