"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:47:23 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..


It would be even more prudent to completely do away with any form of ID?
No
birth certificate, no diplomas, no paperwork of any kind which
identifies
a
person. You say you're Gene, I say I'm Gene, and no one can tell the
difference, except maybe your mom. But, that would assume she was given
the
right child at the hospital, where no form of ID was used. Interesting.


I like it. Think about it .... 100 years ago nobody had a driver's
license
or a social security card number. Many probably didn't even have a birth
certificate.

It gives cause to really think about where we are heading. Implanted
chips
at birth is not out of the question.

Eisboch


Who would own your home? The guy with the biggest gun?

Worked in the wild west before identity theft.

Eisboch

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 10:10:33 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Oct 31, 9:07?am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 08:58:37 -0700, Chuck Gould

wrote:
secondly there is no workable way to
sort out who is a legal resident and who is not.

In a sense.

I don't know what you do, but when we rent, positive identification, a
credit check, valid bank account and positive work history are all
part of qualifying to rent one of ours.

While it dosen't keep one from renting to immigrants, legal or
otherwise, it cuts down on the possibility.

We check ID, verify employment, and run a credit check as well.
It's possible to get a driver's license without being a citizen, most
of the illegals have a job of some kind, and it's pretty easy to
qualify for many types of credit. It would be tough for a guy who just
sneaked over the border last week to have enough stuff together, but
pretty easy for somebody who came across last year to have as many
credentials as a freshly graduated college student.

Possible, but unlikely.

At least around here.

Good point though.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:20:13 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

Wouldn't it be more prudent and cost effective to have chips implanted
at birth? No more lost children or adults, in case of emergency you
could be immediately located and identified, and the government would
know where you are at any given time. No more terrorism!

--

If I could get on a plane without doing the airport hokey pokey, buy
things by waving my hand at the cash register and make it harder for
someone to impersonate me at the bank I would take a chip today.

If something like this happened to you, I think you'd carve that chip out of
your skin with a dull knife in an instant:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/17/ny...icologist.html

On Oct 31, 2:23 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:55:16 -0400, Gene Kearns





wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:50:30 GMT, penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:16:17 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:36 -0400, penned the following
|well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:17:12 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:
|
|USA Today reports this morning that Homeland Security has ordered one
|of its divisions, (the USCG) to define a plan to positively identify
|boaters. The rationale is that small boats could be loaded with
|explosives and used to
|blow up military or commercial vessels, ala USS Cole. Until the USCG
|presents its plan we don't know the details, but possible requirements
|*could* include, at a minimum, carrying a national Boater ID card.
|(Something the Administration seems to favor, based on its proposals
|in several areas).
|
|
|
|I don't know where USA Today got their information, but the USCG
|proposal specifically REJECTS creation of any additional or special
|ID. They adamantly DO NOT want one. The idea is that any photo ID such
|as a drivers license or state issued ID in lieu of a drivers license
|would be all that is needed.
|
|
|Not so, Dana Goward, director of Coast Guard maritime domain
|awareness, is "very concerned about people doing harm with small
|vessels" and that it is "time to look at this other gap."
|
|Adm. Thad Allen, commandant of the Coast Guard says, "... that the
|issue needed extra attention." Allen is, also, in favor of
|"requir[ing] boat operators to have a special license," because that
|apparently has some magical power to allow us to "know to a degree of
|certainty who are operating boats out there."
|
|
|The USCG WRITTEN proposal specifically and emphaticaly rejects the
|idea of a new, separate ID. They want to require that you carry a
|drivers license or other similar ID.
|

Cite?

You don't need one, Gene. The USCG is already being asked to do a

In other words, you don't have any idea what the final WRITTEN
proposal will "specifically and emphatically" recommend or reject and
you're just mumbling through your hat?

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:23:28 -0400, penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:55:16 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:50:30 GMT, penned the following
|well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
||On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:16:17 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:
||
||On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:36 -0400, penned the following
||well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
||
||On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:17:12 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:
||
||USA Today reports this morning that Homeland Security has ordered one
||of its divisions, (the USCG) to define a plan to positively identify
||boaters. The rationale is that small boats could be loaded with
||explosives and used to
||blow up military or commercial vessels, ala USS Cole. Until the USCG
||presents its plan we don't know the details, but possible requirements
||*could* include, at a minimum, carrying a national Boater ID card.
||(Something the Administration seems to favor, based on its proposals
||in several areas).
||
||
||
||I don't know where USA Today got their information, but the USCG
||proposal specifically REJECTS creation of any additional or special
||ID. They adamantly DO NOT want one. The idea is that any photo ID such
||as a drivers license or state issued ID in lieu of a drivers license
||would be all that is needed.
||
||
||Not so, Dana Goward, director of Coast Guard maritime domain
||awareness, is "very concerned about people doing harm with small
||vessels" and that it is “time to look at this other gap."
||
||Adm. Thad Allen, commandant of the Coast Guard says, "... that the
||issue needed extra attention." Allen is, also, in favor of
||"requir[ing] boat operators to have a special license," because that
||apparently has some magical power to allow us to "know to a degree of
||certainty who are operating boats out there."
||
||
||The USCG WRITTEN proposal specifically and emphaticaly rejects the
||idea of a new, separate ID. They want to require that you carry a
||drivers license or other similar ID.
||
|
|Cite?
|
|You don't need one, Gene.

No, you need one....

.....if you make a statement in this newsgroup that doesn't hold
water..... prepare to be asked for a citation. I posted the public
statements of the head of that organization and a citation to prove
that I didn't pull that bit of info from the inner recesses. You've
struck a pose, saying just the opposite of the words of the
commandant.... thus, if you know something to the contrary of what
has been published and cited, you need your own refuting citation.


|The USCG is already being asked to do a lot more with
|less funding. They can't even get obsolete worn out equipment replaced that was
|budgeted years ago. That includes many boats. Why on earth would they want to
|add the huge job of issuing and administering boater ID's? They don't have the
|money or manpower to keep up with what is already on their plate. Sheesh.

I agree with that 110%, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with
your unsupported statement.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:47:23 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .


It would be even more prudent to completely do away with any form of ID?
No
birth certificate, no diplomas, no paperwork of any kind which identifies
a
person. You say you're Gene, I say I'm Gene, and no one can tell the
difference, except maybe your mom. But, that would assume she was given
the
right child at the hospital, where no form of ID was used. Interesting.


I like it. Think about it .... 100 years ago nobody had a driver's license
or a social security card number. Many probably didn't even have a birth
certificate.

It gives cause to really think about where we are heading. Implanted chips
at birth is not out of the question.

Eisboch


Who would own your home? The guy with the biggest gun?

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:08:31 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:03:43 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:46:09 -0500, John H. penned the following well
|considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
|
||You and Chuck both seem to say nothing is necessary because it's not
||perfection. I disagree with that attitude. ID's can be developed that have
||much more than a picture imprinted thereon. But, those won't be perfect
||either.
||
||I disagree with the attitude that since perfection is unobtainable, we
||should do nothing.
|
|No. What I am saying is that adding yet another piece of paper to
|those already required will not enhance security any more than giving
|illegal aliens a driver's license does.
|
|We had a sufficient paper trail to have deported most, if not all, of
|the perps from 9/11, but that did us no good. I already have a
|passport.... what would a national id do that it won't?
|
|A passport, or something similar, should be a requirement for everyone. I
|like it.

That, I don't mind..... duplicating it with another redundant layer of
incompetent bureaucracy is what makes me crazy...

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:03:43 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:46:09 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:


|You and Chuck both seem to say nothing is necessary because it's not
|perfection. I disagree with that attitude. ID's can be developed that have
|much more than a picture imprinted thereon. But, those won't be perfect
|either.
|
|I disagree with the attitude that since perfection is unobtainable, we
|should do nothing.

No. What I am saying is that adding yet another piece of paper to
those already required will not enhance security any more than giving
illegal aliens a driver's license does.

We had a sufficient paper trail to have deported most, if not all, of
the perps from 9/11, but that did us no good. I already have a
passport.... what would a national id do that it won't?

A passport, or something similar, should be a requirement for everyone. I
like it.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 17:06:25 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:47:23 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
...


It would be even more prudent to completely do away with any form of ID?
No
birth certificate, no diplomas, no paperwork of any kind which
identifies
a
person. You say you're Gene, I say I'm Gene, and no one can tell the
difference, except maybe your mom. But, that would assume she was given
the
right child at the hospital, where no form of ID was used. Interesting.


I like it. Think about it .... 100 years ago nobody had a driver's
license
or a social security card number. Many probably didn't even have a birth
certificate.

It gives cause to really think about where we are heading. Implanted
chips
at birth is not out of the question.

Eisboch


Who would own your home? The guy with the biggest gun?

Worked in the wild west before identity theft.

Eisboch


Exactly.

On Oct 31, 3:54?pm, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:53:40 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:





On Oct 31, 2:23 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:55:16 -0400, Gene Kearns

wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:50:30 GMT, penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:16:17 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 12:13:36 -0400, penned the following
|well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:
|
|On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 07:17:12 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:
|
|USA Today reports this morning that Homeland Security has ordered one
|of its divisions, (the USCG) to define a plan to positively identify
|boaters. The rationale is that small boats could be loaded with
|explosives and used to
|blow up military or commercial vessels, ala USS Cole. Until the USCG
|presents its plan we don't know the details, but possible requirements
|*could* include, at a minimum, carrying a national Boater ID card.
|(Something the Administration seems to favor, based on its proposals
|in several areas).
|
|
|
|I don't know where USA Today got their information, but the USCG
|proposal specifically REJECTS creation of any additional or special
|ID. They adamantly DO NOT want one. The idea is that any photo ID such
|as a drivers license or state issued ID in lieu of a drivers license
|would be all that is needed.
|
|
|Not so, Dana Goward, director of Coast Guard maritime domain
|awareness, is "very concerned about people doing harm with small
|vessels" and that it is "time to look at this other gap."
|
|Adm. Thad Allen, commandant of the Coast Guard says, "... that the
|issue needed extra attention." Allen is, also, in favor of
|"requir[ing] boat operators to have a special license," because that
|apparently has some magical power to allow us to "know to a degree of
|certainty who are operating boats out there."
|
|
|The USCG WRITTEN proposal specifically and emphaticaly rejects the
|idea of a new, separate ID. They want to require that you carry a
|drivers license or other similar ID.
|

Cite?

You don't need one, Gene. The USCG is already being asked to do a

In other words, you don't have any idea what the final WRITTEN
proposal will "specifically and emphatically" recommend or reject and
you're just mumbling through your hat?

You keep harping about some imaginary FINAL proposal. I'm telling you what is on
the table right now, and where the USCG stands. No new "Boater ID" is at all
likely to happen. You and Dubya apparently have the same source for "bad
intelligence"

Are you a ditto head?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My "bad intelligence" is courtesy of some guy in rec boats who wrote:

"The USCG WRITTEN proposal specifically and emphaticaly rejects the
idea of a new, separate ID. They want to require that you carry a
drivers license or other similar ID."

He seems to have the same handle that you use. That's pretty
unfortunate, it makes it hard to tell the guy who claims there is a
WRITTEN proposal apart from the guy who belittles others for asking
where to see a copy of the written proposal.