This is a first
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/29401prs20070417.html
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/29401prs20070417.html
Montana Declares Its Independence from National ID
- Thread starter KD7ONE
- Start date
- Status
vis-à-vis
Member
I want to move there more and more.
Lucky
Member
They're getting scared that maybe the dumn rednecks weren't wrong about gov'ts being born with 'original sin'.
Is there a Montana gov't dept. that helps people finding land? I looked at some realtors but they only sell vacation lots that cost more than a fancy house for a couple acres.
Is there a Montana gov't dept. that helps people finding land? I looked at some realtors but they only sell vacation lots that cost more than a fancy house for a couple acres.
As per current regulations, anyone without real=id will not be able to board aiplanes or enter federal buildings after May 2008.
If present trends continue in the states, maybe 10-15 states will not adopt? This could get interesting. However, I'm betting the feds will offer higher bribes and water down the requirements until the resisters toe the line.
As is the case with medical marijuana and a few other issues, there are those who will insist the states have no legal authority to reject any legislation excreted by Washington DC; supremecy clause and all that...
If present trends continue in the states, maybe 10-15 states will not adopt? This could get interesting. However, I'm betting the feds will offer higher bribes and water down the requirements until the resisters toe the line.
As is the case with medical marijuana and a few other issues, there are those who will insist the states have no legal authority to reject any legislation excreted by Washington DC; supremecy clause and all that...
gyp_c2
Member
ha...
...we dontneednostinkinidcards...
...we dontneednostinkinidcards...
Pietro Beretta
Member
Dont you live in New Hampshire?
I thought that was the hub of the free state project movment...
I thought that was the hub of the free state project movment...
Blackfork
Member
Cold Montana.
Global warming.
Global warming.
PinoyInFL
Member
As far as I understand it, this will be used to control illegal immigration. So why is there such a resistance to a national id? How else would you know who's a legal citizen/resident/alien and who isn't?
Now that we told Washington DC to stick it, I am starting to remember the past.
What I remember is when a domestic anti-terrorist bill was not passed in D.C.. After the bill was killed, the OKC bombing happenned. Then the bill was revived and could not get through Congress fast enough.
I would not be suprised to see a "terrorist" attack in Montana in the future. If it happens, we will know why and who is behind it.
It's amazing what the government will do to get legislation passed.
What I remember is when a domestic anti-terrorist bill was not passed in D.C.. After the bill was killed, the OKC bombing happenned. Then the bill was revived and could not get through Congress fast enough.
I would not be suprised to see a "terrorist" attack in Montana in the future. If it happens, we will know why and who is behind it.
It's amazing what the government will do to get legislation passed.
robertbank
Member
I would have thought a passport is sufficient ID for anyone in any country. Can't wait for the first Texan to be refused entry back into the US because he doesn't have a passport or whatever else the Dept. of Homeland Insecurity comes up with for ID requirements.
Talk about an agency that thrives on paranoia.
Take Care
Bob
Talk about an agency that thrives on paranoia.
Take Care
Bob
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
I fixed your sentence for you
robertbank
Member
More to the point whatever system you come up with somebody out there will forge it within minutes of it being produced.
Land mines along the southern border would be a major step forward. Mine the northern border while you are at it. We don't want the illegal Mexicans up here anymore than you want them down there. Just tell Homeland Security you don't want Canadian terrorists sneaking in their nuclear bombs into the States. That would mobilize the Washington State Minutemen into action for certain. Paranoia knows no bounds and the possibilities are endless.
Take Care
Bob
Land mines along the southern border would be a major step forward. Mine the northern border while you are at it. We don't want the illegal Mexicans up here anymore than you want them down there. Just tell Homeland Security you don't want Canadian terrorists sneaking in their nuclear bombs into the States. That would mobilize the Washington State Minutemen into action for certain. Paranoia knows no bounds and the possibilities are endless.
Take Care
Bob
ProficientRifleman
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2006
- Messages
- 579
you betcha!
I just moved there and opened a gun shop!
Woohoo! What a country!
I just moved there and opened a gun shop!
Woohoo! What a country!
EricTheBarbarian
Member
montana sounds like a great place to live. i might consider moving there if it wasnt on top of a super volcano.......
id also bet money that if the gubmnt wanted a national id card system they would somehow make them get one anyways.
id also bet money that if the gubmnt wanted a national id card system they would somehow make them get one anyways.TallPine
Member
Not that I know of.
You want freedom and less govt interference in your life, and then you want the govt to hold your hand ...???
Dravur
Member
Montana is not cold....
Sure, it can get to -40 fahrenheit, but that is simply not cold. I grew up in Belgrade/Bozeman MT, 90 miles from West Yellowstone, arguably, the coldest spot in the lower 48. Now, I lived through -40 f cold, but the coldest I EVER was was in Iowa, in the Quad cities, in January at only 0 degrees.
I froze my tootsies off in Iowa, yet in MT, the cold just made your breathing hurt. The cold in Montana is a man's cold, the kind of Cold that makes the Marlboro Man glad of his artificial lung. The cold in Iowa will make a polar bear whimper.
If you come to MT, bring a job, lots of cash and guns... lots of guns. I would move back there, as I work from home anyway. I can live anywhere, but alas, I have a lass here in Colorado and she cannot move to the great state.
Good Luck MT, and since I allready own land there, I shall move back someday.
Sure, it can get to -40 fahrenheit, but that is simply not cold. I grew up in Belgrade/Bozeman MT, 90 miles from West Yellowstone, arguably, the coldest spot in the lower 48. Now, I lived through -40 f cold, but the coldest I EVER was was in Iowa, in the Quad cities, in January at only 0 degrees.
I froze my tootsies off in Iowa, yet in MT, the cold just made your breathing hurt. The cold in Montana is a man's cold, the kind of Cold that makes the Marlboro Man glad of his artificial lung. The cold in Iowa will make a polar bear whimper.
If you come to MT, bring a job, lots of cash and guns... lots of guns. I would move back there, as I work from home anyway. I can live anywhere, but alas, I have a lass here in Colorado and she cannot move to the great state.
Good Luck MT, and since I allready own land there, I shall move back someday.
SoCalShooter
Member
Well if SHTF anymore than it already has I will gladly join the state of Montana.
O.F.Fascist
Member
good to hear that.
Libertyteeth
Member
Here is an archive of information for people considering moving to Montana: http://www.montana-alliance-for-liberty.org/phpBB2/index.php
In the valleys of western Montana (the mountainous part), the winters are not particularly cold for a northern tier state, and it is a dry cold, not the bone-penetrating cold you see with higher humidity.
Last edited:
Warren
Member
I'd like to get rid of all government issued IDs. But then I'm a radical that thinks the gov has no right to know who I am.
xd9fan
Member
Minnesota joins states bucking plan for a national ID
By Steve Alexander, Star Tribune
Last update: April 09, 2007 – 9:59 PM
Related Content
* Why a real ID act?
The federal government would like you to have the driver's license of the future, which will double as a national ID card and be required for boarding airplanes or entering a federal building.
The cost of the new system: $11 billion. Federal support for it: $40 million.
So Minnesota and two dozen other states are fighting back against the federal law, the Real ID Act of 2005. In Minnesota, officials estimate a $31 million price tag over five years.
"It's an irresponsible use of resources," said state Sen. Mee Moua, DFL-St. Paul, one of the sponsors of a bill that would prohibit Minnesota from complying with the federal Real ID Act of 2005. "They're imposing a whole system that may be less effective than what we have now."
Maine and Idaho already have passed laws opposing participation, and Minnesota is among 25 states that have legislation in the works, according to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, based in Arlington, Va. In Missouri, Republican state Rep. James Guest has started a coalition of state legislators in 34 states who oppose the federal plan.
The opposition is directed toward the expensive steps required to comply with the Real ID Act. To get a license, drivers will need documents such as a certified copy of a birth certificate, and motor vehicle workers will have to verify each Social Security number, immigration document and passport.
Besides verifying identities, states would have to securely store the resulting personal data, set up computer systems to share the data with other states, pay for FBI background checks on state workers with access to the information and manufacture new licenses with unspecified "machine readable" technology. (Current Minnesota licenses already are machine readable, so the new ones might look quite similar.)
Upgrading state computers would be expensive, as would conducting about 1,000 additional background checks on state workers and suppliers, said Pat McCormack, director of the state's driver and vehicle services division of the Department of Public Safety.
The cost would be $14.5 million in the first year of the program and $4.2 million a year for the next four years, she said. And the state might have to hire more workers and open more facilities to handle the number of people getting the new licenses, she said. Otherwise long lines are likely.
But Minnesota faces less of a financial burden than other states that haven't already upgraded their driver's license programs, McCormack said. Minnesota already meets strict requirements for verifying the identity of people getting licenses and for secure production of licenses.
In addition to the cost, states are rebelling against the already extended Dec. 31, 2009, deadline for complying with the Real ID program. They argue it's not realistic because the Department of Homeland Security won't issue final requirements for the new licenses until the fall, just a little over two years before the deadline.
"It's not just the money," McCormack said. "Complying with this would take a long time."
Homeland Security officials have said that if states don't go along with the program, their driver's licenses won't be accepted as identification for boarding airplanes, McCormack said. That might mean citizens could use a passport instead, she said.
"But that puts the onus on every state's citizens to meet the federal requirements," she said. "A lot of us are hoping that there will be some congressional action to help with funding part of it and to make some changes in the rules so it would be more workable."I think my bill will pass," Moua said, because the Real ID Act impinges on the states' rights to handle issuing of driver's licenses, is unfunded by the federal government and isn't practical.
"This isn't a partisan issue," she said. "It's about something that's just not fair."
Steve Alexander • 612-673-4553 • [email protected]
By Steve Alexander, Star Tribune
Last update: April 09, 2007 – 9:59 PM
Related Content
* Why a real ID act?
The federal government would like you to have the driver's license of the future, which will double as a national ID card and be required for boarding airplanes or entering a federal building.
The cost of the new system: $11 billion. Federal support for it: $40 million.
So Minnesota and two dozen other states are fighting back against the federal law, the Real ID Act of 2005. In Minnesota, officials estimate a $31 million price tag over five years.
"It's an irresponsible use of resources," said state Sen. Mee Moua, DFL-St. Paul, one of the sponsors of a bill that would prohibit Minnesota from complying with the federal Real ID Act of 2005. "They're imposing a whole system that may be less effective than what we have now."
Maine and Idaho already have passed laws opposing participation, and Minnesota is among 25 states that have legislation in the works, according to the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, based in Arlington, Va. In Missouri, Republican state Rep. James Guest has started a coalition of state legislators in 34 states who oppose the federal plan.
The opposition is directed toward the expensive steps required to comply with the Real ID Act. To get a license, drivers will need documents such as a certified copy of a birth certificate, and motor vehicle workers will have to verify each Social Security number, immigration document and passport.
Besides verifying identities, states would have to securely store the resulting personal data, set up computer systems to share the data with other states, pay for FBI background checks on state workers with access to the information and manufacture new licenses with unspecified "machine readable" technology. (Current Minnesota licenses already are machine readable, so the new ones might look quite similar.)
Upgrading state computers would be expensive, as would conducting about 1,000 additional background checks on state workers and suppliers, said Pat McCormack, director of the state's driver and vehicle services division of the Department of Public Safety.
The cost would be $14.5 million in the first year of the program and $4.2 million a year for the next four years, she said. And the state might have to hire more workers and open more facilities to handle the number of people getting the new licenses, she said. Otherwise long lines are likely.
But Minnesota faces less of a financial burden than other states that haven't already upgraded their driver's license programs, McCormack said. Minnesota already meets strict requirements for verifying the identity of people getting licenses and for secure production of licenses.
In addition to the cost, states are rebelling against the already extended Dec. 31, 2009, deadline for complying with the Real ID program. They argue it's not realistic because the Department of Homeland Security won't issue final requirements for the new licenses until the fall, just a little over two years before the deadline.
"It's not just the money," McCormack said. "Complying with this would take a long time."
Homeland Security officials have said that if states don't go along with the program, their driver's licenses won't be accepted as identification for boarding airplanes, McCormack said. That might mean citizens could use a passport instead, she said.
"But that puts the onus on every state's citizens to meet the federal requirements," she said. "A lot of us are hoping that there will be some congressional action to help with funding part of it and to make some changes in the rules so it would be more workable."I think my bill will pass," Moua said, because the Real ID Act impinges on the states' rights to handle issuing of driver's licenses, is unfunded by the federal government and isn't practical.
"This isn't a partisan issue," she said. "It's about something that's just not fair."
Steve Alexander • 612-673-4553 • [email protected]
Pietro Beretta
Member
Well thats very true, this will be the reason for the National ID chip act of 2020.
If there ever is a National ID card system put into place, that everyone has to use, there will be tampering of the cards and system.
Thats right, since there is no way to secure a card from illegal tampering or duplication, the only obvious fix for such tampering would put the "card" inside of the person. Any attempt of tampering would render the chip useless, and the "holder" of the chip would be investigated and charged for a federal offence of tampering with government property.:banghead:
- Status
