Coming soon in 2016: Some states will require a passport to enter through an airport; driver license - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;48745353]There is no way that there's enough actual danger present from people flying that requiring passports for domestic flights is necessary. I have my suspicions that this isn't even constitutional.[/QUOTE] How wouldn't it be constitutional?

[QUOTE=The freeman;48746873]How wouldn't it be constitutional?[/QUOTE] We have a right to free movement throughout the country, by any reasonable means. These new rules are progressively more stringent restrictions on that right. I don't think they've been tested in the Supreme Court yet, and I tend to believe they wouldn't hold up. There's also a general right not to identify yourself, or to carry identification. Even if you're talking to police, the most you generally have to do is give your name. Requiring identification to use your right to free travel is incompatible with other decisions by the Supreme Court.

[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;48747005]We have a right to free movement throughout the country, by any reasonable means. These new rules are progressively more stringent restrictions on that right. I don't think they've been tested in the Supreme Court yet, and I tend to believe they wouldn't hold up. There's also a general right not to identify yourself, or to carry identification. Even if you're talking to police, the most you generally have to do is give your name. Requiring identification to use your right to free travel is incompatible with other decisions by the Supreme Court.[/QUOTE] and you still have the ability to move throughout the country. airports are a service, requiring identification for them (no matter how overkill) isn't any more unconstitutional than requiring payment

[QUOTE=Thy Reaper;48747005]We have a right to free movement throughout the country, by any reasonable means. These new rules are progressively more stringent restrictions on that right. I don't think they've been tested in the Supreme Court yet, and I tend to believe they wouldn't hold up. There's also a general right not to identify yourself, or to carry identification. Even if you're talking to police, the most you generally have to do is give your name. Requiring identification to use your right to free travel is incompatible with other decisions by the Supreme Court.[/QUOTE] Flying is a privilege, not a right. It's same thing with driving, you are not entitled to drive for the rest of your life just because you passed a few tests and got a bit of plastic. There are a trillion different ways to get your license revoked and to make it illegal for you to freely move across the country if you are driving. The airports/TSA can totally ask for a somewhat expensive form of identification to fly, they aren't breaking the constitution.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;48745561]I got this fancy Passport ID which allows me only into Canada and Mexico from the US and it's higher authority than state or license, but not quite as much as a real Passport or birth cert. [editline]23rd September 2015[/editline] Plus, it looks so busy and weird I like it kind of [img]http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/passports/marie_card.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/original[/img][/QUOTE] ya those are what they want you to get now

[QUOTE=The freeman;48747088]Flying is a privilege, not a right. It's same thing with driving, you are not entitled to drive for the rest of your life just because you passed a few tests and got a bit of plastic. There are a trillion different ways to get your license revoked and to make it illegal for you to freely move across the country if you are driving. The airports/TSA can totally ask for a somewhat expensive form of identification to fly, they aren't breaking the constitution.[/QUOTE] Access to flight is part of the freedom of travel, because the alternatives are not always practical or economical. Effectively, banning access to flight would impose an unnecessary burden against the freedom of travel, and so any limitations must be backed by a compelling reason. A blanket restriction against everyone who already have the right to travel by air cannot present a compelling reason. In the same way, you can't ban people from travel by car or impose unnecessary burden against that travel (though they can be banned from operating a vehicle, just like they can be banned from operating a plane). Driving is a privilege in the same way as piloting is a privilege. Being a passenger is a right, no matter the vehicle.

It seems crazy that there's so much variety to American driving licences while Europe has standardised driving licences across the board [t]http://i58.tinypic.com/fp3vif.png[/t]

[QUOTE=Doozle;48747188]It seems crazy that there's so much variety to American driving licences while Europe has standardised driving licences across the board [t]http://i58.tinypic.com/fp3vif.png[/t][/QUOTE] So long as the constitution and federal regulations are complied with, the federal government traditionally lets states do pretty much whatever they want, the theory being that the local governments know best how to run things in their region. Obviously it's led to some dumb and/or abhorrent situations, but it is what it is.

[QUOTE=The freeman;48747088]Flying is a privilege, not a right. It's same thing with driving, you are not entitled to drive for the rest of your life just because you passed a few tests and got a bit of plastic. There are a trillion different ways to get your license revoked and to make it illegal for you to freely move across the country if you are driving. The airports/TSA can totally ask for a somewhat expensive form of identification to fly, they aren't breaking the constitution.[/QUOTE] if your license is revoked in one state, you can still get it another. This is common in Minnesota/Wisconsin. Someone will have a revoked Wisconsin DL, but have a valid MN one (and vise versa).

[QUOTE=Code3Response;48745929]FYI this is for boarding an airplane, not getting off one. And Minnesota is fighting it. And the reason is that the act requires some changes to DL's that the states listed have not yet complied with. [url]http://www.kare11.com/story/news/politics/2015/04/10/state-legislators-fight-real-id-act/25617075/[/url] These states are literally the only ones who didnt bend over to the government. All the other states have changed their DL's[/QUOTE] In the ending of the video one of the reps says "Why are they in such a rush to do this now". Like hello it's been 6 years. It wasn't rushed. Also having and using a passport isn't a bad thing.

[QUOTE=Megadave;48745031]These laws need struck down fast, it's only a matter of time before you'll need a special permit just to leave the fucking county.[/QUOTE] What? No it's not. You just need a requirement to have an actual ID to travel by plane. The error lies on the states that fail to provide sufficiently secure ones. Honestly the lack of citizen ID is just weird in terms of the US. I still don't get why there's not a push for a centralised one. You just have a SSN which doesn't have any protections at all.

Welp, I live in Louisiana. Time to get a passport now...

Just one more reason I'll never bother flying anywhere if I can help it. [QUOTE=Take_Opal;48745561]I got this fancy Passport ID which allows me only into Canada and Mexico from the US and it's higher authority than state or license, but not quite as much as a real Passport or birth cert. [editline]23rd September 2015[/editline] Plus, it looks so busy and weird I like it kind of [img]http://travel.state.gov/content/dam/passports/marie_card.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/original[/img][/QUOTE] I find it kind of funny how ridiculously American that ID is. It has USA written in five different places on top of the backdrop of the American flag/bald eagle.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48744980]The thing about a driver's license is that it's prime purpose is [I]not[/I] an ID, it's a license to drive on public roads.[/QUOTE] Here in the UK a driver's license is second best ID from a passport. It's the de-facto ID for buying age-restricted products and doing age-restricted things.

[QUOTE=benbb;48747917]Here in the UK a driver's license is second best ID from a passport. It's the de-facto ID for buying age-restricted products and doing age-restricted things.[/QUOTE] It's been that way in the US as well for as long as I can remember. Everywhere that requires ID has always primarily accepted driver's licenses until now.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48744980]The thing about a driver's license is that it's prime purpose is [I]not[/I] an ID, it's a license to drive on public roads.[/QUOTE] Come to Canada, you're drivers license is meant to be your primary ID

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;48747914]Just one more reason I'll never bother flying anywhere if I can help it. I find it kind of funny how ridiculously American that ID is. It has USA written in five different places on top of the backdrop of the American flag/bald eagle.[/QUOTE] That's kind of called the Seal of the United States - a national emblem to represent the country. Kind of [I]the[/I] thing to put on a passport like that. [editline]23rd September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Aide;48747486]Also having and using a passport isn't a bad thing.[/QUOTE] It's a pain to acquire at times, though.

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;48747914]Just one more reason I'll never bother flying anywhere if I can help it. I find it kind of funny how ridiculously American that ID is. It has USA written in five different places on top of the backdrop of the American flag/bald eagle.[/QUOTE] So you'll never fly because someone not the airlines mandated something? Also flying is fantastic.

Damnit New York

[QUOTE=Levelog;48747996]So you'll never fly because someone not the airlines mandated something? Also flying is fantastic.[/QUOTE] Flying is terrifying

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48748018]Flying is terrifying[/QUOTE] Having flown within the past couple of months to go visit my mom I'd only agree as far as the takeoff and landing parts go. Once it's just cruising it's pretty good as long as you have something to block out the noise of the passengers. I'd definitely take that over the 3-day bus trips that I had to go on to do the same thing last year that had about the same legroom and passenger problems. Imagine 3 days of crying babies.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48748018]Flying is terrifying[/QUOTE] For me flying is one of the most relaxing things ever. I used to fly twice a month and from the second we started takeoff to when we touched down was just calming.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48747989]That's kind of called the Seal of the United States - a national emblem to represent the country. Kind of [I]the[/I] thing to put on a passport like that.[/QUOTE] No shit. I just thought the redundancy of the passport design was kind of funny. [editline]23rd September 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48748018]Flying is terrifying[/QUOTE] Flying is fucking awesome. It's the airports that suck.

[QUOTE=mugofdoom;48747914]Just one more reason I'll never bother flying anywhere if I can help it. I find it kind of funny how ridiculously American that ID is. It has USA written in five different places on top of the backdrop of the American flag/bald eagle.[/QUOTE] It's not that different from european ID cards. Here's a czech example. [t]http://www.ezlato.cz/Files/1__OP_2_Ceska_republika_prado_consilium_eu.jpg[/t] [t]http://www.toulkystomem.cz/Ruzne/cestovani/cest_dokl/ostatni/images/CZ-obcansky_prukaz-2005-2.jpg[/t] German [t]http://blog.cj2s.de/uploads/npa_vorne.jpg[/t] Looks like someone got inspired by the European standard Though if you want to go into real corporatocracy, it's good to look at Nigeria [t]http://newsroom.mastercard.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/NIMC-Card-front-and-back.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=viperfan7;48747949]Come to Canada, you're drivers license is meant to be your primary ID[/QUOTE] And if you're a scrub like me who is completely incapable of handling a vehicle safely, the ID they give you if you need one looks exactly the same as a driver's license.