Why are Britons and Americans so paranoid about national ID cards?

Question

Yes, I realise your concerns about privacy, government control, inconvenience, and what you might call the "road down the slippery slope" to the end of freedom of movement.

May I bring to your attention, however, that national ID cards are a fact of life in almost every country apart from the UK and US.

Countries in which national ID cards are used and compulsory (either by law or in practice) include France, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Hong Kong, South Korea, etc.

Indeed, the majority of the world's democracies have national identity cards. Your paranoid fears have NOT materialised in these countries.

People in France can still go about their daily lives as they wish, without constant interference or surveillance by the government.

In Hong Kong, the ID card is a great convenience: it allows for 5-second automatic immigration clearance at the airport and other entry ponts. Besides, proving your identity at banks and such is a lot easier with national ID.

Source: I grew up in Hong Kong and lived in Europe for a couple of years. The argument of convenience is from my personal experience. You get used to carrying around your ID, and it really does become a good friend that comes into handy when you need it.

May I point out that Hong Kong's identity scheme was introduced under BRITISH rule. Yes, by the very Britons who are so opposed to having an ID card themselves.

And if you think that ID cards are an "invasion of privacy", then how about Japan's system?

In Japan, there are no ID cards. However, all Japanese citizens are listed in a national family registry that contains ALL your personal information, your family tree, your address, AND your criminal convictions. Everyone in your extended family has access to these records. If you're not a Japanese citizen, you're entered into a separate database and tracked like a criminal.

Is such a system any better than ID cards?

Answer 1

In Britain public opinion is divided over compulsory ID cards. Some people see it as an invasion of privacy, human rights etc. while others believe it is essential for security and point to World War 2 when Britons had to carry them.

Personally I am opposed to compulsory ID cards for above reasons and because I do not think they will prevent crime, terrorism, etc. They have not done so in Europe where most countries have them.

I have seen it from both sides as I am British but lived abroad for a while and had to carry compulsory ID.

I think the fairest way to decide such an issue would be a referendum, trouble is the British government is not very good at holding those.

Answer 2

Hong Kong? Aren't you under the auspices of the Chinese communist government? Let's say it goes against our grain, against our right to privacy and freedom. Why should the government want to trace our daily lives as if we are a bunch of terrorists? It seems as if the government is paranoid, not its people. It's more government interference in the lives of ordinary citizens. That makes it more dangerous. The US government also wants to know what books you checkout at the library. This is another step in line of more control and smacks of Biblical prophecy of the "mark of the beast" concepts. If you don't possess this "card" you will be unable to get a job, cash checks, conduct in commerce, etc. What other countries do is their internal business. As for the US, I think it's an intrusion.

Answer 3

i love their accents :D highly little youngsters!!! its between the justifications beside the sturdy universities that i pick to bypass there, i pick my children to have that accessory :) also, i love their vocabulary and the human beings I have met from Britain so a lengthy way were fairly outstanding :) i'm purely jealous that they get to drink 3 years before us, and they have different maximum fittest fashionable chaps (1D, the Harries twins, Marcus Butler and extra).