Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Government Security News Your Rights Online

DHS Official Suggests REAL ID Mission Creep 277

Posted by kdawson
from the just-say-no dept.
The Register noticed that a senior US Department of Homeland Security official has floated the idea of requiring citizens to produce federally compliant identification before purchasing some over-the-counter medicines — specifically, pseudophedrine. The federal ID standard spelled out by the REAL ID act has been sold as applying only to air travel and entry to federal buildings and nuclear facilities. A blogger on the Center for Democracy and Technology site said, "[The] suggested mission creep pushes the REAL ID program farther down the slippery slope toward a true national ID card." Speaking of federal buildings, CNet has a state-by-state enumeration of what will happen on May 11, when REAL ID comes into effect, to citizens who attempt to enter, say, the Washington DC visitors bureau.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

DHS Official Suggests REAL ID Mission Creep

Comments Filter:
  • This Sucks (Score:5, Informative)

    by OS24Ever (245667) * <trekkie@nomorestars.com> on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @09:13AM (#22319670) Homepage Journal
    Look, I know it's cool to fight the drugs, and that meth seems to be evil from what I've seen, dunno, haven't tried it.

    But speaking as an asthmatic allergy sufferer, and someone who gets some really crappy colds every year making good old sudafed a bitch to find/get/procure. That new Sudafed crap elevates my heart rate by over 20 bpm and doesn't clear my head. You feel like you're ordering donkey porn when you go in and try to buy something that has it, and most vendors don't.

    For the record, Aleve has a 12 hour decongestant that is the evil good old sudafed in it. After suffering for three days with every other stupid cold pill on the shelf took one of those, and was fine for 12 hours.

    Of course, it was too late and I got a sinus infection so I had that joy to go through.

    But this is just stupid. I'm ok with you putting it behind a counter so a meth head doesn't come in and clear the shelf, stealing it all. but the limits on the amount make it rought if you have a >3 day long cold sometimes.
  • by EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @09:16AM (#22319692)
    I already have to show ID when I buy a product with too much Pseudoephedrine in it. It's kind of annoying when you need to show your driver's license and sign a slip for buying a big bottle of NyQuil. Is this merely a state law (I'm in NJ) or have people in other states seen it as well?
  • by rhendershot (46429) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @09:34AM (#22319798) Journal
    IANAL

    Go to jail. You are required to comply with the court order or summons. The court does not provide transportation nor lodging. I think it would take an unsympathetic view to your not providing your own identification, proper identification of course...
  • Re:Unity? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Doctor_Jest (688315) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @09:57AM (#22319988)
    Sure. If you got the cash....

    I realize you're being absurdly funny, but still...

    A Federal "Real ID" stomps all over the Constitutionally protected rights of States _and_ citizens. It's been a while since the feds have done such a bangup job stomping on _that_ much liberty.

    Remember, the SS# was "never to be used as a means of personal identification..." And now look where we are. The Real ID is nothing more than a power grab and a consolidation of yet more Federal power... that the Congress complied with happily. Time to take the DHS to court... and let the Supremes decide if they can usurp authority that is _NOT_ enumerated to the Federal government.

    I didn't think I would see such a reading comprehension problem with our government when it comes to the Constitution. Seems clear to me what it says... they may not like it, but I don't care. It's not their position to like it... it's their position to uphold it and keep it from becoming... well... Orwell's nightmare.
  • Re:I wonder... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Profane MuthaFucka (574406) <busheatskok@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @10:27AM (#22320364) Homepage Journal
    The slipery slope IS a logical fallacy, because it'so often given as the reason something is true. Sometimes, the slippery slope is justified, and sometimes it is not. But that justification has to be determined by some other investigation or rationale. The slippery slope isn't good enough by itself.
    Don't be confused and think that a logical fallacy is a reason to disbelieve something. Indeed, if someone uses a logical fallacy to justify their argument, then it would be ANOTHER logical fallacy to assume that anything justified by a logical fallacy is false.

    In the example you gave, the slippery slope may indeed be justified, but that's because you explained another reason why that is so. It is indeed reasonable to consider that at some point this Real ID will be used to control gun ownership, as it may be possible, and has some historical basis.

    However, the slippery slope would not justify a claim that if we have Real ID it will be used to control the purchase of frozen peas. We have made another analysis right there to *rule out* the slippery slope, because it's ridiculous.

    Therefore, the slippery slope is indeed a logical fallacy. You ALWAYS have to use some other judgement to validate if it is warranted or not. You cannot determine the truth value of a statement based on the slippery slope alone.

  • Re:Dear God (Score:4, Informative)

    by Detritus (11846) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @10:45AM (#22320626) Homepage
    Every time I purchase Primatene tablets, each of which contains 12.5 mg of ephedrine hydrochloride and 200 mg of guaifenesin, I have to show my driver's license and sign a drug register. They record my name, address, and the total quantity of ephedrine in the purchased item. They don't care whether or not it is formulated with guaifenesin.

    Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 (CMEA) [wikipedia.org]

  • Re:Dear God (Score:3, Informative)

    by spyrochaete (707033) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @10:49AM (#22320682) Homepage Journal
    As much as I like to put a cap on alarmist propaganda in favour of government control, I have to admit that I've used pseudoephedrine for the purpose you mention. I actually bought some at a rave (knowingly) to pep me up. It worked great so I bought some from a health store (it's since become illegal to sell). Considering the alternatives is it so bad?
  • Re:Dear God (Score:4, Informative)

    by Detritus (11846) on Wednesday February 06, 2008 @11:35AM (#22321400) Homepage
    Legal Requirements for the Sale and Purchase of Drug Products Containing Pseudoephedrine, Ephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine [fda.gov]

    16. What about a sample size package containing only 1-2 pills of pseudoephedrine like those often sold at gas stations or grocery stores?

    The Act exempts the requirements of a "logbook" to any purchase by an individual of a single sales package if that package contains not more than 60 milligrams of pseudoephedrine. These single dose packages have to remain behind the counter.

If you had better tools, you could more effectively demonstrate your total incompetence.

Working...