Two of my favorite "P"s -- Phil Libin and PhaTTboi -- tackle the National ID debate over at Phil's place. This is a smart, often funny, conversation on a national ID system that could ID good guys as good guys, and mark the rest with an X, or something like that.
I guess AKMA could have used a credential that said, "I don't do child 'photography'" when the officer approached him at the library.
Of course, he'd have to have a similar credential that said, "I do steal bandwidth."
Then one that said, "I'm a reverend, for crying out loud."
You see, this gets very complicated. Especially for AKMA.
I hate the idea of an ID program that separates the good guys from the bad guys. The way I see it, this type of program would further serve those with the money to hire good lawyers to defend them and keep them out of jail, reinforcing their "goodboy" standings, while labeling others for their run-ins with the law.
The majority of the people I know fall in the middle. And that's not a good place to be when there are gold-star goodboys ahead of you. Enron executives would have proudly displayed their gold star credentials right up until the end. That's reassuring.
A program that reinforces perceptions of stand-up citizens as stand-up citizens can't work.
I'd rather have no program. But if made to choose, I'd choose one that would verify without a doubt that I am me. Me who shoplifted with a passion as a kid, and me who brings home stray animals more often than I should.
Who I am is, essentially, none of your business, unless you ask me, and then I'll tell you to read this weblog, where anything you'd like to use to incriminate me is waiting.
