?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Homeland Security accepts fake ID

Retired New York City policeman Bruce DeCell, who had arranged to meet with DHS officials last week to lobby for document security, told CNN he purposely used a forged version of identification that Mexican consulates in the United States issue to their nationals living here illegally.

Days before his meeting with DHS officials, DeCell was asked to furnish his name, Social Security number and birth date, so they could be compared by security personnel to a valid form of picture identification. The building security accepted his matricula card, even though it listed a false date of birth, he said.

He was allowed entry into the building after walking through a metal detector, according to a statement posted on his group's Web site.

"It's obscene in a post-9/11 world that they did not match my name against the fake [date of birth]," DeCell fumed. "They're spending a lot of money [on security] for nothing."


Actually, it's obscene that this man expects that someone with legitimate business in a federal building, who walks through a metal detector, should be denied access.  It's obscene that we have to prove who we are (even though IDs don't really prove identity at all) at every pass.  It's obscene that in a post-9/11 world we are willing to give up liberty for "security" that is nothing but a farce.

Comments

( 14 comments — Leave a comment )
dogcandy
Jun. 13th, 2006 01:50 pm (UTC)
They were checking it but not checking it. If they are taking it and looking at it then they should be confirming that it is valid. What if his real ID had been stolen and this fake one left in his place so someone was using his real one to gain access some place else? There should have been no irregularity.

It's not so much as proving who you are but admitting it.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:00 pm (UTC)
There was a time when anyone could walk into the White House.
There was a time when anyone could walk into the Pentagon (I did, once.. with no badge, ID check, or anything)
There was a time when anyone could walk into any government building that wasn't considered a "secure" (e.g. national security) building.

dogcandy
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:02 pm (UTC)
And now there is reason for that not to happen anymore. It's not the way it used to be. Security is set up for the lowest common denominator.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:06 pm (UTC)
Except, the security we have is a joke. You can walk into a supposedly secure building with a fake ID. You don't HAVE to show ID to fly, you just have to submit to a full search. Prohibiting people from waiting outside airports doesn't stop the suicide bomber from driving a bus full of explosives into the terminal. The people being pulled aside for "random" screening at the airport are families with children, and grandmothers, and others who want to FEEL secure even if they're NOT secure. We have a security blanket, not security.

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."
- Benjamin Franklin
dogcandy
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:13 pm (UTC)
Knowing someones name doesn't particularly make them safer. Knowing that they don't have a weapon on them does. There are things that can't be prevented, there are things that can be. Building security wants to know your name so they can tell if you have business inside. The airline wants to know that you have no weapons so you can fly. The spaces that are being entered after a search are not your own. If you don't want to enter them you don't have to, if the people who own that space want you in there then perhaps they will let you, quite likely it is on their terms. People don't randomly go through your house or place of work.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:24 pm (UTC)
When the people owning the spaces are private companies, that's fine. When it's the federal government, which is "of the people, by the people, and for the people," it's a different story. Public buildings are supposed to be public.
dogcandy
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:31 pm (UTC)
That would be crazy. Mass scale of people wandering through. Perhaps personal records are public too, those are kept in government buildings. Taxes, weapons.. the government does a lot of things. But that doesn't mean it is open for everyone to see what it has done for everyone else. Have you ever been denied entry? What would you be needing a weapon for in such a building? Even public buildings are stricted access as people who have no business in there don't need to be entering.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:38 pm (UTC)
Some of the information you list IS public. However, personal records are not public records - they're private. They're records about a person. A publically owned building isn't private, it's public. And the government can make certain information sensitive or classified, that's fine. We're not talking about classified stuff, though.

People who have no business at the Washington Monument shouldn't be allowed in.
People who have no business at the Lincoln Memorial shouldn't be allowed in.
People who have no business at the National Archives shouldn't be allowed in.
People who have no business at Yellowstone National Park shouldn't be allowed in.
Oh, wait. Curiosity, tourism, are legitimate reasons to be in those locations. But, not the White House, or the US Capitol?

Have I ever been denied entry? I was arrested, once, for trying to use a public restroom, in a public building, at a state-owned fairgrounds, at an event I had paid admission to.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:38 pm (UTC)
(arrested for trespassing)
dogcandy
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:46 pm (UTC)
That's a bit tangental. The White House and US Capitol are places with active business, they are not memorials or libraries, parks or reserves. They are places of work and they do provide tours but can not handle people just wandering through. The White House and US Capitol were designed for work, tourist attractions were designed to entertain people and provide information. Each has their designed task and treating one like the other is not going to pull much on logic.

Yellow stone is for camping and sight seeing. I never saw any developers in there working on building houses. Spaces have their designated uses and with that use comes the common behavior for that space.

Not to say some cop or security guard is above screwing up or taking themself to serious.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 02:58 pm (UTC)
Should I have to prove that I have a legitimate reason for being in a public venue, in order to be there? Or should it be assumed that if I am there, I have a legitimate reason unless there is probable cause that my purpose there is illegitimate/illicit?

In this country, we are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. More and more in recent years, we are presumed guilty until proven innocent.
captpackrat
Jun. 13th, 2006 03:59 pm (UTC)
What bothers me the most about that article is the fact that the Mexican consulates are issuing identification to illegal immigrants.
wolffit
Jun. 13th, 2006 04:03 pm (UTC)
What, illegal immigrants can't have legitimate IDs issued by their home governments?
captpackrat
Jun. 13th, 2006 05:17 pm (UTC)
I could see them carrying stuff like a Mexican issued driver's license or passport or whatever, but not for the consulate to say, "Oh, you're in this country illegally, here, have an ID card!"
( 14 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Galen
wolffit
Galen Wolffit

Latest Month

November 2015
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow