Decius wrote:
] Elonka wrote:
] ] Ah, just to be clear, I don't have a problem with ID checks at
] ] bus terminals, hotels, and train stations, either. Those are
] ] private companies who have the right to refuse service, so I
] ] believe that they also have the right to institute reasonable
] ] security measures, and I see an ID check as a reasonable
] ] measure.
]
] You kind of wriggled around my point to an extent, so I want
] to reengage it a bit...

Heh. I feel like you're trying to force me into the position of defending the legality of a wide spectrum of behaviors. But I'm not prepared to do that. I'm not an attorney or a lawmaker, I'm just a private (but voting) citizen who has my own views on what is and isn't acceptable for *me*. If you don't share those views, that's fine, I respect your right to have a different opinion.

] First off, and I'm not really very familiar with the law in
] this area, but I don't think private companies have a "right
] to refuse service." For example, I'm fairly certain that its
] illegal to put a big sign in front of your store that says
] "Whites Only." There are certain things that buinesses can
] refuse service for (proper dress, behavior), but this isn't a
] right like freedom of speech is a right. Its a legislated
] issue. You can refuse service in certain contexts. I don't
] know exactly what those contexts are. In some cases (such as
] the American's with Disabilities Act) you are forced to
] provide service.
]
] However, I won't pursue this point any further. For the
] purpose of this dicussion I'll conceed that it ought to be
] legal for companies to require ID for their services for
] simple identification purposes. I wouldn't do business with
] such a company, and I'm not sure it should be legal, but its
] too much of a tangent to explain.

Private companies *do* have the right to refuse service. If someone's on a bus or a plane, and starts raising a ruckus, the transportation company has the right to throw them off such vehicle. As you mentioned, there are indeed certain race- or disability-based exceptions, but in general, no one has a "constitutional right to ride a particular bus."

To be even more clear, I'll bring it into my own industry, of multiplayer games. As a private company, we have policies about what behaviors are and aren't allowed in our games. If someone doesn't abide by those policies (or even if they do), we can choose not to do business with them. No one has any constitutional right to be allowed to log into one of our products. We have the right to refuse service to anyone, and we exercise that right on a routine basis.

] The core point that I'm concerned with is that an ID check is
] meaningless unless it is correlated with a database.

I disagree quite strongly on this point. ID checks are *extremely* useful, even if they're not checked against *any* database. Again, I'll use my own games as an example. There is a direct correlation between anonymity and disruptive behavior. When we accept a batch of new users into our games, the amount of ID that we require from them is directly related to the percentage of those users who will exhibit disruptive behavior. The more anonymity we give them, the more likely that we will be allowing in users who set out to antagonize other customers, and hence drive away business. And I would further add that this fact has been proved again and again throughout the internet -- people are more likely to be abusive, if they're posting under a false name. If they're using their real name, the courtesy factor goes *way* up, immediately. ID checks are still useful, just by the fact of *doing* them, regardless of whether or not they're compared against anything.

] Also, consider that the government cannot require you to carry
] ID on the street, but how meaningful is this if the government
] can require you to carry ID to do business with a company? Its
] not really possible to do anything in this country without
] doing business with a company.

I have no problem with showing ID every time I cash a check. Where I draw the line on this one, is where I have to identify myself each time I engage in any type of transaction, even for minor cash transactions. For example, I balked at the Radio Shack requirement to give them my phone number every time I'd just walk in to buy batteries. That was excessive (and, I believe, that practice has been discontinued).

] So, I'll close by observing that our success as a society is
] directly related to our ability to adapt and innovate.

And, I might add, our success is also attributed to our ability to accept diversity. Diversity in opinions, in skills, in beliefs, and in lifestyles. That saying about, "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it!" That's a biggie with me.

Elonka :)

RE: How to fly without ID!