It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by spacedoubt
on a side note, I was asked for a picture ID, at the polls on election day.
Thats NEVER happened to me. MY wife, who was in line 5 minutes before me, was NOT asked! Weird huh?
Originally posted by smirkley
Originally posted by chissler
Then when we do not agree, you call us on hypocrisy. Yes you did not use the term, but the message is loud and clear.
Not at all chissler.
Originally posted by smirkley
When one looses or percieves to lose some right that they could not have fathomed losing, like as suggested, even constitutional rights, they get all up in arms and cry foul. They state that the founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if alive today. They state that democracy in this republic is over becouse of some right they lost somewhere in government legislation.
Yet when given an example of how easily it is done, in a little benign way, in a way that seems so obviously "good" for the general population as protection or whatever, they run to it with open arms and accept it as right.
Regardless of how it actually is.
Originally posted by Edn
I have to ask, do you really have to provide ID in places in America to use your credit card? I've never seen this in Scotland, probably because there is no viable reason to do so.
Originally posted by grimreaper797
It may be a "minor" rule, but it is still a rule, and since when is the justification of breaking rules "convenience"?
Originally posted by smirkley
Yes, tis the season
Actually it happens all the time, and most everyone thinks its a wonderful thing.
But guess what, your rights are being violated, and you get a warm fuzzy feeling over it, don't you.
You are being protected, you say.
You feel good that you are being checked.
But in actuality, this simple basic right that is given to you is so commonly removed from you in a way that it makes you feel good.
A small little benign right that most take for granted, but very clearly demonstrates the 'sheeple' attitude of rights being removed.
What am I talking about?
Your credit cards and how they are used.
When you use any credit card as a device of payment, the merchant that accepts your credit card AGREE's to a contract with the card issuer.
Note this agreement... that ALL VISA accepting merchants must agree to and adhere to....
Although Visa rules do not preclude merchants from asking for cardholder ID, merchants cannot make an ID a condition of acceptance. Therefore, merchants cannot refuse to complete a purchase transaction because a cardholder refuses to provide ID. Visa believes merchants should not ask for ID as part of their regular card acceptance procedures.
VISA
This applies to MasterCard as well.
Some more info:
CREDIT-CARD SIGNATURE IS USUALLY ALL THE ID NEEDED
MERCHANT CREDIT CARD ABUSES
Basically, Walmart on down to mom-n-pops stores often ask for ID when they have NO legal basis for asking. There are ONLY two other conditions when additional ID may be asked for,... unsigned on the reverse of the card, or signed as "Ask for ID", the latter is used when a card holder prefers to be asked on a regular basis.
But I have heard everything from "My manager made the rule to ask for ID", or "this is a high fraud season (ie-Christmas time)". Note the latter I have witnessed in a Walmart just today.
You already have fraud protection as a cardholder, and to ask for ID is just plain harassment as that kind of action ONLY protects the merchant from losses. (which wouldn't occur if they were to follow normal authorization procedures)
In summary, this little benign right that one feels so warm and fuzzy and "protected" when they GIVE IT UP, is just an example of how easily we give up our rights for all the wrong reasons.
Originally posted by grimreaper797
This is going understand the assumption that it IS a rule, right? Some one said that its part of the users agreement.
Although Visa rules do not preclude merchants from asking for cardholder ID, merchants cannot make an ID a condition of acceptance. Therefore, merchants cannot refuse to complete a purchase transaction because a cardholder refuses to provide ID. Visa believes merchants should not ask for ID as part of their regular card acceptance procedures.
VISA
Originally posted by MystikMushroom
The system is being intentionally sabotaged from within to create a situation where the public will demand tighter, more restricitive measures -- thus taking away more freedoms than we have now.
The government never blatenly takes away freedoms....they create scenarios to scare us, so we run to them for a "convienient sollution" they already have....
A company I do business with recently called and left a message on my answering machine asking for my SSN and date of birth. I've heard one should never give out this information over the phone. Can they do this? Is it normal to ask for this information?
This sounds unusual. You should call the company at a telephone number that you know to be correct and ask them why they want this information. Usually you are not legally compelled to provide your Social Security number to private businesses unless you are involved in a transaction in which the Internal Revenue Service requires notification. Additionally, The Patriot Act requires financial institutions to verify customers' identities, which can involve the SSN. For more information see Fact Sheet 31, available at: www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs31-CIP.htm.
If the company insists on knowing your Social Security number when you cannot see a reason for it, ask to speak to a manager who may be authorized to make an exception or who may know whether company policy or the law requires it. The same should be true for your date of birth. Remember that the company has the right to refuse you service for failing to provide this information. For additional information on protecting your Social Security number, please see our Fact Sheet 10 at www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs10-ssn.htm.
Originally posted by Diseria
These people play some serious chess!!)
Although Visa rules do not preclude merchants from asking for cardholder ID, merchants cannot make an ID a condition of acceptance. Therefore, merchants cannot refuse to complete a purchase transaction because a cardholder refuses to provide ID. Visa believes merchants should not ask for ID as part of their regular card acceptance procedures.
VISA
Originally posted by semperfortis
Visa and Mastercard have contacted all of the Police agencies I know and advised them that they were advising their corporate partners to request ID on any purchase...
Came right to our Department and we are a State Agency..
Originally posted by smirkley
Cooperate, Or Else! - Complicating your right to remain silent
Law enforcement officers do not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable seizures merely by approaching individuals on the street or in other public places and putting questions to them if they are willing to listen. Even when law enforcement officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may pose questions, ask for identification and request consent to search luggage...
In other words, the police are free to approach us and ask us questions, but Americans retain the right to say "No." Indeed, if citizens do not affirmatively assert their right to say "No," the courts will deem those rights to have been "waived." The lesson was that citizens must take responsibility for their own rights. That sounds sensible enough.
-snip-
Addressing Hiibel, Dove asked, "You got any identification on you?" Hiibel offered no violent resistance and did not attempt to flee, but he did politely refuse to answer any questions. For that—and that alone—Hiibel was arrested and prosecuted for "obstructing an officer."
Hiibel's attorneys appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court, arguing that such an arrest could not stand. In a shocking ruling that was authored by none other than Justice Kennedy, the Court affirmed Hiibel's conviction. Because it is obviously useful for the police to know the identity of suspects, the Court concluded that it is equally obvious that jailing people who decline to answer questions is a constitutionally permissible policy. But what happened to our right to say "No"?
-snip-
The awful truth is that the police have now acquired the de-facto power to demand identification from just about anyone.
-snip-
Given the risk and uncertainty, nearly everyone will be deterred from traversing this legal minefield in order to rebuff an illegal police demand for identification.
With the Hiibel ruling, the Supreme Court has created a situation where ordinary Americans cannot be sure if they are invoking their constitutionally-guaranteed rights or whether they are committing a crime.
Originally posted by chissler
They do not make the rules, they are just expected to enforce them.
Agreeing to disagree.
I myself would not break any law just because my boss told me to. I'd find a new job.