Friday, February 1, 2008

Law would require ID to buy cell phone

I've never been a fan of cell phones, but this shit is fucking ridiculous.

In Texas, State Sen. John Carona (I'll let you guess the party affiliation from this bill) will introduce a bill to require a state-issued ID to purchase a prepaid cell phone and force sellers to track who buys them using a database. It would also limit how many prepaid phones you could buy.

Of course this right-wing bill is being touted as a crime-fighting measure. It wouldn't be the first time lately that the public is forced to surrender their right to privacy in the name of fighting crime - when everyone knows the policy won't curb crime at all. More specifically, the phone carding bill is promoted as a way to fight gangs - which is even more ironic because of the corrupt government's own involvement in gang activity.

An attorney who represents a prepaid cell provider said prepaid phones are meant for low-income customers - and that's who'll be hurt the most by the restrictions. Gee, what a big surprise - not! Any gang member is just going to get someone else to buy phones for them, so the bill is clearly not designed to go after gangs. It's meant to keep tabs on the poor. As much as right-wing lawmakers cry about their own freedom being oppressed, they think the poor should be wards of the state.

John Carona isn't even elected. In his most recent "election", Republican Carona (yep, you guessed right!) ran unopposed, in Soviet fashion. There have been so many "elections" in recent years in which a right-wing Republican ran unopposed that it's exactly like living in a country where the government tells you who to vote for. (I'm still planning on writing about that congressional election in Georgia that had 2 right-wing Republicans but no other candidates.)

So Texans are forced to deal with an unelected dick who comes up with ways to spy on their phone usage and says it's to fight crime. Lovely.

(Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/1/112737/9451/903/447596;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22940064)

No comments:

Post a Comment