: From: michael@resonex.com (Michael Bryan) : On a related note, I was very surprised when I went to England, and : found out that their driver's licenses don't have photos on them, : supposedly because it would be an invasion of privacy. And I was also : told that they cannot keep your fingerprints on file permanently, : except for particularly severe crimes. Minor crimes might allow them : to keep records of your fingerprints for a couple of years or so, but : then the records must be destroyed. It's amazing how complacent we : are in the US by comparison. I fear that a National ID card would be : far to easy to foist upon the American public. I hope I'm wrong. The *police* aren't supposed to keep fingerprints on file if the person isn't a criminal, but who believes they're that stringent? And of course MI5 (SIS, whatever) can do what they damn well please. The USA aren't supposed to keep peoples fingerprints on file either, after they've done the background check, when you immigrate. Want to bet they do? I think when I give my fingerprints I'll ask the official to write me a *personal* guarantee that my fingerprints won't be saved, then sue his ass if they ever appear later... once they've been digitised for the system, do you believe that all copies will be deleted? I sure don't. All I believe is when they tell you the *card* will be returned they're probably telling the truth. BFD. G (Who also wonders if the blood sample for AIDS testing gets dried and filed for future genetic fingerprinting...) PS So are we going to spin off that list we talked about for this sort of stuff or not? Sameer?