Travel in the USA Requires ID

https://neil.fraser.name/news/2014/12/25/

by ColinWright • 11 years ago

144 132 11 years ago

neil.fraser.name

recursive• 11 years ago

Bikes are at least as practical as horses. And buses are at least as practical as that.

URSpider94• 11 years ago

In TFA, the author says that bus passengers are subjected to random ID checks. It sounds like it's a statistical thing, not a 100% screen, but nonetheless if you are dead-set on not carrying/showing ID, it's going to be an issue.

yasth2• 11 years ago

The author is incorrect, they search, but they don't require ID.

balls187• 11 years ago

They are not subject to random ID checks. You are however, subject to random fare inspection.

santaclaus• 11 years ago

Is the MTA in NYC still subject to random ID checks?

rmxt2• 11 years ago

Not sure if this is the latest legal practice, but it seems that the NYCLU has fought against this and won:

http://www.nyclu.org/news/nyclu-victory-preserves-right-walk...

That's to say nothing of the 'license plate reader-like' identification that is feasible through MetroCard tracking.

Unfortunately, your stuff is still subject to "random" searches.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1dm5fu/what_are_my_rig...

http://www.aele.org/law/2006LRSEP/macwade-kelly.html

untog• 11 years ago

I've never had my ID checked. Bag, yes. ID, no.

iak8god• 11 years ago

If it is (or was), I'm curious what happens if a person doesn't have an ID. As someone well above the legal drinking age who does not own a car, I often go about my day without carrying my Driver's License or other state-issued ID.

Zikes• 11 years ago

Not to mention the random checkpoints various states can set up in the name of immigration or DUIs.

fapjacks• 11 years ago

Recently there has been an interesting method of getting around this, which at least is interesting: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/03/see-this-guy-get-...

jameshart• 11 years ago

"We have literally reached a point where the only way to travel long distances anonymously is to use a horse."

Sure about that? Brief Googling on regulations around moving horses between states indicates that "under ... federal regulations, horses moving interstate must be identified and accompanied by an Interstate Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (ICVI)."

beeworker• 11 years ago

There's always personal BigDog robots...

lwhalen• 11 years ago

until those have to be licensed, with appropriately-displayed plates.

CWuestefeld6• 11 years ago

Let's not get started on having to buy dog licenses every year in most of the country.

schoen• 11 years ago

There's a site about this issue from the Identity Project, which documents campaigns against ID requirements for travel.

http://www.papersplease.org/

gohrt• 11 years ago

http://papersplease.org/

IgorPartola2• 11 years ago

I am fairly confused by this site. Best I can find is the page that says that I should deny showing my ID (in all cases? In some cases?), and ask to see the law that requires me to show my ID and "see what happens". For a site that says that one of their core missions is education, I don't exactly feel educated.

Their other activities seem more productive, such as investigating what information the TSA and DHS keep on your travels, but which problem is it at the core here? The fact that the TSA asks to see my passport when I fly, or that the store that info along with my departure/arrival locations?

nulltype• 11 years ago

http://papersplea.se/

MBCook• 11 years ago

We used to make fun of the Soviet Union for its lack of freedom of travel ("papers please").

You only need ID not pre-authorization. You don't have to get Idaho to authorize your vacation and Nebraska to allow you transit.

eternalban2• 11 years ago

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step ...

andrewguenther• 11 years ago

And then you slide down the slippery slope?

dragonwriter• 11 years ago

You only need ID not pre-authorization.

To the extent the federal government requires valid state-issued ID for travel but neither mandates states to issue ID nor prohibits states from rescinding IDs that they have issued, you in effect do need pre-authorization, even if the actual pre-authorization regime is fairly light touch, granted by default for long terms without specific travel plans, and rarely revoked.

eli3• 11 years ago

I've heard of states revoking your ability to drive, but not your ability to have a State ID. What's an example of that?

(That said, I agree that if IDs are going to be required for voting, travel, etc then they should be free to acquire.)

Rapzid• 11 years ago

The federal government does not require valid state-issued ID.

smackfu2• 11 years ago

And the US is actually pretty good about not requiring you to always have Federal ID on you, compared to European countries.

lettergram• 11 years ago

I find it strange compare the laws of a state to others and say things like,

"It's pretty good compared to..."

They are different government types, founded on different laws, containing different people, and so on. The United States was founded on the idea of "freedom" so, it seems strange to require anything on you, unless it impedes others freedoms.

mmcclellan• 11 years ago

State IDs are used almost as a de facto Federal ID. From my experience at least, there is a very careful process in place when changing states.

thecopy• 11 years ago

I cannot remember the last time i showed my ID to anyone when traveling/flying in Europe.

fit2rule4• 11 years ago

15 years experience with living in Europe, I've been asked for my ID only a few times, while boarding planes. Never in the streets, at cafes, being 'carded' for wanting to buy a beer, or drink a beer outside if I want to, freely .. without requiring ID. Like, if you think that Europe is all 'citizens, comrade', those days are over. Schengen is awesome!

dublinclontarf2• 11 years ago

Being in the UK, I only need my licence when ... never really. If I'm stopped by police they can request I turn up at a police station within two weeks to produce my licence but otherwise it's not needed to travel anywhere (excluding flying)

toddmatthews• 11 years ago

also, "papers please" was a German thing AFAIK

fit2rule4• 11 years ago

Its not much of a German thing any more, precisely because the Germans seem to have an awareness for just how ridiculous things can get, whereas Americans seem instead to just be fine with the ridiculousness..

mikeash4• 11 years ago

Russia has a long history of requiring internal passports to travel, including the USSR but existing both before and after.

fit2rule4• 11 years ago

ID is a form of authorization. There are plenty of people who can not get a valid ID in the United States, yet they wish to travel too. So, they walk.

senorprogrammer• 11 years ago

That seems like quite a bit 'only'.

dmix• 11 years ago

Other ways to travel without ID: by taxi paid for with cash also greyhound buses (paid for with cash).

It seems cash is the only means of travelling without IDing yourself. The destruction of privacy via credit cards/debit cards hasn't been given enough credit.

MichaelGG• 11 years ago

The article points out long-haul buses and links to this article: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2011/06/tsa-swarms-8000-bus-...

kirsebaer• 11 years ago

Greyhound and other inter-state buses require ID.

rhino3695• 11 years ago

Comparing an ID with "travel papers" is silly. An ID is an identification device given to everyone who wants one. "Travel papers" are licenses to travel.

IDs are a tiny restriction on your freedom. Travel papers are a major restriction on your freedom.

The stupid airfare taxes are a much bigger restriction on our freedom, IMO.

imglorp• 11 years ago

Three words: No Fly List.

There is no transparency to that process, no way to find out if you're on it, no appeal, no recourse. That's tantamount to license to travel if not worse.

yasth2• 11 years ago

There is an appeal process, and just recently you are now generally notified if you are on it.

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2015/04/14/us-t...

That doesn't mean it is perfect (far from it), but things have gotten (slowly) better.

IgorPartola2• 11 years ago

So you are saying that the current no fly list is as bad as having to apply for a license to travel every time you intend to?

They are different things. When the government says "you must apply for a license before you do X" it means you are denied until permitted. The current implementation of the no fly list seems to be "permitted until denied". That isn't to say the process of getting on/off the list is good, just that it's not nearly as bad as being denied by default.

rhino3695• 11 years ago

I don't really want to argue in support of the no-fly list because I think it is definitely unconstitutional (in current form), but it is still not a license to travel.

It's a black list compared to a white list (travel papers). This makes a huge difference as the default is that you are allowed to travel. Instead of having to convince some bureaucrat that you should be allowed to travel, the government just blocks a relatively small number of people from traveling. Only 500 Americans are on the list. So 1.5 x10^-4 percent of Americans are limited by it.

Also, no fly list only applies to one method of travel. You can still drive, train, or walk anywhere you want.

rmxt2• 11 years ago

The post's entire point is that IDs are de facto travel papers. The reasons why we object to photo ID at vote time should also apply to general intra-US travel (or at least intrastate travel).

rhino3695• 11 years ago

And my point is that travel papers aren't just something you need to travel with. It's a permission for specific travel.

You can argue that requiring an ID for traveling on a plane is too restrictive, but it's not travel papers.

mikeash4• 11 years ago

What's the difference, exactly? "Travel papers" are used to control whether or not you're allowed to travel. ID checks are also used to control whether or not you're allowed to travel. (For example, one use of ID checks for air travel is to check the traveler against the government's no-fly list.)

Are you just saying that the requirements aren't currently restrictive enough to be worth complaining about? Because I only see a quantitative difference, not a qualitative one.

rhino3695• 11 years ago

Permission vs. just to identify who I am.

I can drive to the airport right now and fly wherever I want. I don't need it approved by government.

ubernostrum4• 11 years ago

Airlines tend to like having ID checks pseudo-imposed upon them, as a way of enforcing non-transferability of tickets.

hbbio• 11 years ago

Reading this should particularly echo to the French-crowd here, as our government is about to pass one of worst anti-privacy law in history, all in the sake of fighting "terrorism" of course.

Side note: The author is also the author of Differential Synchronization, a key alternative to Operational Transform. If you happen to read this, congratulations for your work!

pmontra• 11 years ago

Thanks for the reference to Differential Synchronization, very interesting! https://neil.fraser.name/writing/sync/

mangeletti• 11 years ago

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SQCXxa8...

Havoc• 11 years ago

the only way to travel long distances anonymously is to use a horse.

Pretty sure that'll get your name in plenty of papers, so not so sure about the anonymous part...

xigency• 11 years ago

I've never had my ID checked to ride on a Greyhound bus.

Hemospectrum• 11 years ago

That's because drivers are sloppy about enforcing it, even though it's been company policy for however many years.

mherdeg2• 11 years ago

I think you can still travel long distances anonymously using a bicycle.

Stephen King treats bikes as the canonical post-apocalyptic transit method — roads are too crowded with abandoned cars for automobile travel to be effective, and motorcycle travel is very dangerous (there is no ambulance if you have a high-speed accident).

But you can do a hundred miles in a day on a bike. That's not bad.

I've also never been asked for ID when using an Amtrak ticket, although my sample size is low (15 journeys) and I always use a credit card at point of purchase (either online or at a ticket counter).

JoshTriplett2• 11 years ago

Motorcycles also need gas.

varikin• 11 years ago

And motorcycles need constant maintenance.

derekp7• 11 years ago

It's funny you mention that, because he doesn't bring up bicycles in several of his post-apocalypse books (I'm thinking of The Stand as one specific example -- the characters all walk from one end of the country to the other).

ComputerGuru• 11 years ago

I'm fairly sure The Stand uses bicycles as the primary mode of transportation? Unless I'm mixing that up with Under the Dome, but I don't think so?

mherdeg2• 11 years ago

One of the passages I'm thinking of from The Stand:

Halfway there a thought rose to the surface of his mind like a bubble and popped. It happened casually, with no fanfare, but the implications brought him to a dead halt.

The thought was: Why haven't you been riding a bicycle?

He stood in the middle of the lawn, equidistant from the stream and the house, flabbergasted by the simplicity of it. He had been walking ever since he had ditched the Harley. Walking, wearing himself out, finally collapsing with sunstroke or something so close to it that it made no difference. And he could have been pedaling along, doing no more than a fast run if that's what he felt like, and he would probably be on the coast now, picking out his summer house and stocking it.

fredkbloggs• 11 years ago

Much like Greyhound drivers, Amtrak conductors don't always ask to see ID, regardless of where or how the ticket was purchased. It's hit-or-miss in coach, depending (at least) on the conductor, the train, and your boarding station. In first class it's either exceedingly rare or nonexistent, at least west of Chicago. The NEC may be different; I've traveled over 40,000 miles on Amtrak but never there.

A reasonable thing for the author to point out would have been that this has become yet another seldom-enforced law/regulation. Such policies are bad because they allow for selective and abusive enforcement, erode respect for the rule of law as an institution, provide none of the purported security benefits for which the policy was made in the first place, and create confusion as to what laws and regulations actually exist.

As a separate thought exercise, consider the otherwise law-abiding individual who has constructed an identity and identification indistinguishable from a real one, but different from his own. Since there is no means of validating a piece of identification anyway, and in the circumstances described herein no means of determining from an individual's name whether he is to be prohibited from boarding, what's the point anyway? There are a lot of similar rabbit holes here; it's really best not to think about it, because (a) nothing you or anyone does is ever going to change it for the better, and (b) you're never going to discover any kind of logic to any of it. Make yourself a phony-but-real ID if you want, or don't. Travel, or don't. But don't try to reason about or change government policy; it's a waste of mental energy.

jasonpeacock• 11 years ago

There's a lot of FUD in the article.

Most (all?) states have no requirement to carry or present ID to officers - you only have to give your name, and sometimes your address depending on the state. There's no Federal requirement to carry ID.

To operate a motor vehicle you need a driver's licence...but your passengers don't. What about riding the bus? You can get on the local Metro, Bolt bus, or Greyhound w/o an ID.

Hitchhiking doesn't require an ID.

Bicycling doesn't require an ID. Nor does walking.

You don't need a pilot's license to fly an experimental aircraft (but I'm sure there are other requirements for operating from an airport).

Hangliding/parasailing doesn't require an ID.

So...only through a commercial airline (private jets don't require IDs) requires proof of identify.

mikeash4• 11 years ago

Just to nitpick, you absolutely need a pilot's license to fly an experimental aircraft. You don't need one to fly an ultralight, but that's quite a different thing. (An experimental aircraft is just one that's registered in a certain way. It could be anything from something you constructed in your garage to an ex-Soviet MiG that you've restored to flying condition. An ultralight is anything under a certain low weight.)

eli3• 11 years ago

As the blog states, you actually don't need an ID to fly, you just need to prove your identity (and be ready for a huge hassle).

chucksmash2• 11 years ago

It's been eight years, but in 2007 I was able to fly from Columbia, SC to Atlanta, GA without any personally identifying documents whatsoever - I showed up at the airport without a ticket, without a wallet, without anything.

I was flying home for a funeral and as such was fairly distraught, so perhaps they cut me some slack on that account. I don't remember any specific hassles though.

CWuestefeld6• 11 years ago

Is "proving your identity" different in any meaningful way from "having an ID"?

noonespecial• 11 years ago

I think this is simply an extension of the fact that its really no longer possible to live an anonymous life in the USA. The government makes the case that they need to know who and where everyone is so that they can figure out who is "dangerous". This seems perfectly reasonable to an awful lot of people. The problem is that the people's idea of what "dangerous" means is wildly divergent from the government's.

saint_fiasco5• 11 years ago

The author of the article implies that he used to be proud of not having to do so because it differentiates his country from the Soviet Union.

How will having to carry ID turn a country into an authoritarian dystopia? Is it just an American thing?

I ask because I live in a country with an authoritarian past and we still have to carry ID everywhere and people just don't see anything wrong with that. Should I try to persuade them otherwise?

JoeAltmaier3• 11 years ago

Requiring papers to travel means convincing your government. Not requiring papers/ID means the government can't withold them. Personal freedom, which is paramount in American public discourse.

saint_fiasco5• 11 years ago

In my country everyone has a right to an ID card and not even the police can confiscate them.

I agree that withholding an essential ID document is evil.

nine_k• 11 years ago

There's a difference between requiring to identify oneself and requiring to get an explicit clearance to travel.

Last time I checked, air travel in the US requires a valid ID, but you're automatically allowed to travel, unless you're on some no-fly list or are a wanted criminal. (Last time I took Amtrak it did not require any authentication; I bought a ticket from a vending machine.)

The US system is built with certain distrust to the government, and with a number of checks and balances to prevent it from becoming tyrannical. Hence the idea of the government having no business to know my whereabouts unless there's a good reason to suspect me of some wrongdoing.

I personally don't see an excessively great trouble in anyone having my location data. Still, there are two good reasons for the government to collect as little such data as possible. First, the data may fall to wrong hands: fancy your house robbed when you're traveling? Second, it costs a lot of money to collect the data; if the data are collected "just in case", that money is wasted.

saint_fiasco5• 11 years ago

In my country it's exactly the same way. You need an ID, but not an authorization. The location data is also treated the same way, for the second reason you stated.

The way people feel about needing valid ID is very different, though.

CWuestefeld6• 11 years ago

Perhaps it's a small thing, but I remember as a young boy, probably in the early 70s and the Cold War, my mother telling me about the USSR. I specifically recall her saying "over there you need to have papers to travel, so we couldn't just go visit your grandparents like we're doing today".

For whatever reason, that stuck with me for 40-odd years, so the differences today really do resonate with me.

saint_fiasco5• 11 years ago

I agree there is a superficial similarity, but it seems strange to focus on that little detail.

What prevented people in the USSR from visiting their family wasn't the requirement of ID per se. It was the fact that the government could confiscate all your documents and basically turn you into an unperson.

In my country, which had a recentish authoritarian past, the Constitution (we made a new one when we changed the form of government) says that everyone has a right to an identity, and nobody can take that away from you.

pseudon• 11 years ago

You do not need ID to fly intrastate within the US:

http://www.papersplease.org/wp/2015/04/09/why-did-the-tsa-pr...

However, you do need explicit pre-approval from the US DHS to fly, through the Pre-Crime surveillance and control regime of Secure Flight:

http://papersplease.org/wp/2014/09/22/gao-audit-confirms-tsa...

dublinclontarf2• 11 years ago

Pre-Crime

Nice.

joshavant• 11 years ago

In the article, there's a link to a TSA Blog article that assures readers you don't need an ID to pass through security.

And, at the bottom of that article, there's a link to another TSA site, which lists acceptable IDs ('You can find a list of acceptable IDs here.', emphasis mine).

Hilariously, the first line of that page is: 'Adult passengers 18 and over must show valid identification at the airport checkpoint in order to travel.'

Mixed signals, TSA.

TazeTSchnitzel• 11 years ago

This makes me wonder: do you need ID to take a train within the Schengen area? I'd imagine not.

thesimon3• 11 years ago

No. You also don't need a ID for flying inside Schengen or going by bus.

noedig• 11 years ago

I wonder if we will need to have a license to operate a self-driving car. Certainly we will need a driver's license in the short-term, but after some time when people trust that self-driving cars work, will we decide that it is no longer necessary for the person using the car to know how to drive? If so, then that seems like it would open up a pretty anonymous way to travel. Of course, the vehicle will probably be licensed, but if you rent it from a company, then they company will know who is using the car, but the government will not. Will the government require rental companies to check ID's and provide them with the information? Maybe, but they already do that, and the government would need a warrant to get the information.

binarymax• 11 years ago

Forget being checked for ID. If you travel with a phone you constantly broadcast where you are.

anonbanker• 11 years ago

I often use my family bible when going across borders. it's always worked as proper identification, and is always accepted.

Travel in the USA Requires ID

Related Stories