For me, it’s a matter of it’s none of their business. No one’s accused me of making meth, but here’s all my PII in a database “just in case”.
It’s literally harder for me to buy cold medicine than a gun. I hate everything about that situation.
It’s literally harder for me to buy cold medicine than a gun. I hate everything about that situation.
Much of which would be covered as PII and PPI, and, in combination with info from other other data breaches can tell someone a lot about you.
I'm not saying that makes it OK to assemble into a database, and I think the point about amassing PII is well taken, but I think people are probably overestimating the value/hazardousness of this particular data set.
We can and should do the things you're suggesting, but I can't get behind the logic that we should wait til we can accomplish those things, when we can take any other more straightforward measures to mitigate "people making meth at home next door to people who don't like meth labs".
Where in my post did I say we should stop taking IDs and then wait until all of those are 100% fully accomplished before trying something else? Re-read the post - it's not there.
I'm arguing a more robust fix would be to do all of those things. That's not incompatible with keeping the current system of checking IDs until we hit some critical mass where the fixes for the more systemic issues reduce the need for checking IDs.