Immigration patrols on domestic Amtrak

"B Vaughan" wrote in message
...
If someone is not a US citizen, they would hardly have a US-
issued ID;

Why not? Many states issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and
other non-citizens. Remember, all of the 9/11 terrorists had legitimate
government-issued ID.

Plus, you can buy fake US social security and ID cards in Mexico for a few
hundred bucks. You can even rent real ones to cross over if you look
reasonably similar to one of the photos they have. Just head down to any
border town and ask around; you'll get what you're looking for within a few
hours.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On 16 Jul 2007 10:38:42 GMT, "Adam H. Kerman"
wrote:

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
"Merritt Mullen" wrote:
Martin D. Pay wrote:

Does that mean a US-government issued ID? If so, the tentative
plans my wife and I are making to use Amtrack for internal travel
(rather than fly internally within the USA) on our next visit
won't be possible...

No, it does not mean that. The US does not have federally-issued ID.

Of course we do; it's called a passport. That 77% of Americans haven't
bothered to get one doesn't change that fact.

Generally, when one talks of national ID cards one means
something all residents are required to have. It would be well if
everyone agreed on just what is being referred to.

Federal employees also are issued federally-issued IDs. So are
members of the military.


--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Jul 15, 10:35 am, "Adam H. Kerman" wrote:
The document Amtrak asks a passengers to carry is a driver's license (or
equivalent state issued photo id). It's insufficient to establish
citizenship if a Customs officer demands proof. It's another one of
those purposeless annoyances in the guise of security.

How would one prove citizenship? If we're crossing the border we're
supposed to carry appropriate papers now, but on this Amtrak train it
did not cross any borders and as such, the passengers would not be
expected to carry any proof of citizenship.

Of course, the original description said it was an oral inquiry only.
Perhaps this was bureacracy at work, that is, they could report that
they're "checking".

On Jul 15, 12:00 pm, HAL wrote:
No, it does not mean a US government issued ID. It means a government
issued photo ID. If the photo ID is issued by the Albanian government
it is a valid. And it does not have to be a passport. It can for
example, be a drivers license issued by the Albanian government.

I guess for people who don't drive it's imperative that they get the
official state issued non-driver's ID card as a substitute. Do all
states issue them now?

On Jul 15, 12:00 pm, HAL wrote:

No, it does not mean a US government issued ID. It means a government
issued photo ID.

How about a more informal government issued ID? For example, an
employee ID card or facility entrance ID card. I have an official
"govt issued" photo ID card from the municipal swimming pool. I often
wonder if that will count as acceptable. Of course these days, when
I'm taking train pictures locally, if the cops asked for ID that's
what they're gonna get because it was their town that issued it.

On Jul 15, 9:03 pm, Merritt Mullen wrote:

The US does not have federally-issued ID.

Yet.

But the U.S. Govt is demanding all states upgrade their drivers'
licenses to a higher security standard. For some states that would be
a considerable extra expense and nuisance and they're balking at the
requirements.

On Jul 15, 9:28 pm, Alan S wrote:

I've been wandering back through the answers. To be honest,
I fail to see the problem or the hysteria over random
checking.

I find it objectionable in that it's on a transport that isn't
crossing the border and because it's an unnecessary and undesirable
delay.



I would be much more nervous these days if checks like this
were not happening.

IMHO, there's different things to be done that could effectively
protect the safety of the transport system. Return to basic police
patrols, for example.

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:26:29 -0700, wrote:

On Jul 15, 10:35 am, "Adam H. Kerman" wrote:
The document Amtrak asks a passengers to carry is a driver's license (or
equivalent state issued photo id). It's insufficient to establish
citizenship if a Customs officer demands proof. It's another one of
those purposeless annoyances in the guise of security.

How would one prove citizenship? If we're crossing the border we're
supposed to carry appropriate papers now, but on this Amtrak train it
did not cross any borders and as such, the passengers would not be
expected to carry any proof of citizenship.

Of course, the original description said it was an oral inquiry only.
Perhaps this was bureacracy at work, that is, they could report that
they're "checking".

Legend has it that border agents were pretty good at determining
from one's accent if one was American. Even the accented English
spoken by legal residents of foreign birth bears the linguistic
hallmarks of having actually been resident in the USA for some
time.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

wrote in message
ps.com...
But the U.S. Govt is demanding all states upgrade their
drivers' licenses to a higher security standard. For some
states that would be a considerable extra expense and
nuisance and they're balking at the requirements.

Many smaller states have already passed bills rejecting REAL ID, and a few
of the larger states have the same under consideration. The whole thing is
folding like a house of cards as the states realize how much complying would
cost them.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:39:41 -0700, wrote:

On Jul 15, 9:28 pm, Alan S wrote:

I've been wandering back through the answers. To be honest,
I fail to see the problem or the hysteria over random
checking.

I find it objectionable in that it's on a transport that isn't
crossing the border and because it's an unnecessary and undesirable
delay.

I would think the idea is that illegal immigrants may have
boarded the train at a station close to the frontier after
finding a way across. It's not much different than the highway
checkpoints we have to put up with around these parts, some of
which may be 80km from the Mexican frontier. I think the border
agents at these checkpoints may actually get on coaches/buses and
give the passengers the once-over.


I would be much more nervous these days if checks like this
were not happening.

IMHO, there's different things to be done that could effectively
protect the safety of the transport system. Return to basic police
patrols, for example.

is it a sfety thing rather than an immigration thing?

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *