The Instigator
DebateHero82
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wallstreetatheist
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Expired IDs should be accepted to prove DOB

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Wallstreetatheist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 10,612 times Debate No: 22876
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

DebateHero82

Pro

A person's date of birth does not change so an ID that is expired should be acceptable to prove you are old enough to drink, gamble, smoke, etc. The expiration date should only matter in terms of what the ID was given for (driving, weapons permit, etc.)
Wallstreetatheist

Con

Thanks, Pro!


Expired IDs should not be accepted to prove DOB.



Signposting
I Definitions

II My Case
III Opponent's Case
IV Conclusion


I Definitions

Expired: Cease to be valid, typically after a fixed period of time [1. http://tinyurl.com...]
ID: Identity document which is used to verify certain aspects of a person’s personal identity, usually a driver’s license [2. http://tinyurl.com...]
Accepted: receive willingly something given or offered [3. http://tinyurl.com...]
DOB: Date of birth



II My Case

Legality
The rule of law exists for a societally beneficial reason: to maintain social order. The social order would encounter turbulence, if IDs were acceptable in proving DOB even when they have expired. Before we examine the laws regarding this, we must ask ourselves what purpose proving one’s age serves. Well, certain items and substances such as tobacco, alcohol, spray paint, and weapons have minimum age requirements, in order to prevent minors who are not entirely ready for such materials from obtaining them. This minimum age requirement serves an integral role in promoting the social order by discouraging juvenile delinquency and drug use. These min. age requirements are codified into law for the sake of protecting society, and consequently must have a method of enforcement to be effective. This method of enforcement is the mandatory examination by shop owners or clerks of the identification of patrons within questionable age ranges (e.g. if a patron is 24 who seeks to buy alcohol, the clerk will check his ID to ensure he is of legal age). Under the REAL ID Act,
Full legal name,
Signature,
Date of birth,
Gender,
Unique, identifying number,
Principal residence address,
Front-facing photograph of the applicant

are required on an identification, and in section 208 says,
“(9) Establish fraudulent document recognition training programs for appropriate employees engaged in the issuance of drivers’ licenses and identification cards.” [4. http://www.gpo.gov...]

“Under the REAL ID Act and this final rule, those
individuals would now be unable to obtain REAL ID driver's licenses or
would only obtain a temporary driver's license that clearly indicates
on its face an expiration date tied to the expiration of the holder's” [5. http://www.gpo.gov...]
status.




Fraud
Expired IDs are much more likely to be discarded than legal IDs, and are therefore much more likely to be obtained by others. Following from that, a teenager could use the expired ID to represent himself and purchase alcohol, tobacco, dry ice, guns, and other items which reasonably have minimum ages. If allowing this was left as a viable option, fraud would be created by this loophole through which fraud, deception, and juvenile delinquency would be exacerbated. So, expired IDs should not be accepted to prove DOB, because doing so would generate fraud.

The REAL ID ACt states in section 208,
“(9) Establish fraudulent document recognition training programs for appropriate employees engaged in the issuance of drivers’ licenses and identification cards.”

And the consequences are stringent. [6. http://www.alcoholpolicy.niaaa.nih.gov...]




Opponent’s Case

My opponent’s statements scarcely admit to being collectively called a case. He makes only assertions with limited development.

“A person's date of birth does not change so an ID that is expired should be acceptable to prove you are old enough to drink, gamble, smoke, etc.”

A person’s date of birth does not change, but the method in which they present their age may change, as in the cases of fraud that I have (and the REAL ID Act) taken into account. You can’t just look one-dimensionally at the law, you have to ascertain its effects on how the world works. This law is intended to prevent juvenile delinquency, underage drug use, and encourage legitimate business transactions without fraud.

“The expiration date should only matter in terms of what the ID was given for (driving, weapons permit, etc.)”
That is an incomprehensible thought and is in direct contradiction to what you previously stated. If the expiration date matters on a driver’s license, then your entire case falls apart, because if it matters, then you have to accept the fact that a driver’s license is the primary form of identification in the United States when used to purchase items and services (e.g. lap dances) which have minimum age restrictions. Also, this debate is on proving DOB, and the importance of legitimate identification, not the expiration dates of weapons permits...



Conclusion
Expired IDs are not legal forms of identification, and accepting them as such leads to fraud and social disorder. The law is clear, unambiguous, and reasonable on this matter, and serves to promote social order and decrease fraud.



Please, Vote Con
Debate Round No. 1
DebateHero82

Pro

First off, I am not interested in "winning" this argument on this web site or getting positive comments or having some "judge" critique the argument or getting points. I am also not interested in using fancy language or citations. I am also not interested in the law or the courts or the constitution. This is a philoosphical question of sorts and I don't care if some judge, politician or even majority of the population supports your side. I want actual original counter arguments, not simply citing a law. I don't care about the REAL ID ACT. This is not about the law, but rather the reasoning behind the law. Your argument must stand on it's own merit, not simply the authority of the government.

Secondly, you say we can't accept expired IDs because they are more likely to get discarded and picked up by juveniles. People who want to use IDs improperly are more likely to have their own ID made that has THEIR picture and name on it and not somebody else's or may use a relative's but not some random person who threw it away. Besides, they would have to (or logically should) find somebody who has the same looks, height, age, etc. for it to be reasonably believable anyway. I bet if you poll 100 people who are mis using IDs I bet 90%+ will have obtained it through a method OTHER than digging through the garbage. Give me a break with that concern.

Third, I do say the expiration date matters on a drivers license, but only IF that person is driving. The DOB portion is all that matters when one is buying beer.

Fourth, I don't accept that a driver's license is the main form of identification in the U.S. There are military IDs, passports, ID card, etc. many of which have expiration dates. Weapons permits are also state issued and many have DOB on them so this not just restricted to Driver's Licenses, but that really isn't the crux of my argument anyway.

Fifth, I would not consider using an expired ID to prove your age 'FRAUD' even if I accept your argument that they are not legal or good enough to prove how old you. Fraud involves an attempt to deceive. That is right out of the dictionary. Fraud is using another's ID or making up a fake one. There are IDs that allow the person to keep them after they expire. I have a weapon's permit right here that is expired and has my DOB on it. The government let me keep it and I don't think I am committing 'FRAUD.'

Sixth, if the government were to change the law and allow a shopkeeper to accept expired IDs as proof somebody is old enough to buy that beer, it would hardly lead to "SOCIAL DISORDER." give me a break. Social disorder are riots anarchy.
Wallstreetatheist

Con

I thank my opponent for continuing the debate :)

This was essentially Pro's argument:


.
.
.
.
.
and...
.



RC1

"First off, I am not interested in "winning" this argument on this web site or getting positive comments or having some "judge" critique the argument or getting points."

That is perfectly satisfactory to me; I’ll accept your concession soon, if that is truly how you feel. I’ll also let the judges know how little you think of their skills to categorically evaluate the debate.

“I am also not interested in using fancy language or citations. I am also not interested in the law or the courts or the constitution. This is a philoosphical question of sorts and I don't care if some judge, politician or even majority of the population supports your side.”

I will accept your concession of the spelling and grammar point as well as the sources points. The law doesn’t exist arbitrarily as to rule it irrelevant in an argument of an imperative (should, must, etcetera); the purpose of just law exists because it codifies the philosophical* and moral norms to which society should adhere. Law is considered applied ethics. [1]


“I want actual original counter arguments, not simply citing a law...government.”

It sounds like you are ordering me around to provide you with an assignment. Ask this question on Yahoo Answers; I’m sure they’ll love to do your homework.


See my added contention “Identification without government” for a response to your philosophical and reasoning question.

RC2
“Secondly, you say we can't accept expired IDs because they are more likely to get discarded and picked up by juveniles...threw it away.”


Both forms are used and both forms are fraud. It’s much easier for a person to use a family member or friend’s old ID for a night to buy alcohol or get into a nightclub than to spend $200-300 on a decent-looking ID which has the only function of lying about one’s age. The fraud that you mentioned is not germane to the resolution, so let’s try to keep it pertinent.



“Besides, they would have to (or logically should) find somebody who has the same looks, height, age, etc. for it to be reasonably believable anyway...that concern.”

I think it’s more likely that a person would use the old ID of a family member or friend before they would illegally purchase a fake ID. I am currently conducting two polls on the subject which I will post the results of in the next round.

RC3
“Third, I do say the expiration date matters on a drivers license, but only IF that person is driving. The DOB portion is all that matters when one is buying beer.”

Thank you for asserting the Con position on the resolution. You could have added that the ID is no longer valid in a government system or in a spontaneous system to permit that action.


RC4
“Fourth, I don't accept that a driver's license is the main form of identification in the U.S. There are military IDs, passports, ID card, etc. many of which have expiration dates...”

This argument is a bit like saying, "Pie isn't the best food, because cake is pretty good too." Driver’s licenses are used to identify you when you are pulled over by the police. They are used every time one makes a bank deposit. They are used when purchasing alcohol, tobacco, firearms, fireworks, spray paint. They are used when applying for a marriage license or pilot’s license. They are used when getting into a nightclub, a gentlemen’s club, and bars. They are used when renting a car, plane, or boat. They are used when applying to college and other institutions. In fact, since transactions and proof of ID have become so linked together, twenty-four US states have added magnetic strips to their state driver’s licenses in order to turn them into debit cards. [2]

RC5
“Fifth, I would not consider using an expired ID to prove your age 'FRAUD' ...”

Fraud is the wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in unfair advantage or personal gain, so if someone uses an illegitimate ID to purchase or attend something with a minimum age requirement, they are committing fraud in the eyes of the social order, the law, and the spontaneous transactional order. Once again, I do not care about your weapons permit, and since it is not a primary form of identification, you should refrain from mentioning it for the entirety of the rest of this debate.

RC6
"Sixth, if the government were to change the law and allow a shopkeeper to accept expired IDs as proof somebody is old enough to buy that beer, it would hardly lead to "SOCIAL DISORDER." give me a break. Social disorder are riots anarchy."

That is true, but only because the moral and social framework in the absence of government will compensate for that lack. Now, if the government mandated that everyone be allowed to purchase drugs at any age regardless of the pertinent sagacity of the store-keeper, then there would be social disorder. I explain this in my added contention:




Identification without government

The point is that even without a system of coercion forcing people to comply with the REAL ID ACT or state laws pertaining to ID checks, people will naturally shy away from handing drugs to young children, because it’s a moral norm. The system of government monopoly on the issuance of legitimate identification for this sort of use is unnecessary. Private identification centers would spring up in the absence of the government control in order to facilitate the trust in forming contracts and buying and selling. The integrity of these systems would be held in check by the media who would report bad centers. When the new centers would issue IDs, they would naturally require proof beyond reasonable doubt that “you are who you say you are.” And in turn, people with whom you make contracts, deals, or agreements would rely on your identification as the means by which to hold you accountable. Private stores would most likely establish their own rules regarding the purchase of drugs, and would require identification for young-looking customers based on the inherent moral responsibility in genuine human interaction. [3] [4]


Since private enterprise naturally runs every operation more efficiently and effectively than the government, the expiration on IDs would be shorter than government issued IDs, because when a case compromises the integrity of an ID issuer, his store may be untrusted, disreputable, and following from that: unprofitable. It is quite reasonable to assume that since firms would maintain their own minimum age requirements and identification would arise from the natural order of protecting natural rights of contract and exchange, that expired IDs would not be considered legitimate sources of identification and could even harm a store’s reputation and by extension, the store’s profit. Stories such as, “Chuck’s gas station selling alcohol to 8-year-olds with expired IDs” would definitely deter some customers in the same manner that the Catholic Sex Abuse Scandal deterred church offerings in the order of billions of dollars.

Therefore, identification would arise out of the spontaneous natural order to protect natural contract and exchange rights and the DOB checking would be more effective and appropriate than government-mandated rules.


Conclusion
With or without government, expired IDs would not be accepted to prove DOB.
People, through moral responsibility, care about one another and set private rules to ensure the interests of both parties in a transaction.
My opponent has failed to present a case and thus fails in his burden of proof. I have exceeded my burden of broof.



[1] http://www.iep.utm.edu...

[2] http://www.creditcards.com...

[3] http://mises.org...

[4] http://plato.stanford.edu...
Debate Round No. 2
DebateHero82

Pro

DebateHero82 forfeited this round.
Wallstreetatheist

Con

"Human intelligence is a reflection of the intelligence that produces everything. In knowing, we are simply extending the intelligence that comes to and constitutes us. We mimic the mind of God, so to speak. Or better, we continue and extend it."-Huston Smith

"When I examine myself and my methods of thought, I come to the conclusion that the gift of fantasy has meant more to me than any talent for abstract, positive thinking." -Albert Einstein

"A lot of good arguments are spoiled by some fool who knows what he is talking about." -Miguel de Unamuno
Debate Round No. 3
DebateHero82

Pro

DebateHero82 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
DebateHero82

Pro

I am taking time off. I will pick up this debate later
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Travniki 4 years ago
Travniki
DebateHero82WallstreetatheistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: But...but he didn't care!
Vote Placed by larztheloser 4 years ago
larztheloser
DebateHero82WallstreetatheistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ff, con made great case that remainder of non-arguments points conceded too.