←back to thread

Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

(www.reuters.com)
525 points alex77456 | 1 comments | 26 Sep 25 02:09 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
isodev ◴[26 Sep 25 03:21 UTC] No.45382255[source]▶
I’ve always lived in places where having an ID on you has been part of your “citizen responsibilities”. So reading the post my feeling was “oh cool, they’re getting a new eID-like system”. But I imagine it’s a huge step if folks could get by without an ID at all.
replies(2): >>45382459 #>>45387321 #
Nursie ◴[26 Sep 25 03:56 UTC] No.45382459[source]▶
In the UK it has never been compulsory to carry ID, even when driving.

At a traffic stop the police have the option to require you to present documents at a police station within seven days if they think something is fishy.

And people do seem to exist quite happily without formal identification. As someone who has always had a passport and driving license it was a bit of an eye-opener to me, but if you don't drive and don't travel, some folks just get by without.

So if there is a requirement to have a Britcard, and to present your 'Britcard' when stopped for any reason, then it is definitely a change.

replies(4): >>45382577 #>>45383631 #>>45383691 #>>45383867 #
userbinator ◴[26 Sep 25 04:15 UTC] No.45382577[source]▶
That is very surprising. In the US, you are legally required to carry your license when driving. If you are caught driving without one, expect to be arrested.
replies(4): >>45382671 #>>45382831 #>>45382977 #>>45383368 #
kimixa ◴[26 Sep 25 04:34 UTC] No.45382671[source]▶
Also the US reserves the right to demand ID if you're within 100 miles of a border - which is effectively 2/3 of the population. And detain you until your status can be "verified", however long that could take.

That should only be for non-citizens, but I have no idea how you could prove that without documentation in the first place.

So for the vast majority of Americans, you probably have to be carrying ID at all times anyway, else you risk someone deciding you "might" not actually be a citizen.

If this same rule was enacted in the UK, there would be no place on the British Isles that would be excluded, as nowhere is more than 100 miles from the coast.

replies(2): >>45382724 #>>45382759 #
1. palmfacehn ◴[26 Sep 25 04:47 UTC] No.45382759{3}[source]▶
In practice the pseudo-crime of being "suspicious looking" also requires ID. Good luck if you want to argue your constitutional rights. Immigration status is topical for the current era. Something as benign as walking up the street to pickup takeout could involve identifying yourself to the police and waiting for them to clear you for warrants.