I was just watching the news on this. They were showing how some clubs in Vancouver have already started doing the whole swiping the driver's license thing. They were doing it to see what kind of information a person has on them, they can get records on people to see what they've done in the past. It shows stuff like if you've been banned from a club, if you've fought, if you've past out drunk and other stuff. This information is shared with every other club, too. This could lead to other cities implenting this idea, but there's already people complaining about how it violates their privacy. The "Safety verses Privacy" debate has begun. What do you think about it?
Safety vs. Privacy
- Thread starter Audacious
- Start date
People will know their past with the swipe of a card.
Oh, and I personally value my privacy over my safety. These kind of proceedures are being introduced because western society is trying to handle all the crime that plagues it in the club/pub scene.
Ask yourself why violence is escalating at these establishments.. Fact remains, these places sell alcohol, alcohol intensifies ones current mood.. If everyone is fighting more and becomming agressive, what does that tell you about peoples general collective state of contentment and happiness? That they're not content or happy!
By doing something like this, we are becomming more exposed to everyone else, we are becomming more the pawns, like cattle, we will wait to be admitted and checked to make sure we are ok, and not a threat - In the same way meat is checked for contamination. Where's the dignity in that? Instead of presenting measures to tackle WHY there is an increase in violent behaviour and a more common hostile mindset, the governments seek to root out those who are not compliant with the system, and turn them away. This is a treatment, not a cure.
Only the strong survive? Correct
Only the obedient prosper? This is something that is becomming more apparent.
I may have elaborated into seemingly off-topic issues, but they are all interlinked with the matter presented - as it goes deeper than mere electronic card swiping.
Oh, and I personally value my privacy over my safety. These kind of proceedures are being introduced because western society is trying to handle all the crime that plagues it in the club/pub scene.
Ask yourself why violence is escalating at these establishments.. Fact remains, these places sell alcohol, alcohol intensifies ones current mood.. If everyone is fighting more and becomming agressive, what does that tell you about peoples general collective state of contentment and happiness? That they're not content or happy!
By doing something like this, we are becomming more exposed to everyone else, we are becomming more the pawns, like cattle, we will wait to be admitted and checked to make sure we are ok, and not a threat - In the same way meat is checked for contamination. Where's the dignity in that? Instead of presenting measures to tackle WHY there is an increase in violent behaviour and a more common hostile mindset, the governments seek to root out those who are not compliant with the system, and turn them away. This is a treatment, not a cure.
Only the strong survive? Correct
Only the obedient prosper? This is something that is becomming more apparent.
I may have elaborated into seemingly off-topic issues, but they are all interlinked with the matter presented - as it goes deeper than mere electronic card swiping.
S
Sheik Abdul Bin Fallafel
Guest
I say it's the club owner's club, he can do whatever he wants.... if you don't like it, don't go inside 
They have the same thing both in the US/Canada for shopping retailers like Home Depot, The Gap, Banana Republic, you name it, almost all of them signup for a similar program. When you return something, they swipe your driver's licence.... if you're a "chronic returner" they don't have to give you a refund, and ask you to stop shopping at their store. It's supposed to help reduce losses for the store for people who steal stuff and return it... or people who shop around for cheap goods and return it to more expensive stores, or people who just return every freakin thing they buy.
It happened to me actually at Ikea when I first moved here.... I literally spent like $5,000 there in a matter of 2 weeks just getting furniture and stuff for my apartment and was there like every day. 1/2 the stuff they sold me was defective, I didn't like it or whatever and I returned stuff like 10+ times... it was easy to just show them my ID and get a gift card instead of finding the receipt and getting a refund cuz I planned to shop there more anyways. Then later I found out I was BANNED from returning stuff again without the receipt! And I found out even if I returned more stuff with the receipt too much, I would get banned from returning stuff at all.... even tho I kept 1/2 the stuff I bought and was a good shopper I guess they could live without my business.
Anyhow, moral of the story: If the business feels like it's in their best interest (their bottom line) they can do whatever they want... if you feel it invades your privacy, don't shop there
They have the same thing both in the US/Canada for shopping retailers like Home Depot, The Gap, Banana Republic, you name it, almost all of them signup for a similar program. When you return something, they swipe your driver's licence.... if you're a "chronic returner" they don't have to give you a refund, and ask you to stop shopping at their store. It's supposed to help reduce losses for the store for people who steal stuff and return it... or people who shop around for cheap goods and return it to more expensive stores, or people who just return every freakin thing they buy.
It happened to me actually at Ikea when I first moved here.... I literally spent like $5,000 there in a matter of 2 weeks just getting furniture and stuff for my apartment and was there like every day. 1/2 the stuff they sold me was defective, I didn't like it or whatever and I returned stuff like 10+ times... it was easy to just show them my ID and get a gift card instead of finding the receipt and getting a refund cuz I planned to shop there more anyways. Then later I found out I was BANNED from returning stuff again without the receipt! And I found out even if I returned more stuff with the receipt too much, I would get banned from returning stuff at all.... even tho I kept 1/2 the stuff I bought and was a good shopper I guess they could live without my business.
Anyhow, moral of the story: If the business feels like it's in their best interest (their bottom line) they can do whatever they want... if you feel it invades your privacy, don't shop there
Uneek said:
To make it short, who would want people to know about their personal life? Wouldn't it be embaressing if maybe one day you got in a fight and it wasn't your fault but then suddenly you were banned from every club just because of that fight? It'll be on your record everywhere you go, lol.
MJaY said:
Do you have any "cure" in mind? It'll be pretty hard to attract people without alcohol don't you think?
Sheik Abdul Bin Fallafel said:
Don't people already know that Ikea's cheap? You shouldn't shop there for furniture. Was that ban for just the local Ikea you went to or would it be on every Ikea in the US?
S
Sheik Abdul Bin Fallafel
Guest
Ikea has 2 price points for furniture.... real crappy stuff, and somewhat decent stuff... I tend to buy the decent stuff unless it's something I know I won't be taking with me to my next place.
But for someone on a budget, younger people especially who want somewhat "retro modern" like furniture, it's a good place to shop.
As for being banned on returning stuff, I'm not sure if it's just local or not, the next one is like 50 miles away or something so it's not convenient for me to shop there.
But for someone on a budget, younger people especially who want somewhat "retro modern" like furniture, it's a good place to shop.
As for being banned on returning stuff, I'm not sure if it's just local or not, the next one is like 50 miles away or something so it's not convenient for me to shop there.
steelcity_guy19
New member
safety for sure.
J
JujU
Guest
Obviously everyone wants safety. I, too, prefer safety over privacy. However, it's unjust. For instance, what if your friend had committed something unlawful such as trafficking narcotics and an officer caught him or her but he or she hid some of it in your bag. Let's say you got searched and the officer found the substance in your bag; you are now charged with possession and you now have a criminal record. How can you then go to a club, get your card swiped and be accused of something that you had no knowledge of committing? How can you explain yourself to a club owner the situation in order for him or her to allow you to enter the club? Obviously they wont believe you.
Moreover, what if you have committed a crime back in 1990 and we are now in 2005 let's say within the 15 years you have improved your behaviour. Will that records from 1990 enable you from entering the club? I support the idea to a certain extent. If there was a limit regarding how far back your records can be checked then that's fine for example from 2005 you go back two or three years. If no unlawful behaviour has been committed then you are allowed to enter the club; however, if you have committed a crime in 2003, then you're not allowed, it's too recent.
How valid is this method of keeping the clubs safer? What if your license card proves that you are not a threat to society then you attend a club and start a fight or are doing drugs or someone starts shooting at a club?
If you have done nothing wrong, then you wouldn't care for your privacy you would prefer safety; whereas, if someone had done something, then he or she will care for his or her privacy.
Moreover, what if you have committed a crime back in 1990 and we are now in 2005 let's say within the 15 years you have improved your behaviour. Will that records from 1990 enable you from entering the club? I support the idea to a certain extent. If there was a limit regarding how far back your records can be checked then that's fine for example from 2005 you go back two or three years. If no unlawful behaviour has been committed then you are allowed to enter the club; however, if you have committed a crime in 2003, then you're not allowed, it's too recent.
How valid is this method of keeping the clubs safer? What if your license card proves that you are not a threat to society then you attend a club and start a fight or are doing drugs or someone starts shooting at a club?
If you have done nothing wrong, then you wouldn't care for your privacy you would prefer safety; whereas, if someone had done something, then he or she will care for his or her privacy.