Re: ENTRAPMENT in New York City?

On Apr 28, 7:03 pm, Dave Null <bitbuc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:51:28 -0700 (PDT), marcman <marcmanstud...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Apr 27, 8:53 pm, Dave Null <bitbuc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>


Dave, thanks for your reply.

How do you feel about banks?

Actually, I don't trust them.  I invest all my money in shotguns and canned
food.

Do you maintain an account or do you get
your paycheck, truck on over to the check cashing store, stand in line
with the vagrants and transients, and take your earnings home with you
and spread it out between the jar in the kitchen cabinet, inside the
mattress in the bedroom, and the hole that you dug in in your yard?

Did you know that they take a fingerprint at the check cashing store
(and sometimes at the bank)?

You speak as if you've had some experience with that kind of operation.  


I have indeed.


Besides the kitchen cabinets and mattress are among the first places any decent
burglar will look for cash/valuables.  And ever since I lost that jar of pennies
as a kid, I do not feel my backyard vault is all that secure anymore.

It is funny though, how that ATM  doesn't need to scan my DL (which is the point
here) in order for me to deposit/withdraw.


The ATM is determined secure through the use of a PIN number.



On those very rare occasions when I do *have* to set foot in the place, I need
only to show some photo ID, not necessarily a DL, nor would it be scanned..  


Not everybody has a DL, so naturally, an alternate "official" ID would
be sufficient. I'm sure at Target, your state issued ID card (in lieu
of a DL) would have been sufficient as well.


And any bank that wants a fingerprint would never get my patronage.


You may not believe this, but I respect that. That of course is your
call. I'm just trying to understand what all the fuss is about (mostly
surrounding the scanning of a DL) as I mentioned from the outset.


and b) I do not wish to
have my buying habits tracked so that I may be better marketing target..

Why not?  Why would you possibly care if companies that were going to
advertise/market to you anyway, advertised/marketed items to you that
you actually might be interested in, instead of random items?

And why does it mean so much to you that I don't want to be innundated with any
of that crap?


It doesn't matter to me, you're the one that expressed your
displeasure, I just asked why.


To each his/her own, but it works for me, and as a side benefit it does tend to
keep my mailbox relatively junk free.

Yeah, I know what you mean, it takes me 11 seconds everyday when I get
the mail to throw away the unwanted. Sometimes it's worse, and it
takes me 12 seconds. Those days, my entire evening is ruined.

Perhaps I find some solace in knowing that I'm doing some small part in reducing
the waste stream.  Every little bit helps.


But you're not. The example you cite doesn't reduce the amount of
solicitous mail, it just changes the type. From random to targeted.
At least if the solicitations are targeted there's maybe a chance one
of the coupons might be of use to you . . . now that would reduce the
amount of junk.


Additionally, I find it annoying to have to spend time shredding the unsolicited
come ons, etc. that I do get.  


And my point was that if the unsolicited come ons were targeted, your
shredding time would likely go down.


Of course it is much easier to go your route and take the path of least
resistance.  At least as long as it is convenient.  It is the American way,
after all,


On the contrary, the route I'm espousing here in this discussion
creates less junk, not more junk.


<snip...>

I see your point.  I'm never going to see an MD again, because I read
somewhere that sometimes those medical records in the evil databases
are compromised the same way. So I figure it would make sense for me
to never see a doctor again.

Well, that's your choice.  

The original point was the scanning of DL's, and staying out of as many
databases as possible, not *all* of them.  


My opinion is that it's a fruitless exercise to try and stay out of
databases as we're discussing here. It's like fighting a war, one man
against an army. Now if you gathered an army and evened the playing
field, I might even join with you, but I'm not taking on an army by my
lonesome, just doesn't make tactical sense to me.




Although if it were possible, I would certainly try.

BTW:  I have never had to show my DL (for scanning or other purpose) for any
medical treatment.  

Not yet you haven't.

My insurance card (name, policy ID and PCP) and my work
photo ID have always been enough.


Is that the ID that the bank is satisfied with seeing? Your work ID?
That's very surprising to me, unless you're a long time depositor at
the branch and they know you personally. Even still, usually a
government issued form of ID is required for banking purposes
involving withdrawals, check cashing, etc.


And yes, I do make sure that my medical records are not to be released without
my expressed written consent, or that of Major League Baseball.

Oh, thanks for clearing that up.  We both likely know and agree that
Target has no privacy policy with regards to the info that they gather/
store.

None that I saw that said a DL needed to be scanned in order to purchase
controlled items.  Just proof of age required.


I'd say it was a safe assumption that the DL scanning deal while maybe
not referred to specifically, was covered in their privacy policy
under a broader umbrella.



And furthermore, I guarantee you that they did in fact have a
privacy policy posted just not at every register, in front of every
single shopper's nose.

Again, no posted policy on the *scanning of DL's*, stick with the issue.

None would be required specific to the *scanning of DLs* if covered in
a broader language.


If you're so, ummm, paranoid, about your basic
info, maybe *you* could have checked it out before holding up
everybody in line behind you, instead of blaming the other people for
being in such a hurry and enjoying time saving conveniences.

Actually, I would have been very happy if there had been someone behind me.

Very honest and forthright of you to admit that.


But
alas, I held no one up that day, so it was a bit of a loss.  Sucks tilting a
windmill with no one around to hear it fall.


I thought I was pretty clear that I wasn't really talking about you or
what you did or didn't do specifically. Doesn't matter that in your
case there was nobody behind you in line. I wasn't talking about you.
Just wanted to know what the big deal was with the swiping of a DL and
what the big difference was between that and the swiping of a CC.



I'm sorry to hear that. My cousin got hit by a bus when he was
crossing the street a few years ago.  Now I never cross streets, if
the store isn't on my side of the street, odds are very good that I do
not need to shop in that store.

Did you burn yourself?  I hope you don't need any medical attention.  


My dr's office is on my side of the street, so no worries.


<snip..>

Wow. I should have thrown a sarcasm tag on that. Never assume . . .

Touche.  My sarcasm meter must need recalibrating.  

<snip...>

It already is SOP. You need a congressman's ear, not the "zitzky" (I
think that was your term for the young man or woman that was simply
trying to work his/her job at the register) clerk's.

No it is not SOP.  

Gathering info by retailers and gov't (and other) agencies isn't SOP?


And the term I used was "zitster",

Zitster, zitzky, does it matter? My point, and I don't know how you
missed it, was that it wasn't Mr. Zitster's fault, all he's doing is
working to earn some money (rather than selling drugs and or whatever
else). Probably a good kid doing his job. Why you felt the need to
insult him and all the other zitsters, I'm not getting.

and he found the situation
to be pretty funny,

LOL, yeah, I'd be laughing too!

and was actually trying to help me out.  It was his boss
that was being a douchenozzle.


Yet you harbor ill will towards the pimply kid. Sorry, don't get it.



And not for nothing, that  very same store had sold me the very same product the
week before, without insisting on scanning my ID.  They looked at my DL, entered
in the DOB, which as I have said was not a problem for me.



Things change. Progress.



While I could bring it up with the Congressman, I doubt that he will be able to
do anything as I really doubt this is a Federal issue.  


Yes of course, my error there.

However, without a doubt, my NYS Rep. and NYS Sen. will hear about it.  I doubt
that they will do more than listen politely, and tell me they will look into it.

My expectations are pretty low on that working out.


Not if you gathered others who agree with your position and presented
numbers to your reps. Might be a better tack to take then just getting
all pissed off at Target, particular at the zitsky kid.



<snip...>

Are you a secret agent or something?

Actually I am, I stupidly left my Li'l *** cover ID at home in my other
black suit that day.  

And on your way across the street to Kmart you may have found a bag
with a million dollars in it. I'd say you made a wise decision though,
despite not finding the bag. The chance was there.

And if the Queen had balls she'd be the King.  An awful lot of burning hay
today, I hope my allergies don't act up...


I'm not understanding the burning hay references. Please pardon my
ignorance on that, if you explain, I'll read.


<snip..>

Sorry, but my right to privacy trumps the store's right to tracking my every
purchase.

Apparantly not.

Actually, it does.  

I've made my choice, Target will never see another nickel of my money, ever.


Fair enough. What are you going to do when Target's policy becomes
the others' policies?


No problem to me, I've since found another place that will be more than glad to
respect my privacy in order to get my greenbacks.  

For now.

And, as a bonus, they were a
buck cheaper than Target.

So you'd show your driver's license and allow the clerk to check it
out and/or examine it, but you won't let them scan it.

Yep, that's the crux of it.

Sounds to me like your way just makes the wait on line longer for everybody else. I
can only imagine the scene in the store that day. Hey buddy, some of
us have things to do and places to be.

And I would not have felt the least bit bad if it did hold up these imaginary
people behind me in the line.  
And I would not have felt any different if there
were someone behind me.  


Why would you not feel bad holding up the people in line behind you?



If I got angry every time the person in front of me held up the line screwing up
using this amazing time saving plastic/electronic payment system, the veins in
my head would have popped long ago,


So somebody else does someting that pisses you off, and that gives you
good cause to do the same thing to an unrelated party?


There'd be a winky smiley at the end of that last comment, but the
RMGD rulebook prohibits that.  Far be it from me to rock the boat.

You seem to be the kind of person that doesn't want to rock the boat.   ;^)

Just lookin for love in all the wrong places.
.

Loading