Need SS# to purchase a permit in Missouri as of today

[liphunter]

22 hours ago, skeeter said:

Not exactly a "revolution" but a demand for responsible government ( I know, lately, that's an oxymoron). If you've ever gone through the expense of having your Identity stolen, which access to a Soc. Sec. number enables, you'd understand my concerns.  It ain't fun and ain't cheap.  There is no such thing as "secure storage" of a number on any Computer system just like there is no such thing as an unbreakable lock. 

That pretty much hits the nail on the head Skeeter. Our so called government of the people, for the people is nothing more than a corrupt socialist maybe leaning towards fascist) nightmare. And before some loser or here says move. I just want to say, that  I draped myself in the flag a good many years. I wore the the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor for a good many of them. My son is a captain in the US Army, and it bothers me a great deal to know his well being at the whim of such a corrupt system ran by so many so many criminally minded sociopaths.   I usually try to put a lighter more humorous spin on these forums, but this is an area I really struggle with. My apologies...

[mojorig]

Wow, I was curious about this because Arkansas started asking for SSN last year and I had no clue why. When I did a search, most states were referring to federal law 42 USC Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, Part D, Section 666(a)(13). Here is a link to Section 666: http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section666&num=0&edition=prelim

(13) Recording of social security numbers in certain family matters.-Procedures requiring that the social security number of-

    (A) any applicant for a professional license, driver's license, occupational license, recreational license, or marriage license be recorded on the application;

    (B) any individual who is subject to a divorce decree, support order, or paternity determination or acknowledgment be placed in the records relating to the matter; and

   (C) any individual who has died be placed in the records relating to the death and be recorded on the death certificate.

 

 

[tjm]

My sleuthing isn't perfect nor conclusive, but, as mojorig says, I think this is the "new law" in question and I believe it goes back to 1984 with the latest amendment to it in 2014; so not quite a new requirement.

I also recall a similar discussion of another forum several years ago, someone had just discovered the SS requirement and thought it was "new" and ranted on about MDC taking things into their system that didn't relate &blablabango etc. I believe you will find each month dozens or more privileges automatically revoked over family support related to any & all the states that reciprocate on license suspension.    I think Mo still has your SS# on your drivers permit too. It's in the computer system barcode stuff.

As far as benefits to whom,  don't you think MDC would like the income from those thousands of permits annually? They lose money with every revocation of potential permit sales, don't they?

The many citizens that squawk about government money going to welfare and family support of single mothers are the driving force here. You get a lot of kids off the public dole by enforcing parental support, enforcement needs tools and this provides one. I have in the past been amused by some people wanting the government to act on a thing like this and then the same people rant and rail about how that government action is affecting them. Old adage about being careful what you wish for.

The Bradley amendment of this act in 1986 prevents states from modifying adjudicated child support under any circumstances, even if the custodial parent doesn't want the support payment, the state must collect it under this law.  

Not necessarily on topic, but, last I checked there are over 4,400 Federal crimes; so if we were not aware of this law, it is only one of thousands of criminal laws that most of us will never be aware of til we are charged with them. (that's not counting state nor local crimes)

[fishinwrench]

2 hours ago, tjm said:

They lose money with every revocation of potential permit sales, don't they?

Um, no, you have a permit to be revoked because you've already paid for it.  It aint like they give you your money back.

The ignorant thing about it is that hunting/fishing permits get revoked right before drivers licenses get suspended.  After that you technically don't have any ID to carry, so if you're fishing and an agent approaches you he can't really identify you, and basically all you have to do is turn your back and walk away.   What's he gonna do, shoot you?

I saw a guy pretend to not understand English and just walk away when a MDC agent asked to see his permit and the agent just stood there looking stupid for a minute....then went to check someone else.   It was kinda funny.

[tjm]

The suspension or revocation or whoever is of  the privilege, not the permit, as I understand it.

I believe  you have to be privileged by the state to buy permits to drive and to buy permits to hunt or fish. Things not specified as rights under the constitution are or may be allowed by privilege granted by the state.  The state could suspend/revoke my privilege   to own hunting rifles but can not suspend/revoke my right to own militia  (military) arms.

1 hour ago, fishinwrench said:

technically don't have any ID to carry, so if you're fishing and an agent approaches you he can't really identify you, and basically all you have to do is turn your back and walk away.   What's he gonna do

I'm not sure, doesn't Mo. require a "non-driver"  photo ID  for adults?  As to what's "he gonna do" , how would you expect this to work out at a traffic stop or any other confrontation with a LEO?  idk , but always expect escalation to escalate.

[fishinwrench]

7 hours ago, tjm said:

The state could suspend/revoke my privilege to own hunting rifles but can not suspend/revoke my right to own militia  (military) arms.

Say WHAT?   🤣

[aarchdale@coresleep.com]

i got checked at Pomme 2 weeks ago, I showed him my valid permit on the app on mine phone and that was it.   I could have showed him anyones info and he would have still went on his way, didnt ask for any form of ID to match up with the permit

[fishinwrench]

7 hours ago, tjm said:

I'm not sure, doesn't Mo. require a "non-driver"  photo ID  for adults?  As to what's "he gonna do" , how would you expect this to work out at a traffic stop or any other confrontation with a LEO?  idk , but always expect escalation to escalate.

You aren't required to carry ID everywhere you go.   I don't carry any identification when I bike ride and have had a cop ask for ID.  When I told him I had none he asked my name, so I told him, but then asked him "are you gonna take my word for it?"   LEO's lie all the time so I can't imagine them taking anyone else's word for anything.  

As to being shot for fishing without a license, or failing to identify yourself to a MDC agent....  Never!   Not around witnesses anyway.

[tjm]

On another forum a few years ago I had seen something about in Mo you were requited by law to ID yourself to LEO at any stop, I never looked that up but maybe stating your name is sufficient ID. In the same discussion, it was stated that it was against the law to lie to a cop a stop. So many socialist laws that I don't keep track of them all.

4 hours ago, fishinwrench said:

Say WHAT?   

Reading of the 2nd discloses no reference to hunting, the only firearms protected are  those necessary for the militia and for self protection. The myth of hunting arms being protected is a part of the socialist movement towards firearms confiscation.  Some day soon.  the people will relinquish  that right to maintain arms to overcome the Federal standing Army. But this is getting into politics and I'll let you read the Bill of Rights  for yourself, and suggest reading the Federalist papers also. I'm not the best communicator and was attempting to illustrate the difference between a 'right' and a privilege.  I see I failed. Suffice it to say hunting is not a right.

[skeeter]

If anyone's interested in details and facts including the Federal and State Statute language, I received this reply from my State Senator's office: 

Beginning May 30, 2018, the Department will require buyers of Missouri hunting, fishing, and trapping permits to provide their Social Security Number (SSN). This change is accordance with Federal Statute 42 U.S.C. § 666 and Missouri Revised Statute 454.403 which requires the collection of a SSN on any application for a professional, occupational, or recreational license. This requirement also applies to free landowner permits. This requirement does not apply to commercial permits.

Now...what about us old-farts that don't need a fishing license anymore ? 

😁