NationStates Jolt Archive

I was just thinking about this, they put microchips in dogs that can be used to find the dogs if they go missing (kind of like a tracking collar). The microchips can be detected from something like 15 miles away and contain on them the dogs name, age, owners name, and owners location. Why can't we use this same technology with people? Think about how many kids could be saved each year if they have a little microchip put in their arm, adults too, when someone is wanted for a crime you just type in their ID number that is on the chip and you start looking for the signal. Simple, so why not use it?

Some people will see this as a way for the government to categorize people and keep track of their every movements, well they said that about the dog tags for GI's and Social Security numbers for everyone.

I was just thinking about this, they put microchips in dogs that can be used to find the dogs if they go missing (kind of like a tracking collar). The microchips can be detected from something like 15 miles away and contain on them the dogs name, age, owners name, and owners location. Why can't we use this same technology with people? Think about how many kids could be saved each year if they have a little microchip put in their arm, adults too, when someone is wanted for a crime you just type in their ID number that is on the chip and you start looking for the signal. Simple, so why not use it?

Some people will see this as a way for the government to categorize people and keep track of their every movements, well they said that about the dog tags for GI's and Social Security numbers for everyone.

And after we do this, can we have TVs that watch us?

Great, a Big Brother society :?

That is completely absurd, "let's treat people like common pets," although there could be some validity to microchipping children for their own saftey (such as finding them quickly if they're kidnapped), the potential for abuse of the tracking capability by the government is staggering...

In my state, the police recommended having your children fingerprinted so they would have thier fingerprints on file which would somehow make finding the kids easier if they went missing... this seemed logical, infact there was even a propaganda book written in the form of a children's book to convince the kids that thier parents were right in wanting them fingerprinted... I was one of the children of that era, now my fingerprints are on file with those of every common criminal, even though I have NEVER committed a crime....

think about it for a moment, computer chips are an even worse idea, unless you like the idea of "big brother" tracking everyone's movements...

This really is one of those situations where you have to ask if the potential benefit outweighs the potential harm. It doesn't for me. Hell, I don't even like the fact that my cell phone can be used to track me. But there are those people for whom the benefit will outweigh the loss of privacy and independence. For them--great. Not for me. As long as it's not a government mandate, then let them do what they want.

They are an invasion of privacy. Even more than we are now :?

That is completely absurd, "let's treat people like common pets," although there could be some validity to microchipping children for their own saftey (such as finding them quickly if they're kidnapped), the potential for abuse of the tracking capability by the government is staggering...

In my state, the police recommended having your children fingerprinted so they would have thier fingerprints on file which would somehow make finding the kids easier if they went missing... this seemed logical, infact there was even a propaganda book written in the form of a children's book to convince the kids that thier parents were right in wanting them fingerprinted... I was one of the children of that era, now my fingerprints are on file with those of every common criminal, even though I have NEVER committed a crime....

think about it for a moment, computer chips are an even worse idea, unless you like the idea of "big brother" tracking everyone's movements...

Which state is this? What was the book called.

I was just thinking about this, they put microchips in dogs that can be used to find the dogs if they go missing (kind of like a tracking collar). The microchips can be detected from something like 15 miles away and contain on them the dogs name, age, owners name, and owners location. Why can't we use this same technology with people? Think about how many kids could be saved each year if they have a little microchip put in their arm, adults too, when someone is wanted for a crime you just type in their ID number that is on the chip and you start looking for the signal. Simple, so why not use it?

Some people will see this as a way for the government to categorize people and keep track of their every movements, well they said that about the dog tags for GI's and Social Security numbers for everyone.Its a pretty worrying idea. What if one of the people who controls these things is disturbed and starts stalking someone by radio control?

Yes, their are risks, but what is the cost of a human life? A college student was kidnapped, raped, and murdered here this past winter. They couldn't find her and after they found the body they found out she was being held in a barn only 3 miles away from the college. Had they had those tracking chips she probably could have been saved.

Yes, someone could be stalking you, but they don't really need to use that chip, their are ways just as easy to stalk someone, like cell phones for one. And as for this gavernment watching your every move, hace some common sense people, their are 280 million plus people in the US, do you have any idea what the cost would be to monitor every single one of them 24/7? You would have to have like 1 in 10 people monitoring, not much of a secret anymore. The only reason the government would be watching would be if you did something wrong to catch thier attention.

Yes, their are risks, but what is the cost of a human life? A college student was kidnapped, raped, and murdered here this past winter. They couldn't find her and after they found the body they found out she was being held in a barn only 3 miles away from the college. Had they had those tracking chips she probably could have been saved.

Yes, someone could be stalking you, but they don't really need to use that chip, their are ways just as easy to stalk someone, like cell phones for one. And as for this gavernment watching your every move, hace some common sense people, their are 280 million plus people in the US, do you have any idea what the cost would be to monitor every single one of them 24/7? You would have to have like 1 in 10 people monitoring, not much of a secret anymore. The only reason the government would be watching would be if you did something wrong to catch thier attention.

Okay, let's put it this way:

I don't want to be tagged and tracked. I will resist any and all attempts to do this. Will you invent a new crime to put me away because of this?

Because that's what you'd have to do.

I would only support this if it were voluntary. That way, you could offer a way to protect potential victims of crime, without forcibly invading anyone's privacy. If you made it mandatory, it would be worthless for tracking down criminals and terrorists, because the first thing they'd do would be to have the chip removed.

Well, it could start out as voluntary, but it would quickly become mandatory. I'd be seriously worried about privacy issues. As well, that could possibly be a forerunner to the 'mark of the beast' described in Revelation in the Bible.

its jsut another layer of control man. its how those in power are going to keep tabs on us. they will see where se go, what we do, when we do it. they will use these facts to blackmail us into submission. there is only one way out...
FREE YOUR MIND!!!
8)

this sort of thing leads to big brother/government etc. control. And of course that is bad as is social security,patriot act, the new matrix government program among others basically any christian who's done some reading knows its the mark of the beast and the end coming I may sound nuts but either way christian or secular viewpoint all this shit is bad

Well, it's not the mark of the beast itself, because the Bible says that the mark will be visible. But a microchip could be a part of it somehow. Or maybe the mark of the beast is a barcode. I've heard that explanation.

I don't think we should have microchips that track people. However, they don't all do that. The one my dog has can be scanned at close range by a specific scanner. It then tells them the ID number of my dog with a company that keeps my address/etc. on file and they can get that info and contact me about the dog.

This could be done with people's name, medical history, etc. so that if a person were injured and unable to communicate, the doctor's could use the scanner and find out their name, some contact info for family, and any allergies, etc. This, I think would be a good idea (although it would obviously be voluntary.) Any opinions?

This'll be way too intrusive on any individual. If they do this, I seriously would flee the country. I'd rather die than submit to the will of the beasts that made me do this.

I don't wanna be tracked. What if the government declares being tatood illegal. Then those wit tatoos get tracked down and shot. Bad Idea!

*has Josh Dollins and Purly Euclid tabbed*

Some people will see this as a way for the government to categorize people and keep track of their every movements, well they said that about the dog tags for GI's and Social Security numbers for everyone.

Yet people Still rail against those things.

You people are wory rats, you know that? I can understand Chinese complaining that it would be a way for the government to track each individual person becuase they most likely would, but not in the US or most of Western Europe. And how is it an invasion of privacy? What are you doing that you are so worried about being caught? Heroine? Cocaine? What? Do you rape little kids and throw their bodies into the river? If you are not doing anything wrong their is no reason to worry, and don't forget, these things have a limited range, about 15 miles, so you have to be near someone and actually looking for them to find them, you can't sit in New York and say "Oh, I wonder what my exgirlfriend is doing in Los Angeles right no", turn on a radio and get a complete list of what they has been doing for the last week. The government could already track your every movement by satellite if they wanted to, but they don't so long as you don't give them a reason to suspect you are doing anything wrong.

That is completely absurd, "let's treat people like common pets," although there could be some validity to microchipping children for their own saftey (such as finding them quickly if they're kidnapped), the potential for abuse of the tracking capability by the government is staggering...

In my state, the police recommended having your children fingerprinted so they would have thier fingerprints on file which would somehow make finding the kids easier if they went missing... this seemed logical, infact there was even a propaganda book written in the form of a children's book to convince the kids that thier parents were right in wanting them fingerprinted... I was one of the children of that era, now my fingerprints are on file with those of every common criminal, even though I have NEVER committed a crime....

think about it for a moment, computer chips are an even worse idea, unless you like the idea of "big brother" tracking everyone's movements...

Which state is this? What was the book called.

Pennsylvania was the state... and to be honest I don't remember what the book was called, I was like 7-8 years old at the time, but it was a book about a little kid who got kidnapped and the cops were able to find him because they dusted the kidnapper's car and found his fingerprints, totally illogical, as if they would just be out dusting random things for fingerprints... doubt the validity all you like, I merely stated that as a point of interest, to show potential abuse something simlar

What are you doing that you are so worried about being caught?
This is what the argument always comes back to--the assumption that the person who values individual freedom and liberty is doing something illegal. What's really the case isn't that I'm doing something illegal and don't want to be caught--it's that I don't trust government to always do what's in my best interest, and I never trust government to care more about my individual liberty than for its own power.

Let's say there's a major change in the government of the US and it's now illegal for a citizen to cross state lines--forget that it would be unconstitutional; we're talking about a situation where the government has changed so radically that the current situation looks like a libertarian's paradise. Now if the government has a tracking device inside my body, I'm effectively screwed--I can't get away from it, even though I should have the ability to travel where I wish. And that's just one scenario.

You people are wory rats, you know that? I can understand Chinese complaining that it would be a way for the government to track each individual person becuase they most likely would, but not in the US or most of Western Europe. And how is it an invasion of privacy? What are you doing that you are so worried about being caught? Heroine? Cocaine? What? Do you rape little kids and throw their bodies into the river? If you are not doing anything wrong their is no reason to worry, and don't forget, these things have a limited range, about 15 miles, so you have to be near someone and actually looking for them to find them, you can't sit in New York and say "Oh, I wonder what my exgirlfriend is doing in Los Angeles right no", turn on a radio and get a complete list of what they has been doing for the last week. The government could already track your every movement by satellite if they wanted to, but they don't so long as you don't give them a reason to suspect you are doing anything wrong.
Because we have no idea if this can be manipulated for political gain, or if one person divulges personal information he found out to another, interested party. This, more than any other citizen detection measure, can encourage government corruption, and will create a huge, Byzantine bureaocracy. Perhaps it'll save lives, but at what cost? These little chips are the fastest way to move the government to the way it was in the book 1984, and that is not an ideal world to live in.
So pull out other toys to track us, like sattelites, cameras, etc. However, none of them even hold a candle to microchips when it comes to invading privacy.

You people are wory rats, you know that? I can understand Chinese complaining that it would be a way for the government to track each individual person becuase they most likely would, but not in the US or most of Western Europe. And how is it an invasion of privacy? What are you doing that you are so worried about being caught? Heroine? Cocaine? What? Do you rape little kids and throw their bodies into the river? If you are not doing anything wrong their is no reason to worry, and don't forget, these things have a limited range, about 15 miles, so you have to be near someone and actually looking for them to find them, you can't sit in New York and say "Oh, I wonder what my exgirlfriend is doing in Los Angeles right no", turn on a radio and get a complete list of what they has been doing for the last week. The government could already track your every movement by satellite if they wanted to, but they don't so long as you don't give them a reason to suspect you are doing anything wrong.

you make some valid points, but I'm still waiting for the day when one can no longer speed without being ticketed on an empty unpatrolled highway because there are sensors in cars that report such things... and you also seem to insinuate that all drug users are drug abusers or are doing illegal things to get the money they use to pay for the drugs, I've met many people who responsibly(and only occasionally) use drugs...

I went for the minutia I know but so many have taken care of the larger issues

WP the difference between a Dictatorship and a Democracy is that the Dictators citizens are aware that they are being oppressed.

you make some valid points, but I'm still waiting for the day when one can no longer speed without being ticketed on an empty unpatrolled highway because there are sensors in cars that report such things... and you also seem to insinuate that all drug users are drug abusers or are doing illegal things to get the money they use to pay for the drugs, I've met many people who responsibly(and only occasionally) use drugs...

I went for the minutia I know but so many have taken care of the larger issuesSomething similar has happened already, except it wasn't a government--it was a private company. A rental car company in the northeast used the sensors that link it to its anti-theft gps system to track the speed at which its renters drove their cars. When they sped, it triggered a penalty that was added onto the renter's bill. One person raised a stink about it and the company discontinued the practice, but it just pointed out what's already possible in terms of surveillance.

you make some valid points, but I'm still waiting for the day when one can no longer speed without being ticketed on an empty unpatrolled highway because there are sensors in cars that report such things... and you also seem to insinuate that all drug users are drug abusers or are doing illegal things to get the money they use to pay for the drugs, I've met many people who responsibly(and only occasionally) use drugs...

I went for the minutia I know but so many have taken care of the larger issuesSomething similar has happened already, except it wasn't a government--it was a private company. A rental car company in the northeast used the sensors that link it to its anti-theft gps system to track the speed at which its renters drove their cars. When they sped, it triggered a penalty that was added onto the renter's bill. One person raised a stink about it and the company discontinued the practice, but it just pointed out what's already possible in terms of surveillance.
However, it was only placed on cars, and that is far different than tracking humans. With cars, they can't tell who's driving them, unless they put a camera in them (a blantant violation of the Fourth Amendment).

However, it was only placed on cars, and that is far different than tracking humans. With cars, they can't tell who's driving them, unless they put a camera in them (a blantant violation of the Fourth Amendment).I agree completely--I was merely pointing out the start of the slippery slope and noting that if private companies are capable of this type of surveillance, imagine what a government that didn't care about your civil liberties (witness the Padilla case) would be capable of.

I don't think microchip implants are a good idea; they could be used to invade privacy, and that's not something in the interest of anyone.

However, it was only placed on cars, and that is far different than tracking humans. With cars, they can't tell who's driving them, unless they put a camera in them (a blantant violation of the Fourth Amendment).I agree completely--I was merely pointing out the start of the slippery slope and noting that if private companies are capable of this type of surveillance, imagine what a government that didn't care about your civil liberties (witness the Padilla case) would be capable of.
I disagree about the Padilla case, seeing it as more for our protection than anything else. If this was a civil liberties assault, every criminal would be an "enemy combantant". However, Padilla did work for the enemy.
Anyhow, you're probably right. We're on a slipperly slope and we can't go back. I see, however, survelliance in public not to be a problem. At least they aren't in homes. The question, however, is how much survelliance is too much? Microchips go above and beyond too much.