Why does this even matter? You don't like it, don't get one. That's what almost everybody is going to do.

Also people can already track you using your cell phone if they want to. Turning off or leaving behind your phone is easier than taking out a chip, sure, but you can do either if you need to go to ground.

Sort of defeats the purpose of even having one, doesn't it?

That's a bad thing? Such convictions aren't made by casually grabbing just anyone off the street... unless you're saying everyone convicted is innocent...

I don't doubt errors are made, however. The chip won't alter that one way or another in the first (unchipped) instance. It could prevent recurrence if not in error, and establish a different location if subsequently accused though, couldn't it?

Can I get satellite radio with one of these?

Yep. But wait... there's more!

According to the article, people are using them to gain access to VIP lounges and such.  I think I'll have one then.  Canadian whiskey please.  Straight up, no ice.

If someone uses it to follow me, what's the diff?  I carry a cell phone and it's always on.  I also have a GPS and am looking for a truck cam that can record my trips so I can prove that the idiot who ran the light and pulled out in front of me needed to be t-boned.

And I still want my borg chip.

Yes...yes it is, because now not only does that person have a hard place finding somewhere to live, they also have a hard time finding a place to work, and when they can't find a place to live and a place to work, they became desperate, and desperate people make rash decisions that put them in MORE risky situations (living out of cars, or in the woods, and eating out of dumpsters, or stealing things, and taking drugs to get a respite from the fact that they're saddled with this GUILTY verdict on their head for ever and ever). 

Maybe you've never known someone who lives with that sort of stigma.  It influences everything about them -- they can never wake up in the morning and say, "it's a new day, I'm going to live it with a clean new philosophy" because the world at large sees them as continually committing that same crime over, and over, and over again.  There is no "oops, I screwed up when I was 16" and now I'm older and know better.

And if you're innocent of it the first time, but some malicious person finds out about your conviction and subsequently accuses you of it again, the chances of being convicted a second time are rather high, aren't they? So now you're a convicted sex offender in two locations, despite never having done anything illegal.

If you want to prevent recurrence you prescribe antiandrogens, or castrate them.

Regardless of how they're pitching it now, wouldn't be surprising if by the 2050s this becomes a government-mandated identity chip inserted at birth.  Social security numbers are required for infants now, but I didn't get one until I opened a savings account at 13.

The chip wouldn't alter that one way or another, would it? No one but the police would be able to "see" it...

As it is, they have to register and report. This would obviate that except for random checks. It would also reveal if they approached fenced off/proscribed areas for them. Maybe just chip the rapists and child molesters... Not writing legislation here, nor does my heart bleed for those crime categories. And really, no one's talking about 15 year olds unless they were involved with a child, Karen. Not talking about two teen aged 'lovers'. That wouldn't require chipping.

Not really... unless the person was there at the given time of occurance. If he/she was somewhere else, the chip would be rather exculpatory, wouldn't it?

How long before they have your bank and medical info tied into these things.  What will you do when you have to have one in order to buy, sell or get medical treatment?

I think I've read something about this somewhere...

It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark  - Rev 13:16-17a

And that's guaranteed, how?

If a chip is introduced this way to keep track of criminals, I have no doubt big business will find a way to "see" the chip and sell this sight to other companies to be used in hiring practices.

You're probably right.  The human implanted RFID chip has been around for quite some time though.  I was there when one of my great nephews was born several years ago.  The hospital staff offered to implant a chip in my niece's and nephew's newborn son as a way to help recover potential kidnap victims and such.  My nephew refused to have it implanted in his son and I have to agree with his position.

If I want one, which wouldn't bother me, it's my choice.  But except for criminal tracking, nobody should be able to make that choice for someone else, even for a child of that person.  Once that child is grown and can make that kind of decision, he/she should be given that choice then.  And not until.

In the case of criminals, I don't see a problem.  It's simply an identity chip.  There aren't any criminal or medical records implanted in it.  If a problem arises, the records can be fixed or in extreme cases, hacked.

My great uncle had a serial number tattooed onto him. Think about it.

I'll be losing sleep over that.

As did relatives of mine. That is not at all an example of what we are discussing, nor is that equatable to protection from convicted criminals... if you are referring to what I believe you are. That was a case of the perverts and criminals tattooing the innocent.

No one said that our government will be any better about it. First, you have to consider that the government has already passed a law, the NDAA of 2012, violating our protections against unwarranted searches and seizures. Second, keep in mind that bills like SOPA, which is only bench til later this month, puts the burden of a criminal's actions on the backs of other citizens. Even the Nazis, although an extreme I admit, started with lesser legislation concerning their citizens and worked upward. Jim Crow the Red Scare certainly prove that our government has the potential for tyranny, just as with any other.

My concern is less about using it on criminals and more about future generations that may receive this at birth by government mandate. Probably not going to happen within my lifetime, but questions of ethics and liberty must never be pushed off until later.

I agree. Only a matter of time and enough brainwashing of how 'good' it is.

Voluntary to mandatory with 1 vote while your scared shitless of some other BS attack that will make the dummies want it for them and their children.

Chips should be compulsory to ALL and implanted at birth [or close to] and recorded with DNA.  All personal 'data' can then be linked to it.

There are so many benefits to that I'm not going to spend the hours listing them....you can work them all out for yourselves.

Absolutely.

The thought that "maybe someday it'll be misused" prevents any bsort of advance. Hey, we should have stuck with a flat earth, no medicine, electricity? Forget that! You could get burned! So no fire either! Better all around we should sit in cold, dark caves, and eat raw food. No vaccines, thank you. Writing only will cause pornography, so none of that either. 

To prevent abuses, we learn history... but might as well chuck the baby with the bath water. Sorry. Forgot. No bathing.... you only get sick from that.

This is just the beginning. 

As far as I can tell, all these things are are just high-tech dog tags.  They can't record our voices or know what clothes we're wearing (yet).  But I fear that in the future, RFID tags will be advanced enough to do those things (via links with other RFID tags).  So one day, big brother might know EXACTLY what clothes we're wearing, via RFID chip codes on the clothes themselves (or lack thereof, meaning we're naked or wearing "old" clothes).  And record our voices, so people may be persecuted if we pray or say things that the bastard government doesn't want us to say.  And they'll know what food we buy and eat, I wouldn't be surprised if they start putting RFID tags inside the ACTUAL food we're eating.  (It's not like there's ton of nasty chemicals in our food anyways)  And then we'll have additional RFID tags inside our stomachs.  That would just be radiation overkill right there.

I don't know, maybe i'm paranoid.  Nobody can really tell what's gonna happen until it does happen.

I do feel sorry for the future generations of this world, who by then will have no choice but to have an RFID implant at birth.  I feel sorry for the current generation that the social-network addict parents are posting baby pictures of their children on Facebook.  What will the children think of their baby pictures when they get older?  I'm so glad none of my kid pictures (or any pictures of me in fact) are on the web, let alone facebook.  To this day, I have never had a photo of myself on the web, and i'm gonna keep it that way for as long as it takes.  No stupid government is gonna force my identity and photo to be uploaded to the web without my permission.

So long live privacy!

Well, let me be the first to post this up....

668 - The neighbour of the beast ....;p

Yes... the RFID chips will transmit your thoughts to the super secret thought control agency and will transmit its commands back... as well as XM radio broadcasts.

Only tin foil and Po's skin will save us!

I'm not about stepping back in time, but it's a question of will and ability. Technology like the phone allows us to communicate freely. It's good. It can also be tapped or remotely activated to allow others into your private life. That's bad. The advantage of the phone is that it can be turned off or disconnected or left behind. So there is a happy medium that allows us to have the advantage without others using it beyond our means to prevent. If there is a chip inserted into your body, with no certain means of turning it on or off, then it is a liability. I'm not saying it doesn't have potential good and I'm not saying that we shouldn't look for its uses, but we have to first weight in the cons, even the most extreme of them. Never assume the outlandish can not happen, for often it does.

This thread is soooooo 2004.

Actually?  1984.

Was also a show on "Law & Order SVU". (http://www.rfidgazette.org/2006/11/index.html)