It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Passes Bill Allowing Government to Microchip Citizens with “Mental Disabilities”

page: 11
60
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
this bill basically made it legal to track anyone with any chronic disability not just people with mental illness, it states in plain english "developmental disability".
edit on 26-1-2017 by namehere because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I haven't read the article yet, so this is based on the assumption that the government can call the shots and override the wishes on families.

This is bulls#. My youngest brother is pretty severely mentally disabled with Down Syndrome, he's had his wandering events. He's an adult now, but in no way capable of taking care of himself or being able to remain safe without supervision. It's still no excuse to implement chipping humans like frigging dogs. I understand if individual families choose to, that's their right to do so. One of my friends has 3 autistic kids, all Houdinis (this should not need explaining, but means they're experts at managing to wander off despite best efforts) That family would more than likely choose to chip the children for quick finding, but it's their right to even if I think it's wrong.


originally posted by: CranialSponge
Next up:

Refugees, mexicans, hippies, New Jersey-ites, and people who wear socks with sandals.


... for their own safety, of course.


HEY NOW.

I only wear socks with my sandals in the winter, and only when my kid boosts my boots. Damn footwear thief.
edit on 1/26/2017 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: namehere
this bill basically made it legal to track anyone with any chronic disability not just people with mental illness, it states in plain english "developmental disability".


You're throwing around very broad terms there, when the Bill is more specific.

When you differentiate between "chronic disability" and "mental illness", where do you see the line? Do you consider autism to fall under chronic disability or mental illness? Or neither? Or both?

The bill seems reasonably clear in relation to who it addresses. Instead of looking at a single word you need to look at all of the words. For instance, it uses the phrase:


...shall award grants to State and local law enforcement or public safety agencies to assist such agencies in designing, establishing, and operating locative tracking technology programs for individuals with forms of dementia, such as Alzheimer’s Disease, or children with developmental disabilities, such as autism, who have wandered from safe environments...

This paragraph deals with the locative technologies (other paragraphs with a broader remit discuss proactive preventative measures rather than locative technologies) and identify two categories; (i) individuals with forms of dementia, and (ii) children with developmental disabilities, such as autism.

They consistently qualify the developmental disability (such as autism) which, I would argue, indicates that it aimed towards disabilities that influence the capability of the patient to make decisions.

The only way to extend this to "anyone with a chronic disability" is either to (i) broadly redefine what you mean by the term, or (ii) misunderstand how the term is used, or (iii) very selectively choose a word from the Bill and ignore everything else around it.
edit on Ev11ThursdayThursdayAmerica/ChicagoThu, 26 Jan 2017 11:11:12 -06007572017b by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)

edit on Ev12ThursdayThursdayAmerica/ChicagoThu, 26 Jan 2017 11:12:18 -06007582017b by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah
It's still no excuse to implement chipping humans like frigging dogs.


Except they're not. Read the bill. Skip the article.



posted on Jan, 26 2017 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: DeadMoonJester

LOL yes that poster who thinks mind control,gangstalking and chipping is rubbish yet appears in every thread about these topics since time immemorial...methinks he doth protest too much


He doth havest an understanding of thy subject matter. And thou doest not.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: AutonomousMeatPuppet
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

The smallest commercial gps is still about the size of a solid bottle cap. And the battery needs recharged often. It takes power to communicate with satellites, although some secret technology could use radioactivity, in case you need something to be paranoid of.


Need? No, I don't "need" anything like that. As for what's possible, it's a safe bet a lot more than we are told.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 01:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

You trust that? Tracking devices can be very small.


I know it - it's not a matter of trust. I design stuff like this. I are an radio enguner


There are lots of reasons why you can't implant something with GPS and with a transmitter that can link to something nearby. Not and have it run for long times. And such things are very easy to spot. Because a system isn't just the smallest part. For GPS, even if you COULD put it inside wet conductive meat and have it still work, the antenna has a minimum size, and that's about the size of a big watch. You can't make it much smaller - the size is a function of the frequency. So you'd have an "implant" the size of a half-dollar. It would be pretty conspicuous.

It's not a matter of giving someone a flu shot and implanting them with a GPS or something, that's loony.

This thing is a stripped down cell phone. You can get them small enough to fit on a big dog's collar, if you don't want more than a half day's battery life or so.


LOL at the humor.

Good to hear someone with the tech to know. I'd assume that's why tracking devices are the size they are, for ankle bracelets. It's more the idea of someone being required, that isn't a criminal, that bugs me. Something like that, seems the guardians should have some say. The government deciding is a bad idea.



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 01:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
The idea that a person would have something attached is the issue I have.


Well, in the bill they''re talking about this. When a person no longer has capacity to make rational decisions, or if they never did, it's a standard of legal practice to declare them incompetent and place them under guardianship. When this occurs, you can house them in places like the VA Alzheimer's home and it not be incarceration or kidnapping.

The bill discusses legal protection and guidelines that need to be developed for the courts to use to decide when it's time for one of these for each individual person. It's not like press gangs are going to be waylaying Trump protestors and welding tracking collars to them.


If a person has no legal guardians, I could see some merit to that. If they do, however, I'd want to see those people have some say in whether or not such a device was used. As for the political angle, well, if it came to that, that sort of thing could go either way, and I don't think any of us would want that! I become concerned any time the government asks for more power. How much they should have is a delicate balance.



originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
And, yes, embedded chips CAN track a person; they already use them to track pets! I know people who had them in their pets. The post where the hubby was stationed before retiring made those a requirement, to have a pet on post.

As for cell phones, yes, they are a method that could easily be used to track anyone carrying one!


No. Pet implants have one function - they are h-field devices that have a stored serial number. They can only be interrogated by a device that uses NFC, and the interrogator both powers the implant and reads the serial number return and it does that by load modulation. The implant never "transmits" anything, ever. It does not use radio. It can't operate more than a few cm away from the interrogator.

Pets cannot be "tracked" by this. If you have the pet in hand and have an interrogator, you can read the serial number from the implant. But that's it. The implant does not send out a beacon, does not transmit, has no power. If the pet is out and about, you can't get on a computer and see where the pet is. It just doesn't work that way.

Moreover, you can't interrogate one at a distance using something like a cell phone tower. Because it doesn't use radio waves. And it doesn't because radio is especially crappy for transmitting from inside wet conductive meat, and it would require batteries, and a sizable antenna. Because a system is more than the smallest part. The antenna on a radio device is proportional in length to the frequency it operates on. And the higher the frequency, the worse the meat absorbs the signal. So short tiny implant antennas stand NO chance of working inside a critter. And lower frequencies that aren't absorbed as well require huge antennas. This is why subs using ELF had to trail hundreds of feet of active sensor cable. And why the ELF transmitter had a 75 mile long antenna, and at that was something like 0.00001% efficient. You don't get to just choose an antenna size at random and say there you go.

Animal implants use magnetic fields. Magnetic fields fall off as the sixth power of the distance from the interrogator. Worse, there's a truly awful SNR issue with the way load signaling works. The return is tiny to start with, and the higher the power you use to get distance, the worse it swamps out the tiny return you get. I think the record for reading an animal implant (which is identical to a Verichip) is something like 28", and that took a custom built rig which read the implant hundreds of thousands of times and correlated the signal up out of the noise.

If that's not enough, there's an insurmountable point called the "lambda wall" beyond which God himself could not read the return because it ceases to be near field, and that happens about 15 meters away.

So, no. No, you can't track a pet with a serial number implant.

What's being talked about is a band that has a stripped down GSM cell phone. One with no display, no mic, no keyboard, no speakers, nothing on there but the assisted GPS and the bare basics of a GSM phone, and a battery. The cell network can interrogate the assisted GPS on it the same way an iPhone uses "find my phone".


Well, interesting data, to be sure!! Seems that it would be harder than I'd have thought to manage. Here's a thought, though. What if they had devices that could read such a chip installed in public places? Meaning, is it possible for one to be read if someone passed close enough to a device, or does it have to be VERY close? If very close, then not a concern at all. If within a few feet, perhaps a little.

Appreciate the data! Knowledge on such things is always welcome, and quite helpful in discussions!!



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 05:04 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Actually I am pretty sure it is optional, the bill is all about standards and getting the legal procedures down so the person has some protection and rights. It doesn't dictate its use.

Oh, and the answer is very close.
edit on 27-1-2017 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2017 @ 09:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Actually I am pretty sure it is optional, the bill is all about standards and getting the legal procedures down so the person has some protection and rights. It doesn't dictate its use.

Oh, and the answer is very close.


Optional is good, then! Should be. I can see the use, of course, for some people, who do wander and have problems. I hope there is a way to distinguish such a person from a criminal wearing an ankle bracelet, too.

Very close is good, then! That would certainly make that worry much less!!



posted on Jan, 31 2017 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: khnum

But we know the truth don't we? Mind control clones and chimeras.. they don't know. We do.



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join