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: 5
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: GreyScale
a reply to: BlueAjah

So you can't point out in the bill what you were inferring at all and now want to be happyhappyjoyjoy.

Got it.. thank you for the reply.



There is nothing in the bill to say that it IS suggesting micro chipping. Can you point to a place in the bill where it says that?

Bedlam makes a good point above.
Micro chips in dogs do not track.

ps... Why are you so angry?
Take a deep breath, have a nice cup of tea, and smile a bit.
I am not your enemy just because I have a different point of view than you do.




posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: anotherside
What's to stop the chip designers from putting mind control in the chip?


Reality.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: GreyScale

The House recently passed a bill that would bring a micro-chipped populace closer to reality before year’s end.

Any thoughts, fellow ATSers?


Yes. I think it has nothing to do with "a chipped populace" and everything to do with fitting out demented and mentally handicapped people with leg bracelets with GSM phone modules in.

"Tracking chips" are a meme. But not a reality.


"Tracking Chips" for people were approved by the FDA in 2004.

Thanks for pointing out that they're just a meme though.

/facepalm



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

Do that many people wander off that lo jacking them is worth while?


Actually, yes. Getting happy feet is a problem with Alzheimer's patients. Pretty much every one of them, tbh. They hit a point where they are looking for something, and take off to find it. Only they don't know how to get back. Quite a few of them die every year.



And wouldn't a bracelet of some sort work just as well?


That's what this is, more or less. Some are put in the shoes so they won't pick at it constantly.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

I read it. It goes on to say they would take bids and give grants....the type of device is not clear. An injectible nanochip would be a lot easier that a surgically implanted- 15 year old technology- type pf device.

I read the bill before my first response in the thread.


None of the proposed devices is implanted. And can't be. Nor is an 'injectable nanochip' a functional thing.

You can't just stick a piece of logic into the skin and it works, any more than I can take a radio chip and have it play a tune. The entire system is more than the core silicon. In the case of a GPS device, the silicon isn't negligably small. But it's just a fraction of what it takes to make it work. You have to have power, an antenna, any number of small but very tangible passive parts, and then you have something that knows where it is - except it can't receive the GPS signal if it's implanted. But if it could, it still can't communicate that location to anything else. So now you have to add a transmitter, more power, more parts, another antenna.

In the end, if you exclude the myriad reasons why you can't implant GPS at all and why it's quite difficult to do with a small transmitter, and the power requirements to run it all, it's still going to be pacemaker sized. Even though the logic parts are much smaller.

The whole 'injectable nanochip' thing is a myth.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: BlueAjah

We can think that implantable chip will be part of the bill...




But what you CAN'T do is think 'tracking device' and 'VeriChip' at the same time, not and be rational.

The verichip is an h-field device for returning a serial number. It's the same one that's used in dogs. It can tell you who the person is/was, but you'll never be able to 'track' someone with one. Unless by 'track' you mean 'pass through a doorway with a reader in'.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Bluntone22

Do that many people wander off that lo jacking them is worth while?


Actually, yes. Getting happy feet is a problem with Alzheimer's patients. Pretty much every one of them, tbh. They hit a point where they are looking for something, and take off to find it. Only they don't know how to get back. Quite a few of them die every year.

...


Exactly.


More than 60 percent of those with Alzheimer’s or another form of dementia will wander, and if a person is not found within 24 hours, up to half of individuals who wander will suffer serious injury or death.

Three out of Five People with Alzheimer’s Disease Will Wander


How many Alzheimer's or dementia patients wander each year?
...
Current statistics indicate that about 60 percent of persons suffering from Alzheimer's will wander.

This makes the potential pool around 3,000,000 individuals.
...
Of those found within 12 hours, 93 percent survive. Seven percent don't.

So, about one in 14 in this category don't make it home alive.

Of those lost more than 24 hours, only a third survive. That is a sobering statistic.

Of those lost more than 72 hours, only 20 percent survive. One in five. Sobering.

Sobering Statistics about Alzheimer's Wandering

We went through this with my grandfather.
They had to put locks on the doors that could only be opened from the inside with a key, which my grandmother had to keep around her neck so that she could open the doors quickly in an emergency.
We were all constantly worrying because he wandered.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: GreyScale

So what you are saying is that their first thought is going to be "ZOMG, we can just put a REMOVABLE bracelet on autistic kids and Alzheimer's patients! Because there is no way an AUTISTIC CHILD (I've 4 autistic grandchildren) could possibly take off a bracelet! This is genius!!!!"

Nope... I'm going to say that the final result won't be something that Grandma can peel off while running through the woods because she's 12 again.

Just an opinion. And for the record, the bill sucks.



If you've ever been to an Alzheimer's facility, they all have bracelets on that they can't remove. Some of them have near-field devices in to lock the doors if they try to get out.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: GreyScale

"Tracking Chips" for people were approved by the FDA in 2004.

Thanks for pointing out that they're just a meme though.

/facepalm



Verichips aren't "tracking chips". They're near-field serial number devices.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: GreyScale

#### you, politicians.

And #### your police state.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

it doesn't seem to be clear as to weather one could be forced into having to be trackable either.

right now this is for those who are mentally impaired... but there is one group that I would consider to be far more in need of protection from themselves than the elderly forgetful person, at least in the public's eyes and that is the children... all the children, regardless of race, or income, ect...
to me it seems that maybe the mentally impaired would be the guinea pigs in the experiment but after some time, probably not really a long enough time, they would be saying just how successful the program was and how every child should be given the same technology (probably some kind of chip implanted since a bracelet, or necklace, ect could be easily removed by some bright kids) then given enough time, it could be made mandatory for every kid to have them, just like it's mandatory for every kid to have their vaccinations..
and after a couple of generations of mandatory chipping of kids, well, we would have a society full of chipped adults..

and of course, this is coming out of a house full of republicans, many of whom are touting those "christian values" who by all means should be very much against the idea of chipping anyone because it's seen as the mark of the beast... rather ironic really.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I wonder if they'll make this mandatory with certain medications?

The pharmacists could install the wristbands.




posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: reldra

it doesn't seem to be clear as to weather one could be forced into having to be trackable either.



We've had tracking bracelets/legbands for home arrestees for quite a while now. Has there been a lot of push for everyone to be forced to have them? No?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
You don't need a law passed for a voluntary action.

This is government violating individual rights.

Of course, it's for the "children" or the "disabled".

My ass it is.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
You don't need a law passed for a voluntary action.

This is government violating individual rights.

Of course, it's for the "children" or the "disabled".

My ass it is.


Except, it isn't. The bill doesn't say anything whatever about violating rights. It provides financial incentives to develop the system and provide for monitoring. Not that they are going to buttstroke old folks to the ground and rivet it to their heads or something. Get a grip.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Oh please.

It's for our 'safety" and "security".

Right?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

No one is being forced to do anything.

The bill offers grants for research and for supplying tracking devices to those who can not afford them - if they want them.
The grants are also for training of first responders in search and tracking methods.



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

home arrestees are criminals who have broken laws and therefor have sacrificed some of their rights...
by the way, they have been known to take their little ankle bracelets off I do believe??

starting at around page 15 or 16, there is a statement that states that the attorney general or someone will have to come up with policies regarding different things...
one of those is the use of tracking devices over the objection of the individual.. so basically they are talking about forcing someone to carry or wear, or have implanted some sort of tracking device..



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Bedlam

Oh please.

It's for our 'safety" and "security".

Right?


And it's totally voluntary. Right?



posted on Dec, 14 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

This is a bad step in the wrong direction.

Supporting this type of intrusive technology, what would be the end game?



new topics

top topics



 
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join