It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Stun Bracelet for ALL Airline Passengers?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 12:18 PM
soon they will have us all walking around with a number tattooed on our foreheads or till they start making solvent green....

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 12:19 PM
I still can hardly believe that the government has a war against smoking in public places on the off chance someone might catch some second hand lung cancer (not to mention the idiotic war against marijuana) yet they get gung-ho over ideas like this which have an even better chance of causing serious injury or death to someone. That's one of my main beefs with the government, actually, they suffer from a serious lack of brains.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 12:35 PM
reply to post by merryxmas

Here is more information on the bracelets by the company itself.

Scroll to the end of the page to read on the different PDF documents talking about our government at state, local and congress interest in the devices.

Already Colorado, Wyoming and Montana has shown interest and they want Mexico also.

So its more to the bracelet than just airport security.

It looks like they are waiting for funding at local level and through grants, this means that some private organizations and groups are looking into the devices.

[edit on 8-7-2008 by marg6043]

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 12:44 PM

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I fear the US goverment more than I fear any terrorist. If I ran the show, I would mandate all citizens carry a side arm, and tell them that it's each citizens responsibility to make sure the US is safe.

And what you'd get is a million incompetent nincompoops shooting at their own shadows.

"That guy looked at me funny--he must be a terrorist!" *BANG*

"That girl is wearing a veil--I bet there's a bomb strapped to her waist!" *BANG*

"That guy's skin is a different color and his accent is weird!" *BANG*

As another posted earlier, the person with his hand on the buttion for these things has to power to activate them at a whim based on his "best judgment". Not that I think this is a good idea--if it happens I'll never fly commercial again--but if you're not willing to trust the judgment of a trained observer in using something like this, why would you trust the judgment of millions of untrained individuals with far more lethal weaponry at hand?

Like it or not, there are a lot of people in this country who, by reason of mental defect, poor motor skills, or just plain old crass stupidity, should not be allowed to own and/or use guns. Encouraging such people to carry all the time and use their "best judgment" to take the law into their own hands is sheer lunacy.

Spread the power evenly throughout the citizens, instead of awarding some organization power over everyone. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Once you have absolute power, you are a god, and everyone else is consumable item subjects, to do whatever you bid.

As a socialist I'm inclined to agree with this. However, I recognize the need for trained professionals for functions such as law enforcement. The problem arises when those professionals are not held to high enough standards by the civilian authorities and are not disciplined by their superiors. Checks and balances only work when those responsible for checking and maintaining the balance do their jobs properly according to the mandate of the People. It is the People who have abdicated their responsibility to demand higher standards, accountability and common sense.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 01:36 PM
reply to post by Keyhole

I have a better idea. Lets' just get right to it and RENDER AIR-PASSENGERS UNCONCIOUS right from the start.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 01:36 PM

Originally posted by Keyhole

What is wrong with these people
[edit on 7/7/2008 by Keyhole]

LOL!!! i ask my self that question everyday.

its getting to that point now all i can do is just laugh.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 01:47 PM
This is supposed to be a youtube video on the subject of stun bracelets.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 02:03 PM
what about the bracelet wearer carrying a simple 1/4 inch thick
and 12 inch wide band of nonconductive material such as a leather r rubber bracelet...

Simply put the innocuous protection between the security bracelet and ones skin and the stun bracelet is rendered ineffective.

Or hows about a pruning shears to cut the sukka off.. hey they allegedly stashed box cutters on aircraft before. so why not a bolt cutter or a shear or even one of the TV advertized , battery powered, wonder cutters...
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz and zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, there you have the bracelet cut in half and useless.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by merryxmas

Here are a couple links to letters sent by the Department of Homeland Security to the company who produces these bracelets ( LAMPERD) that are on their website..

The topic of the Homeland Security Letters is:

Subject: Improved Border Security with the Detention and Possible Immobilization of Detainees Using the Security Bracelet ZATTS.

In the third paragraph down
on this page, it says:

In addition it is conceivable to envision a use to improve air security, on passenger planes.

and here is the last page of that letter.

And I guess maybe cattle prods will be next if the lines at the airports start moving too slowly for them!

reply to post by jackinthebox

I sure hope they don't see THAT thread of yours, but then again, they've probably contemplated it already!

The new way to fly! Sleep your way across the country! (No extra charge!)

[edit on 7/8/2008 by Keyhole]

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 03:14 PM
reply to post by centurion1211

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by manson_322
this exposes the fact that USA treats its own like animals ...

wow , more crimes against humanity will be committed by USA

Uh, to remind you. These measures are having to be considered (and I hope they are rejected!) not because the U.S. population are being treated like animals. It is rather because of what the terrorist "animals" you seem to be supporting have done.

It is this mindset which allowed for the sweeping loss of constitutional rights post-9/11.

We run to our government scared and stupid, seeming to forget the repeated pattern of abuse of power. It is easier to carry on, not making a fuss, than to adress the obvious.

We are free damnit...

...because they say we are!

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 03:56 PM

Originally posted by spines

It is this mindset which allowed for the sweeping loss of constitutional rights post-9/11.

I realize this is a potential hijack or deflection of this thread to ask the question - exactly what freedoms have you lost since 9/11?. But I guess it needs to be asked (ad nauseum) every time it comes up - because no one can ever name a freedom they've lost. They just keep repeating this sound bite as if that alone made it true. Political Correctness (PC) is costing you way more freedoms than the Patriot Act ever has, but none of you ever complains about those.

Granted, I will have to change my position if this bracelet thing ever passes, and stop flying for any purpose.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 04:28 PM
reply to post by centurion1211

Rather then spend a long time typing it all out, I will link to a .pdf file which states it more clearly and much more concisely then I am able to.

This is the .pdf file, and this is the site from which it originates.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 04:40 PM

Originally posted by spines
reply to post by centurion1211

Rather then spend a long time typing it all out, I will link to a .pdf file which states it more clearly and much more concisely then I am able to.

This is the .pdf file, and this is the site from which it originates.

The New York Civil Liberties Union. Like the ACLU, their name is a total oxymoron. Both organizations long ago changed from actually guarding civil liberties to pursuing a totally PC agenda. As I mentioned earlier, I'm much more concerned with the loss of my rights due to PC - so far. Just really hope they don't make the logical leap to thinking, "Hey, why not make drivers licenses work this way, too?"

[edit on 7/8/2008 by centurion1211]

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Shaker
I honestly can not imagine the majority of people going against this if it was put into place. Sure people might grumble a little bit, but then they'll just do what they're told and put it on just to board the plane.

Some agency wants to know what everyone is doing all the time and the majority of people roll over and take it.

It happens when people think, "I'm not doing anything wrong so what does it matter?"

I would wear the collar, or whatever, no because of what you have stated but because I would have to. Since I'm a frequent flier and have to get from point A to point B, I have no choice in the matter...

Right now I am in Lisbon Portugal, in a week or two will be in Petersburg, Russia, and Helsinki, Findand. In August I will be in Carliele, UK, then I will be going to Cambridge, Ontario, and finally home to Long Island, NY...
If they made me wear a collar how do you suggest I get to these places, swimming????

For me in is not a question of choice, or sheep mentality, it is a question of need and lack of any other options...

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 06:02 PM
reply to post by jackinthebox

Great idea, I would go along with that

I hate flying but have to do it all the time, that would be great for me, I would same a fortune on pills...

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 07:04 PM
reply to post by Keyhole

And the masses will be fooled into thinking that it's worth the loss of freedom for this new kind of "protection" from hijackers.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 08:08 PM
Well for starters the United States does not decree legislation for all air flight passengers, only those flying within, to (once in their airspace) and from the States. So the thread title is misleading.

I agree with the posters that state most people will just go along with this should it become law; more interesting is the fact that the idea comes from a non-elected body (homeguard bunnies) and appears to be defining up and coming legislaton. This should be of great concern.

I think lastly, should it be forced on Americans, it's going to provide much amusment with passengers on connecting flights zapping American passengers with the slightly dodgy zap remotes they bought in Camden Market the day before.

posted on Jul, 8 2008 @ 11:39 PM

Originally posted by depth om
reply to post by manson_322

Committed by THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA yes, but not The United States.

Hehe, great point there. The whole idea of a 'nation' disgusts me. Nations exist only to serve their own abstract political agendas, inevitably moving towards empire for those with the power to do so. The US was [supposedly] founded in rebellion of that very idea. But no, now we have a "federal government" which is no longer a voluntary relationship between independent States (as it should be) but is rather a behemoth monstrosity that has even brainwashed most of us into thinking that "we are Amerika" as a united entity (i.e. "reification," the one and only sin of the enlightened) controlled by "our" government in D.C. Its BS...I didn't sign up for this Excrement!

posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 02:09 AM
reply to post by NorthWolfe CND

What you bring up here is a valid point too. My main point was to the vacationers and not really to the business travel. Assuming that is what your frequent flying is for... but I don't want to presume...

I don't remember anything being said about international travelers being required to wear the bracelet, as far as I knew it just said this was for domestic travel here in the States. They might be able to mandate wearing one on the outbound flight, but how could they enforce it at international hubs outside of US jurisdiction? CIA? Who knows...

After all is said and done though, this is still a pretty bad idea brought upon by a need for control, that shows no regard to travelers safety.

However on the other hand, I can see where they would be coming from using the terrorist argument. That if some person tried to take over the plane someone, be it the pilot or flight attendant or whoever has the little buttons, they would get zapped and then restrained. Flight saved.

But out of the thousands of flights per day around the world, how many hijackings are there per month on average? Now they want to slap these things on us every time we fly "just in case."

In my humble opinion there are better things they could be spending money on to make this country safer and more secure without having to resort to the shredding of any personal liberties.

Just my 0.0127427 Euros...

posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 02:21 AM

Originally posted by deadline527
So many things wrong here..

What about pregnant women?
What about elderly?
What about people with heart problems?
What about children?

I am sure a shock to a pregnant lady that immobilizes her for several minutes is quite safe to the unborn child. Surely electrical currant knows where to stop so it doesn't hurt the child. And as for the older population, just look at tasers, I could see a LOT of people having heart attacks and such after being shocked. Is this product safe for children? I mean, surely the misbehaving child deserves to be shocked unconscious.


What are these pregnant women and elderly people doing trying to hijack a plane anyway?

I dont agree with the idea at all, but really, do you think that it will be used against a snotty nosed kid, or some yappy pregnant lady?

Here's a better idea, it would sort the problem of plane hijackings all together. Rig the planes up with a remote detonation device, so that at the first signs of a hijacking, someone in the tower presses a button and the entire plane is blown out of the sky. Pregnant ladies, old people, snotty kids, terrorists, and hippies, no discrimination.

Come to think of it, if I were on a plane and suddenly realised there were 5 guys intent on flying the plane into a sky scraper, I might just prefer the bracelets...

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in