By silicon.com, 12 July 2004 15:20
NEWS RFID has always provoked strong opinions - from supermarkets proclaiming it to be the best thing since sliced bread to privacy advocates calling for a moratorium on the technology. However, news that one Japanese school is planning to put RFID tags on it pupils and readers on school gates and other 'dangerous' locations drew a great deal of comment from silicon.com readers.
A several readers were saddened by the development, saying the trade-off between privacy and security was too great or predicting that the tagging of children in one school was the starting point of humanity in general being tagged.
Michael Litwak summed up the feelings of many of them. "Is paranoia what we wish to teach our children?" he wrote, adding: "How much restraint will the next generation show, when it's their turn to do the monitoring? Let's not sell out real liberty for the false promise of greater security."
The dilemma between infringing on children's civil rights and at the same time ensuring their safety was one that perplexed even the most opposed to RFID.
Reader Pete Bellamy said: "[This is] the first salvo in the war to implant chips in the world's population... But on the other hand, when a kid goes missing, the idea of being able to GPS track them is very appealing."
Nat Irvin, however, believes the sacrifice is one worth making. "For some reason, this seems to make perfectly good sense to me. Children are our most vulnerable and prized possession. Privacy is not," he wrote.
Others were less convinced that the scheme had any chance of working at all, given the nature of schoolchildren.
An anonymous reader wrote: "Can you imagine the chaos that could be caused by naughty children swapping schoolbags or items of clothing, or stealing items and then placing them in dangerous locations? A wonderful example of the misuse of technology."
Coleman Yee thought he had the answer to wandering children and it didn't need any tracking chips. "Cheaper solution: close the gates!"
One anonymous reader just simply couldn't see what all the fuss was about, saying: "How many of you have cardkeys? Guess what - that's RFID! This is no different than issuing a card key to each student, just like we have at work. And, just as cardkeys, you only get tracked when going through chokepoints such as entrances and exits. No big deal here - and I'd prefer people spend more time worrying about their kids' exercise habits, spelling and math."
Comments
There are 38 comments. Join the discussion
1. James Pomeroy
It isn't the system that is at fault - purely the risk of the information collected being abused. If the only people able to access the childrens location was their parents - as a parent of 4 kids I would love to know I could find them if abducted within minutes.
As for shops and clothing etc. if the information collected was only used to track stolen items what's the problem. If the stores are tracking people to assess their shopping methods it is a breach of privacy.
Many people now track expensive cars - the tracker is only used if the car is stolen - surely if this were applied to kids and stolen items they would only be tracked if there was a problem.
I can't see a problem with that
2. Gordon Bunker
20 years from now children will be chipped at birth. We do it with our pets (dogs, cats etc), our farm animals (Ostriches, cows, pigs etc) it will be a natural thing. No ID cards, will be needed, our medical records will be instantly available, it can carry dna daata to prove that we haven't been re-chipped etc. - IT WILL HAPPEN, lets work out how to make best use of it.
3. Craig Golby
I really dont see the problem. RFID on kids is a great idea from the point of view of Security and Safety, anybody argueing otherwise is mad.
I do see the point on the invasion of privacy, but when push comes to shove, if you havent got anything to hide, whats the problem.
4. Nick Ford
Privacy, Civil liberties and freedom are precious and there are too many who want to deny to us under the guise of "security".
The nothing to fear statement is another load of drivel. we all have something to hide however minor. It's waht a goverment might decide is unaceptable next that makes the "nothing to hide" statement nonsensica. Tell that to the white farmers in Zimbabwe, the moslems, the old, the Rwandians, the opposition party in Zimbabwe. All these had nothing to fear until goverments decide they were to be outside the law or controlled.
5. Ken Hall
In response to Craig Golby. You are not a clinical psychologist, hold no credentials or qualifications as a psyciatrist and yet you make a diagnosis of madness to anybody who may disagree with you.
It is this kind of empty, blind and closed mindedness that makes compulsary RFID chips and ID cards so scary. You cannot create a counter argument and so anyone who disagrees must be mad, you attack the person and not the argument.
The 'if you disagree you must be mad' argument is one used prominently by dictators and tyrants the world over. Added to this the technology of chipped humans linked to Government databases and you have the perfect recipe for an enslaved population.
Craig, you are free to disagree with me, you can freely call me mad. You can freely (at this time) call Tony Blair, G.W.Bush or anybody else you wish mad. However, with this technology, (an implanted RFID chip linked to an entitlements database) you could easily have your entitlements stopped for merely disagreeing with the polititicians of the time.
This scenario is not so far fetched, who'd have thought 4 years ago that the US and UK Governments would be detaining individuals without trial and holding them in prisons/camps without charge or legal representation?
It's like you are being herded into a steel cage for your own safety. Only it is not untill you are inside that cage that you realise the danger is inside with you and you cannot get out.
The Governments in the future may be benign, but do you want to give them that ultimate power? Do you know for certain that all future Governments will be benign?
You have no guarentee of a safe and free future. This technology if implemented takes the choices out of our hands.
6. Chris Tolmie
There are key areas of concern - where is the chip placed on the child, who installs it and when is it removed or disabled. The thin end of the civil liberty wedge is getting wider. We now have CCTV in our high streets, complusory Id, RFID, and many laudable checks to protect ourselves and our children. But I am worried . . . . .
7. Chris Millar
While I totally agree with Nick Ford on the fact that Civil Liberties and Freedom are precious commodities we must also remember that the right to protect your siblings is also an in-built reaction with parents and equally precious.It is a decision that must be made at family level with good communication between each member. We cannot be social workers to the family unit (Fluffy Liberals take note).....It is thier decision and in my opinion RFID tagging used in a responsible communicated way can only help to give peace of mind to the parents holding the responsibility of the child/ward.....In Soham the killer was able to discard the larger units such as the mobile phone which means the tag must be concealed in some way......they would not have saved the child but would have pinpointed immediatly where the children lay. This would have saved the families the torment of those crippling days.....Society is where it is and the tools must be allowed to give all involved ....A FREEDOM OF CHOICE
8. Craig Golby
Response to Ken Hall.
You are correct Ken, I dont hold those qualifications, however if the baby that my wife is to have in 3 months was to wear some for of RFID tag, and this prevented them from being abducted, abused or killed then I am all for it.
You question my ability to call you mad. My statement, if you would like to read it again was
"I really dont see the problem. RFID on kids is a great idea from the point of view of Security and Safety, anybody argueing otherwise is mad. "
Can I take it from the fact that you are disagreeing with me that you do not recognise the benefits of this technology for childrens "Security and Safety" ???? That you would rather preserve a few perceived civil liberties at the cost of a few more childrens lives.
You may not have noticed, but we live in a democracy in this country, whilst certain liberties may be taken away, any government doing so can be ousted 4 years later.
Remember 9-11, I would rather loose a few liberties than see another one of those. Or are your liberties worth more than others lives ????
9. Derek Jameson
This is another low water mark for the intelligence of the British public. People treating ludicrous schemes like this seriously reflects the sad state of public life in britain, as more and more aspects of modern living are applied to the most insidious, downright evil form of simpleminded vindictiveness and hate crime ever to surface in Britain, the perpetual hounding of pedophiles to avoid standing out in a crowd. This kind of debate would be more suited to a discussion of jews in nazi germany.
Child abduction happens once every few weeks at most in this country of millions.
Anyone who subscribes to this kind of scheme by employing the argument of child safety, is in fact abusing their own children and exploiting them to serve their egoes and make them feel secure socially among the creeping shadow of fear and ignorance which now governs our lives. If people are really that concerned for the safety of children, then they should consider the affect unfair trading practices, agricultural policies, and foreign affairs are having on innocent children daily. Nike trainers made by kids and 3rd world children dying by the hundreds every day are monumental issues, sparking widespread attacks both terrorist and otherwise, on western values, what's left of them...
Or don't we care about children suffering in their hundreds of thouands if they have dark skin?...
It saddens me to see 'professionals' and others of high standing stoke their egoes with this kind of vile, cowrdly behaviour.
10. Alan Lewis
In response to Craig Golby.
Whilst I might not have something to hide, what I do and where I go is my damn business and no-one elses.
I notice the use of capital S in security, as though it is a holy shrine; 'all else is secondary in the name of Security'?
What about Liberty and Freedom? A friend - sadly deceased - wrote for his thesis a paper "Are we losing our Liberty through Legislation" That was almost 20 years ago, and much of what he wrote was heavily critised. Yet 20 years later, much of it is so commonplace we hardly notice.
RFID is another small step in a series that erodes our personal freedom and privacy. Credit cards track our spending patterns, supermarkets track our eating habits, surveilance cameras watch on our streets and roadways. Proposals for yet mroe electronic tagging, ID and tracking. Yet has this reduced - or even prevented - crime? No. The cameras do not deter criminals, they penalise otherwise legal drivers. The data that is collected by private and public bodies is abused and sold on, poorly protected by legislation and often by physical controls.
I dont want people knowing what I am doing, where I am going, where I have been. 65 years ago, asking such questions was deemed unacceptable due to the war.
If 'Security' is so important, why do we have such poor border control? Why focus on own citizens and not the external threats?
Only the guilty have something fear? A government can legislate innocence into guilt.
back to the plot! What real benefit has RFID tagging have in a school? Only to say a tag has passed a given point. It does not enforce policy or control.It does not prevent truancy, bullying, or anti-socila behavior. And the inherent danger? Once it is in place, a someone, somewhere will decide it would be useful to "extend" the reading area...
11. anonymous
In secondary schools 4 minutes are wasted at the start of every lesson because by law you have to take a register, with RFID tags on students the time will be 4 seconds.
Result more teaching time, better educated kids? Got to be progress
12. Alan Lewis
Another response to Craig.
In what way will RFID tagging prevent a child from being abducted? Or killed? In what way would it prevent another 9/11?
It can't. Pure and simple. Its a tracking device, with limited range. Even the "safety" benefit of being possibly able to track a missing person would need an extensive and extremely dense network, complete with backhaul links and processing power. The price? Huge. The benefit? Dubious. It would prevent little. Certainly not a crime from being committed.
Prevent a 9/11? Laughable. Do you see the terrorists lining up to be RFID'd at port of entry. Do you see tourists accepting RFID tags for two weeks. And can you honestly imgine any government enforcing immigrants to be tagged at port of entry. No. And whilst the legitimate may be honest enough to dutifully collect visas, permits, citizenship and tag, the illegals will do what they do now - disappear.
Perhaps the answer is to increase police powers... the police can demand your "papers" whilst running a scanner over you... "No RFID tag... criminal, that is. Must have something to hide. Obviously guilty". Far fetched? Not really. Travelling without papers was a capital offence in Nazi Germany...
13. Mark Cooper
Craig and Ken... Both of you have legitimate and reasonable arguments, but lets take a step back for a moment and look at what is actually being argued over.
From one point of view, we have a prospective parent who sees this as a means to enhance the protection and security of his offspring, yet on the other hand we have someone who envisages this being used as part of an overall strategy to allow some sort of Orwellian vision of the future to come into being.
True, politicans and governments cannot be trusted, but unless we somehow manage to dispense with the democratic process, all such are answerable to we, the voters.
How realistic therefore is it to assume that all technology that is capable of tracking or tracing our activities will also be used to control them?
I remember similar discussions not too long ago on the subject of allowing (or even forcing) children to carry mobile phones. If a mobile phone is switched on and carried by someone, it can be traced. No-one these days seems to have any worries about this as it is now seen as an essential part of our lives. A small child, however, cannot be expected to carry and use a mobile phone. Why, therefore, should they be excluded from the benefits that RFID has to offer?
As with any new technology, uses will be experimental and vary in implementation until clear cut rules are defined and enforced - which they will be.
14. Darrall Pullen
Being a father and having a child, surely we are missing the biggest problem with an instant solution. The problem is society, we (the royal we)no longer hold dear the values of "life". Society has shirked its responsibilities to common "man". I only have to look at my life to realise that humanity no longer cares about one another, only looking to gain from fellow man's misfortune. e.g. a man in the street being beaten by fellow man.....who amongst you would step in and confront the assaulter. Nobody! Why? Because although it may be wrong we no longer have the desire to make a mistake by assuming the person assaulting is committing a wrong. For all we know the person being assaulted may have committed a serious offence, potentially warranting the assault. As an individual, who are we to judge? The vision of a person being assaulted should command us to intervene, whether the assault is warranted or not. Back to the thread; the protection of a child should reside with the parent/s. It is their sole responsibility to ensure they are adequately protected from fellow man; furthermore it is the responsibility of fellow man to protect all people of this planet and not resort to technology or any other means to secure our prosperity, safety and future. Would we allow all persons to be bar-coded(a well established and reliable technology) at birth just so we could track our children safely? I think not!
15. Craig Golby
Derek Jameson
"Child abduction happens once every few weeks at most in this country of millions. "
Agreed Derek, and personally I think that is far too many !!!
16. Craig Golby
"the protection of a child should reside with the parent/s. It is their sole responsibility to ensure they are adequately protected from fellow man; " Agreed Darrall.
Most of us here are likely to be parents, or parents of the future.
Technology is available to us, and should be used and abused to make our country, and the world, a safer place. If we cant use it for that, then arent we all just wasting our time ????
As for the conspiracy theorists, I am sure when this becomes common practice they will find something else to worry about.
17. Dan Lewis
Surely sometime during Ms Best's schooling she was taught that acronyms and terms that have been reduced to the first letter of each word should be identified clearly at the first use of the term in the writing.
Evidently 'Jo' (Ed note. Why the single inverted commas around 'Jo'?) has forgotten how alienating it can be to run into such an above mentioned term without the decoding of the term in its concentrated form.
Yes, I know that RFID probably means Radio Frequency Identification, but what about all those who do not? Phooey!
(Ed note. Judging by the reader comments you can probably work out that our readers do indeed know what RFID technology is. If we weren't a technology site we probably would spell it out, but as we are we tend not to feel the need. It's been in common usage for some time now - if it were a new concept we would spell it out, but stopped doing so, some months ago.)
18. Derek Jameson
Mr Golby,
Agreed.
But is that any reason to support something which effectively will have no plausible effect on this, at such a potentially terrifying cost?
If I were to suggest that you wake up every morning with a splitting headache til sundown for the rest of your life, on the 0.00001 percent chance that it may save one child from abduction, would you agree to that? Based on your reasoning you are left with only one answer already...
Remember there is more at stake here. I think our chief duty is to preserve what's left of a world fit for humans to live in for our children, not to be bullied into every life-strangling scheme launched, allegedly, in their names, in order to aid those who would oppress us for their own profit.
I really believe that you, and others of the same opinion should think long and hard about what proportion of your values are your own, and what proportion has been whispered in your ear while you weren't paying attention...
19. Pachey
This is a very interesting thread.
Many people are arguing that RFID tagging is justified because it protects children from being abducted. Child abduction is extremely rare. All of us were once kids and made it to adulthood without being kidnapped/murdered/wandering out of the school gates and getting lost.
Does anyone else think we're patronising children? Do we not think they're capable of protecting themselves to a degree? I think teaching your kids to be streetwise is a far better way of protecting them than tagging them like you would your cat or dog.
It would be interesting to see what children themselves think of this idea. Has anyone asked any?
20. Craig Golby
The simple answer Derek is Yes, and please call me Craig, its less formal :-}}
I would question whether you have children. You ask, whether I would be willing to wake up with a splitting headache every morning on the off chance that it protected my child from abduction, again the answer is Yes, unreservedly and without doubt YES.
You want to preserve a world fit for humans, then this is necessary. We currently have a world where people can move freely, can assume false identities freely, can transport goods freely. These three things are what led to 9-11. People assuming that in the name of their religion they can take multiple thousands of lives.
Yes it would mean that I have to show my tag when I move from country to country, but how is that different to a passport. I would have to show my tag when stopped by the police, how is that different to my driving licence. I would have to show my tag when at the bank, how is that different to my bank card.
I think that the problem here is its different, people are afraid of change.
If it makes the world a safer better place then lets go for it, damn the civil liberties and the conspiracy theorists.
As for the subliminal lessons that you are suggesting that I have been subjected to, can I not suggest the same of you, one who is willing to sacrifice other human life over a few civil liberties that realistically dont exist anyway !!!!
21. Craig Golby
Do you want to know what I really think, well here it is, the master plan.
A Central database, not as is being discussed at the moment on these pages, but a truly central database. Merge them all, DVLA, DVLC, Postal, Passport, Police etc etc etc. At birth you get registered, at death your passing is noted. In between all you do that is of note is noted.
In order to get any sort of benefits, or to purchase a house or any other sort of transaction of that size you must identify yourself using this database.
Different people have different views, the Police can only see Criminal Records, the Passport Office can only see what is appropriate to them, but it is all still central.
A points system is created for the purposes of obtaining certain sensitive jobs, such as teacher or caretaker, that would overcome the Soham issue.
And Yes, at birth you are registered with the database and are provided with an identification of some sort RFID today, something else tomorrow, and it is yours for life.
What the hell is the issue. If you commit crimes you will be easily caught, if you dont you will carry on as if nothing has happenned.
Yes you might get a few more targetted junk mails, but you do what we do now, create a junk mail filter, or file them under B for Bin.
People need to think about priorities.
We are living in a dangerous world, technology is something that can help us to eradicate some of that danger.
Use it and stop wingeing about it !!
22. Chris Millar
In response to Derek Jameson..... I am a professionaland I am also a father of three boys and at the age of 13 they were allowed to go to parties and dances with a condom in their top pocket ....along with the knowledge that AIDS was rife and getting a girl pregnant would affect their lives and the girl in question.
They are well mannered happy guys who all hold degrees and the ability to communicate with friends and strangers alike....As a parent with the worry of something major happening to them (All brought up in Belfast) I would have discussed the matter with them and the fact my responsibility was to them until they were of suitable age.
Do not play the Nazi and Jew card and criticise individuals for thier views as it only begs the questions .... is communication skills lacking in certain areas here....has the guy kids....or the persuit of peadophiles seems abhorant in this issue - Is there a darker reason.
23. Chris McDermott
As someone who is leading a campaign against RFID (www.notags.co.uk) I am well aware of the arguments for and against this technology.
The problem is how much of what is left of our privacy are we prepared to surrender. RFID is the perfect tool to monitor movement, whether that be goods or people.
RFID is a reaility and is not going to be un-invented. It is going to be up to all of us to decide how we interact with this technology and perhaps more importantly how it interacts with us!
The idea of chipping humans I find truly terrifying but in our current society I can see how the concept could be very appealing. But I firmly believe that the chipping of people would mark the end of human freedom, as we know it.
If you wish to be a serf of the state, if you want to surrender your freedom just so you can walk around without having to carry a credit card then go right ahead but I won’t be joining you.
I have heard the old’ nothing to hide, nothing to fear’ argument so many times its endless. For those people who use that argument to defend the State / global corporations having limitless access to your life, just think about what type of world it would be if everywhere (and I mean everywhere) you went and everything you bought was monitored, collated and recorded?
Even if you are a law abiding good citizen like myself you would have nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. We have never before faced such a threat to our individual liberty as we do with RFID. The time is fast approaching when we will have to face this technological threat head on!
24. Nigel Perry
All technology from the paper bag to atomic power has its uses and abuses. To favour the benefits over the problems you require stable democracies, so put your effort into those.
25. Chris Millar
To Chris McDermott I can say that actual chipping and/or the penetrating of skin to bury a chip is without doubt a No No.....The point has to be made that in todays market cell phones can track a person to the nearest metre (But are far to big)......The issue here is tagging (i.e. keyring size RFID) which can be used or left behind after a deal breaking communication with family members.
Parents are responsible for the children under thier care.....they can also be sent to jail for not showing due care or control....the key is communication and the family unit and what is in the best interest for the family and peace of mind.
As for the chap who asks if the child has been asked.....then I believe that you come to the position of the lunatics running the asylum.
Freedom of choice for the parent who is duty bound to look after the children......brokered deals with the family to ensure protection and common sense prevails.
Yes there are draconian parents.....Maybe they should be chipped (By the authorities)until they learn how to use thier mouth to talk and not thier hands to control
26. Alan Lewis
"use it and stop whinging about it"
So exactly how does this central database overcome the danegrs in this "dangerous world" that we live in?
It doesn't. It doesn't do one single thing to prevent crime, terrorism, or even anti-social behaviour.
The references to Soham are misguided. That was a failure of process. The information was available and not acted on.
How do we, as citizens, use it? We can't.
And why on earth does *anyone* need to know what I do of note...
The reality is, that controls will be ill-thought out, and poorly implemented. That security services will have access to all areas. That the database will be believed in preference to an individual (and precedent legal decisions).
Given that it has no preventative value, has no benefit or usage to the individual, what is it the point in building it? Money spent on better things, like more bobbies on the beat, more nurses, lower taxation.
The only purpose I can see is to enable to closer surveilance of the individual.
27. Derek Jameson (not THE)
Ok Craig, apologies for my tone earlier.
The idea of a central database as you described it is unavoidable due to the obvious ability technology has to simplify public life. Ultimately this is something I am resigned to. However, two issues spring to mind;
1. Having this database, as you described it it still isn't clear how it aids the police in investigating crimes, unless you are advocating that the location of every man woman and child is tracked and logged in perpituity. In any event, when a relatively liberal country like ours introduces this technology, it just rubber stamps it for introduction in countries where families live in fear of knocks on the door, executions etc. This is something I don't want on my conscience.
2. Introducing such a system on the grounds that it is there to protect children from horrible fates is an argument geared to manipulating peoples most basic emotional make-up, and subsequently public opinion en-masse.
I find the issue of a childs welfare being exploited to promote such blanket schemes obscene, and would rather the very real issue of the possible introduction of electronic tagging of the civilian population be examined based on our willingness to be monitored for life, with no idea what form future government will take. This, after all, will be the government our children have to live with people!
Don't let tabloid sensationalism and scare-mongering erode your courage, or your free will! It is, inarguably, the cornerstone of our humanity, and isn't that what we are trying so hard to preserve in all of this, one way or another?
28. Craig Golby
All, its interesting how this has escalated from putting a key ring sized tag on a group of children in one school in one country, not even the UK, to the meteoric heights of everyone having surgically implanted chips under the skin that are tracked 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
We are all intelligent people here, my courage and my free will have not been eroded in anyway, whether I am chipped or not, I will still do what I want, when I want, within the rules that the Law of this country lays down, so whats the difference.
This is coming, it will happen, what we need to do is control how it happens, and the rules around it. We also need to be looking for the half full glass (positives) as opposed to the half empty one (negatives)
And Derek, thanks for the debate, we must all have our views challenged every now and again, thats the beauty of the democracy that we live in, and will continue to live in, with or without chips.
29. Chris Millar
To All reference Craig Golby statement.....
Hear! Hear!
Good debate.....and I am sure we have not heard the last
It will be implemented....probably to protect and help Alzheimer sufferers ....then who knows
Best Regards To All
30. Chris Tolmie
One thing from my side. If I had one of these chips in me as a teenager - I would have taken it out, or, if this was not possible I would have disabled it. Like many teenagers, I was a rebel!
Chris
31. Derek Jameson
"There is only one step from fanaticism to barbarism"
Denis Diderot
32. Joe Whitehead
Gonna laugh, when everyone finds out what 100% effective laws are like.
Yep, it all started with the DVDs and video games that can't be fast forwarded at the beginning. Wait till your PCs, your automobile, your bank account are no longer yours... oh wait, that's happened in one way or another. (See what happens if a police officer pulls you over and you are way over intoxicated, or what happens if you do lots of large bank transfers and have no explanation, in most countries, including mine)
You can lose your license if lucky, and also have your car impounded. Go to jail if really bad.
Yes, this was meant as humor. (:
Sometimes humor makes you see things in a new light.
33. chicken feet
we are not bloody dogs we don't need to be chipped we need to be free and independent there are other ways to get certain info about people that you need
34. Craig Golby
Joe Whitehead
Meant to be humerous.
In what way exactly ????
If you are driving a car whilst drunk, you deserve to be stopped, deserve to be locked up and deserve to have your car confiscated.
If you have large sums of money being transferred between bank accounts "and have no explanation" then similarly you deserve to be investigated and where necessary locked up.
There is an explanation available for every money transfer, otherwise why would you transfer it ???? If its legal then state it, if its criminal go to prison.
35. Marc Lewis
It's just technology, it will be circumvented and invalidated weeks or months after it's inception. Technology has a tendency to bite itself. I think chipping people is just going to happen. In fact if you want money I'd buy stock in those companies. I don't necessarily agree with it because of the ingenuity of people over the technology they have created themselves. Eventually this technology will be invalidated as easy as the computer has been, and it will be just be another equally uncertain way to possibly track something or someone. Technology is a mental creation effort that can be undermined in a matter of time by a similar process.
There never going to chip all of the people, they'll miss people who could benefit it, and not chip people who should be tracked more closely. Someone can override your kids chip by the time he's tagged in the first place. There will be times when this RFID has value and equal times when it will be useless and futile. Even if you started tagging all the prisoners in a prison, they would find a way using available items like tinfoil, to block it, squelch it, dig it out and change it with others. They used to trade stamps and cigarettes in prison for money, now it will be RFID tags.
Freedom is worth lives, it costs lives to get it, it still has value so it will cost lives to keep freedom.
36. Barry Johnson
Reply to comment made by Gordon Bunker, This guy seem like the type that tells everyone he lives in a big house, drives a flash car and forbids his kids to watch TV. I bet he is also the type to volunteer his kids to be "Chipped"
37. anonymous
What about when your child grows up then the government can track their every movement.If they don't like what your child believes or does they can turn off their chip.They can track them they have that child's rights removed.
38. Craig
Just searching on the web for my name and came across this article. Seems so long ago, 4 years.
I wander now what the reaction would be to the same discussion.
I still see the rights of the individual as paramount, however, maybe, just maybe, if such a solution had been put in place in time Madeleine McCann (and so many unamed others) would/could have been located.