| |
|
First point: I don't know about the situation in Brazil, but here the rate of kidnappings is actually markedly down this summer, just that it's been beaten to death in the media. A far more suspicious person than I would theorize that such media exposure is no accident, and that this is the latest move in a strategic attempt to get such devices into mass acceptance for far more sinister purposes than kindly Mr. Gov't keeping His fatherly eye on your young'uns. I'm not sure I'm quite so suspicious yet, but I am not encouraged, either.
Second point: I might sooner chop off any child of mine's hand than allow hir to be tracked like some animal in the wild. (In fact, once they'd allow for such implants, the possibility that the boogeyman known as "the criminal element" might see the possibilities in doing just that, which would justify a companion implant in the skull. Go check your Bible for the locations of the Mark of the Beast.) Life, including parenthood, is risk, and one should only allow for reasonable measures to minimize such risk as is within your power. This is not reasonable. You know that from this point it's merely a short hop to having one's "vital" information, such as police record, credit report, bank account, etc. encoded into these chips, which will then make almost any and all actions you could take recordable. I disagree with the argument that the probability of criminal recidivism goes down inverse to the probability of capture; all that means is that the message is beamed home that you will never be trusted again, so you'd better find another way of survival within a system stacked against you. Sorry, but no single human agency, even under the artificial guise of an industry distinct from the state, should ever, EVER be allowed to hold that much influence over human behavior. I'll accept the burden of free will, thank you. |
|
|
