Adam007 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Read here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/ ... r-peanuts/ I'm not much into posting news articles and discussing them, but I'd like to discuss the idea of this. I first saw it on my local news. After being shocked at the idea, I checked online for more information. Before I give my own opinion, I'll quickly explain what this 'safety bracelet' is for those who want to skip the read. Meant for U.S. airlines, it replaces your boarding pass. It stores your information, contains a GPS, and using EMD (Electro-Musclar Disruption) technology, is meant shock unruly passengers, as well as terrorists. The first thing that came to my head was how ironic this seems, calling it a safety bracelet. You can make the argument that it may prevent terrorism, but how many liberties do we need to sacrifice in the name of terrorism? First we only need to wear them in airports, then out of necessity for our security, we suddenly need to wear them everywhere? Not to sound too '1984,' but would we really want our government knowing where we are, being able to get our information, and being able to shock us like we're wearing a dog collar at any time? I know the idea may seem well-intentioned, but I just don't like where this technology could head. I'm hoping they don't bring these to airlines any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaphias Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Just pray that the airlines would have to pay for them. They won't. 8,325th to 99 Firemaking 3/9/08 | 44,811th to 99 Cooking 7/16/084,968th to 99 Farming 10/9/09 | Runescaper August 2005-March 2010Tip.it Mod Feb. 2008-Sep. 2008 | Tip.it Crew Sep. 2008-Nov. 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 They are taking this airport stuff way to far. It wasn't enough to not be able to take on a bottle of water now this. All the while there are still gaping holes in security. I have a friend who works at SFO for United. She said that there are ways for employees to get around security and get to the gates. Thats what DHS should be doing not this garbage. My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpbizkit Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Wait .. Theres been nothing like 9/11 since then .. That ive noticed .. This is TOO far. I mean you get the wrong person .. And that person is a child ... Tif 360 MGC Leaderboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 This would violate so many rights... "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
re4p3r1 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 theres safety and then theres just crossing the line...this would be it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpbizkit Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. Its a small inconvenience when the wrong person gets caught? Like they press it wrong so its a little child? Wouldn't this be able to kill said little child or do some serious damage ... Small chance but the chance is still there. And its a big attack at rights. Tif 360 MGC Leaderboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. Its a small inconvenience when the wrong person gets caught? Like they press it wrong so its a little child? Wouldn't this be able to kill said little child or do some serious damage ... Small chance but the chance is still there. And its a big attack at rights. They clearly said that no Permanent Damage (in the Vid around 4:20) would be done, I doubt they can kill someone, the whole point is to stun and immobilized the victim, not killing him/her. EDIT: Also look at this quote The bracelets remain inactive until a hijacking situation has been identified. At such time a designated crew member will activate the bracelets making them capable of delivering the punitive measure - but only to those that need to be restrained. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpbizkit Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. Its a small inconvenience when the wrong person gets caught? Like they press it wrong so its a little child? Wouldn't this be able to kill said little child or do some serious damage ... Small chance but the chance is still there. And its a big attack at rights. They clearly said that no Permanent Damage would be done, I doubt they can kill someone, the whole point is to stun and immobilized the victim, not killing him/her. Like they said the tazer would do no permanent damage. Tif 360 MGC Leaderboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Great we can't quadruple quote ok to Limpbizkit Tazers where one of the first stunning technology invented some years ago (1988), don't you think that in those years they might have improved the stunning technology? The only way these "Safety Bracelets" can kill someone is if they were abused like maybe overriding the computer's reaction and identifing and innocent person as a "Victim" and shocking said Victim over and over, but I'm sure that they have something for this situation. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushrock Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Never. Never give up your personal freedoms and individual rights for safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Well said. After 9/11 we've slowly given away our freedoms for so-called "security". We are no more safer than we were before 9/11 and we now have less freedoms. This would just be added to the list. "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoffman44 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 They clearly said that no Permanent Damage (in the Vid around 4:20) would be done, I doubt they can kill someone, the whole point is to stun and immobilized the victim, not killing him/her. They said that about tasers too. ---------------- Now playing: Queen - Bohemian Rhapsody via FoxyTunes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam007 Posted July 12, 2008 Author Share Posted July 12, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. I thought you were being sarcastic at first. I guess you're fine with the wiretapping they've been authorized to do on all our phones too, as well as abolishing habeus corpus. We're not terrorists, so for all we care, let em install surveillance cameras with speakers on every corner, have police watch us from them, and if we act out, let em shock us. Because we'll never have to act out since the government is always looking out for our best interests. Part of the constitution was written out so that if the government gets out of control, we have the responsibility to revolt. We need to keep some power and privacy in the people's hands. I know I exaggerated to make a point, but once we give them one freedom, it's a slippery slope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baalboy5 Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 I don't understand how the 1 terrorist will get the shock when noone will know the braclet frequency, will it shock everyone? Don't you know the first rule of MMO's? Anyone higher level than you has no life, and anyone lower than you is a noob. People in OT eat glass when they are bored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyderJ Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Never. Never give up your personal freedoms and individual rights for safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackattack Posted July 12, 2008 Share Posted July 12, 2008 Well said. After 9/11 we've slowly given away our freedoms for so-called "security". We are no more safer than we were before 9/11 and we now have less freedoms. This would just be added to the list. We are safer. We haven't had an attack since then. What freedoms have you lost? The freedom to call a suspected terrorist overseas without the call being listened to? My carbon footprint is bigger than yours...and you know what they say about big feet. These are the times that try mens souls... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. I thought you were being sarcastic at first. I guess you're fine with the wiretapping they've been authorized to do on all our phones too, as well as abolishing habeus corpus. We're not terrorists, so for all we care, let em install surveillance cameras with speakers on every corner, have police watch us from them, and if we act out, let em shock us. Because we'll never have to act out since the government is always looking out for our best interests. Part of the constitution was written out so that if the government gets out of control, we have the responsibility to revolt. We need to keep some power and privacy in the people's hands. I know I exaggerated to make a point, but once we give them one freedom, it's a slippery slope. Yes I am fine with wiretapping, as long as it is not used to spy on innocent people. Yes I am fine with cameras on every corner, as long as it does not invaded the Privacy of Innocent people. People start to freak out when the Government shows some power, that they think it will be abused. The Government is just trying to protect you and some security measures must be taken, afterall your life(ves) is not something to take lightly. Surely you don't want your life in Danger? They clearly said that no Permanent Damage (in the Vid around 4:20) would be done, I doubt they can kill someone, the whole point is to stun and immobilized the victim, not killing him/her. They said that about tasers too. Did you not read my post about a few hours ago. Great we can't quadruple quote ok to Limpbizkit Tazers where one of the first stunning technology invented some years ago (1988), don't you think that in those years they might have improved the stunning technology? The only way these "Safety Bracelets" can kill someone is if they were abused like maybe overriding the computer's reaction and identifing and innocent person as a "Victim" and shocking said Victim over and over, but I'm sure that they have something for this situation. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 what's the big problem? If you're not a terrorist, why would they shock you? Why are people so afraid of security measures, if you have nothing to hide? This is one of the last line of defense im afraid. Afterall it's just a small inconvience. I thought you were being sarcastic at first. I guess you're fine with the wiretapping they've been authorized to do on all our phones too, as well as abolishing habeus corpus. We're not terrorists, so for all we care, let em install surveillance cameras with speakers on every corner, have police watch us from them, and if we act out, let em shock us. Because we'll never have to act out since the government is always looking out for our best interests. Part of the constitution was written out so that if the government gets out of control, we have the responsibility to revolt. We need to keep some power and privacy in the people's hands. I know I exaggerated to make a point, but once we give them one freedom, it's a slippery slope. Yes I am fine with wiretapping, as long as it is not used to spy on innocent people. Yes I am fine with cameras on every corner, as long as it does not invaded the Privacy of Innocent people. People start to freak out when the Government shows some power, that they think it will be abused. The Government is just trying to protect you and some security measures must be taken, afterall you life(ves) is not something to take lightly. No matter what reason they blanket wiretapping under, it is, and always will be a complete invasion of privacy. I don't care if I'm an innocent citizen, I do not want the government to have the opportunity to wiretap my house. Who regulates who the government wiretaps? There is no special committee that dictates who they wiretap. They choose. Once cameras and wiretapping become accepted, we are on the brink of losing everything that the founding fathers strived to achieve for this country; it's the reason they left Britain. Persecution. Every individual has a right to act the way he or she wants to in their own home. Violating the Constitution through cameras and wiretapping is one of the things that will bring a citizen uprising against the government. Do not ever let the government control you like that. No matter how they disguise it, they are controlling you. "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 Your Propaganda won't work on me. If it means saving millions of lives then I say that Wiretapping someone's house is the last thing and the right thing to do. But let's say the government is corrupt, if the government goes mad with power and invades EVERYBODY'S privacy then yes, the Government is "Controlling" us. Thats bad :ohnoes: But I do beleive there is a special process to wiretappings someone's house. It has to be issued by a warrent, like a search warrent and this warrent is given in a Court. So this means the Police just can't go around Wiretapping and Searching everybody. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 Your Propaganda won't work on me. If it means saving millions of lives then I say that Wiretapping someone's house is the last thing and the right thing to do. But let's say the government is corrupt, if the government goes mad with power and invades EVERYBODY'S privacy then yes, the Government is "Controlling" us. Thats bad :ohnoes: It's not my propaganda you're falling for, it's the government's. Tell me the last time our country lost millions of innocent civilians. We've survived plenty fine for 100+ years without wiretapping. Why do we need it now? If you only understood the types of atrocities the last 8 years has brought to our civil liberties, then maybe you would see where I'm coming from. Unfortunately you (along with millions of other Americans) remain blissfully ignorant of a lot of the things that go on in this country. This isn't meant as an insult to you by any means, I just don't think you understand it all yet. "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizz Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 I was using millions of lives as an example of when to use it and you are using Propaganda by trying to convince me to think that the Government is Useless and is trying to get rid of our Freedom. You want an Example of how our contry lost alot of civilians lives? 9/11. Sure Wiretapping is bad but It has also saved lives, sure an individual wire tap might save 1 or 2 lives but those lives total up and that 1 Person might be a person of Top Priority who might influenece or save alot of lives. Since your saying I'm falling for the "Governments Propaganda" then give me one example of this. Afterall we still have the right to Revolt. Wongton is better than me in anyway~~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasscube Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 I was using millions of lives as an example of when to use it and you are using Propaganda by trying to convince me to think that the Government is Useless and is trying to get rid of our Freedom. You want an Example of how our contry lost alot of civilians lives? 9/11. Sure Wiretapping is bad but It has also saved lives, sure an individual wire tap might save 1 or 2 lives but those lives total up and that 1 Person might be a person of Top Priority who might influenece or save alot of lives. Since your saying I'm falling for the "Governments Propaganda" then give me one example of this. Afterall we still have the right to Revolt. Alright, can I have a wiretap on your house? Afterall, if you have nothing to hide then why can I not have a wiretap ? Never know when you are going to blow up my house. Help drive change Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furah Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 there is no chance of you getting me on a plane, let alone putting that thing on... Steam | PM me for BBM PIN Nine naked men is a technological achievement. Quote of 2013. PCGamingWiki - Let's fix PC gaming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now