Line forms over here.
This is more government intervention phonied up we're here to catch the criminals and help those who need protection.
----
It seems too far-fetched to be true, especially in the “land of the
free” where the Constitution supposedly recognizes and enshrines certain
“inalienable” human rights like individual choice and
privacy, but it’s true nonetheless: In the United States, we have all come one step closer to being
microchipped by mandate.
As
reported by
True Activist, about six years ago
NBC Nightly News made a bold prediction: That by 2017, all Americans would be fitted with a radio frequency identifier (RFID) chip so that
all of us could be tracked
by the government in real time (except for the elites doing the
tracking, of course). That prediction doesn’t appear to have come
true—and with Hillary Clinton soundly defeated Nov. 8, it doesn’t look
like it will happen anytime soon.
But what if it
did? What if somehow
some of us began to be “chipped,” sold to us as a way to ‘enhance public safety’ (which is
always the excuse government uses to take away our rights and freedoms)?
Don’t look now, but it
just happened.
The government will decide who is ‘mentally unfit’ and must be tracked
As
noted by the Daily Caller,
in recent days the U.S. House of Representatives “overwhelmingly”
passed a bill that would require the U.S. attorney general to provide
grants to local law enforcement agencies so they can create, establish
and operate “locative tracking technology programs.”
In other words, the legislation—known as Kevin and Avonte’s Law—makes
it “legal” for police to track certain U.S. citizens, despite the fact
that their privacy is
guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.
The program, which many have likened to the opening of a Pandora’s Box of wider tracking in the future, gives local
police the authority to use technology to
locate “individuals with forms of dementia, such as Alzheimer’s
disease, or children with developmental disabilities, such as autism,
who have wandered from safe environments.”
Advocates of the legislation, including Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee,
D-Texas, and Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., say the measure can help police
intervene to avert tragedies through the use of location technology
before the mentally disabled wander into trouble. But opponents, like
Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, see it as a way for government to broadly
interpret how it uses the technology.
“While this initiative may have noble intentions, ‘small and
temporary’ programs in the name of safety and security often evolve into
permanent and enlarged bureaucracies that infringe on the American
people’s freedoms,” he said. That is exactly what we have here. A safety
problem exists for people with Alzheimer’s, autism and other mental
health issues, so the fix, we are told, is to have the Department of
Justice start a tracking program so we can use some device or method to
track these individuals 24/7.”
Later, Gohmert said the bill’s sponsors implore lawmakers and the
American people not to worry because it has language saying that any
tracking device cannot be invasive and is
totally voluntary.
What’s to stop some future authoritarian from widening a tracking program?
But he added that he was confused as to why Republican majorities in
both chambers of Congress—the party historically at odds with big
government and the massive federal bureaucracy—would be taken in and
fooled into approving
yet another massive, invasive government program.
He was also astounded that the GOP-controlled Congress would allow
the tracking of people with “developmental disabilities”—a term that
could have
very broad applications—but not approve any tracking of illegal aliens, criminals and other malcontents.
He was also astounded that the GOP-controlled Congress would allow
the tracking of people with “developmental disabilities”—a term that
could have
very broad applications—but not approve any tracking of illegal aliens, criminals and other malcontents.
Therein lies the rub: Who gets to define “mentally incapacitated?”
And is that description only limited to persons who have been medically,
clinically diagnosed with a “mental” problem?
Because in the recent past, Left-wing activists, politicians and
academics have accused alternative media types of being mentally
deranged and “
propagandists.” Should alternative media journalists be
tracked, for the
public’s safety?
It’s not that farfetched anymore to think that could happen someday,
especially when a “program” establishing ‘official’ tracking of
‘certain’ persons has already been implemented.
newstarget.com/2017-01-09-independent-journalists-will-be-forcible-micro-chipped-by-government-after-being-labeled-with-a-mental-disorder-for-not-believing-propaganda.