California State Senator Wants To Save You From RFID

from the paranoid-much dept

In certain paranoid circles, there's a big fear that at some point, people will be forced to get RFID implants. North Dakota and Wisconsin have already passed laws making it illegal to force somebody to get an RFID implant, and now a California state senator has pushed a similar bill through. This isn't new ground for Joe Simitian, the senator in question. He's sponsored anti-RFID bills in the past, but with little success. The fact remains that few people have any interest in RFID implants, while even the federal government has said that tracking humans with RFID isn't a good idea. Perhaps the bill will assuage the senator's paranoia, but meaningless bans like this won't do much to deal with the real privacy issues surrounding RFID.

Filed Under: politics, rfid


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Linda, 8 Sep 2007 @ 3:25pm

    THE "NO MORE VICTIMS" ACT OF 2007


    INTRODUCTION:

    Due to the purported high rate of sex crimes and the public's demand
    that the government take whatever steps necessary to protect the
    children from adults who prey on them; I would like to introduce
    the "No More Victims" Act of 2007. The "No More Victims Act" of 2007
    picks up where Megan's Law and others like it left off. The common
    thread with all these laws is what to do after a crime has been
    committed and fails to address any preventative aspect. In order for
    there to be "No More Victims" our focus must now be on prevention of
    these crimes.

    It has already been well established that the Federal Government and
    States have a "legitimate governmental interest" in protecting the
    public, especially the most vulnerable among us, America’s children.
    Additionally, the courts have ruled and the general public accepted
    that the rights of victims and/or would be victims, take precedent
    over the rights of those that "may" pose some future threat to
    society based solely upon empirical data and risk assessments, which
    are tools which "predict" future behavior.

    It has also been well established - and upheld by numerous courts
    that what is currently known as the "Sex Offender Registry" is not a
    punitive scheme, but a regulatory one.
    Designed to alert the community of those with a risk towards
    committing some future act.

    Given that upwards of 90 percent of new sex crimes are committed by
    someone who is NOT currently on the sex offender registry, not known
    to law enforcement, and is not on community notification , and
    cloaked in anonymity, lawmakers have a duty to adopt the following
    measures to put an end to sex crimes for once and for all.

    Since they have a stated "legitimate governmental interest" in
    protecting the public and since the techniques proposed herein would
    guarantee upwards of a 100%, if not a full 100% rate of success, it
    is incumbent upon lawmakers to adopt this act, so that there can
    be "No More Victims"

    I introduce to you the following ACT, which shall be hereby known as
    the "No More Victims Act of 2007".

    UNDER THE ACT:

    All persons, both male and female, age 18 and over must submit to a
    plethysmograh and given a risk assessment while under polygraph. The
    plethysmograh purports to have a 100% effectiveness rate in
    predicting who will offend, is FDA approved, and already in use in
    the United States. Given the recent high rate of offenses among
    teachers, clergy, governmental and law enforcement officials, and any
    other person in a position of trust or authority I move to start
    with those individuals first, as well as with any other person that
    maintains a position where working among children whether paid or
    voluntary.


    Based upon the results of the plethysmograph, polygraph and an
    empirical risk assessment, each individual who cannot "pass" shall be
    placed on a public "high risk" registry along with their assigned
    risk level.

    The site must include the following:
    1. a current photo
    2. risk level
    3. date of birth
    4. living address
    5. name of employer and work address
    6. If attending and educational facility, the name and location
    of said facility
    7. all e-mail addresses and online identifiers
    8. List any/all known deviations from currently accepted
    societal norms.
    9. Individuals who pose a risk must obtain a yearly driver's
    license or state issued non-operating identification card. The image
    must, within 3 business days be submitted to the agency responsible
    for maintaining the sex offender website.
    10. ANYONE WHO REFUSES TO SUBMIT TO THE ACT WILL BE AUTOMATICALLY
    ASSIGNED A RISK LEVEL OF THREE AS THAT CAN ONLY BE AN INDICATION THAT
    THEY HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE AND A REASON TO FEAR THIS ACT.

    In order to withstand any constitutional challenges which may arise,
    any prior criminal act which is discovered to have occurred via the
    risk assessment and prior to the enactment of this act cannot be held
    criminally liable based solely upon the information derived from the
    assessment. However, such acts must be considered when designating
    the risk level said individual poses to society.

    We foresee no challenges in respect to constitutional rights
    violations as the sex offender registry is merely a tool for the
    public, to warn them of those that "may" pose some future risk to
    society and the intent is to prevent sex crimes. This "Act" merely
    expands the public's awareness and would be a vital tool in the
    prevention of crimes as well as having the potential to catch those
    who have already committed crimes but have not been caught or
    prosecuted. Additionally, the courts have already ruled that
    registration is regulatory and not punitive in design and therefore
    The "No More Victims Act" will easily withstand constitutional
    challenges on that ground.

    All “REPLY’S will be forwarded to the writers of this Act..

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.