Using technology to track a person's location is nothing new. For years, police have been able to trace cell phone signals and use other dashboard devices such as automatic toll-collection systems to confirm a driver's whereabouts.And best of all, you pay for it!
But the growing popularity of GPS systems — in cars, cell phones and other handheld devices — gives authorities another powerful tool to track suspects.
Don't have one? Wait a few decades--it'll be a standard requirement.
And since we all agree driving is a "privilege" (we all agree that, right?) that should be licensed, why it stands to reason that legislation must be introduced to make disabling or otherwise interfering with such devices to be a crime--and probably a federal one at that, since cars are products of interstate commerce.
Besides, if you're not doing anything wrong, what have you got to hide?
17 comments:
" It was even possible that they watched everyone all the time."
--"1984," about the Thought Police
If this technology had been around when Orwell wrote that, it would have been a much shorter book. The ending would have been the same, though.
Don't Let Anyone Tell You "Driving is not a Right"
Of course. It's a point not talked about enough, even in the libertarian community: Freedom of movement is a RIGHT.
every single time i've argued that driving is a right, the die hard statists deny vehemently it is not, that the states MUST regulate that privilege so they can be assured that drivers on the road are registered and safe. which doesn't explain why there are so many accidents and fatalities on the road......
The Law Abiding have ALWAYS suffered(been wedged) the most.
I had it all explained to me by a politician the other day. (Don't worry, I took a long shower after...)
He was telling a room full of people who came out to protest the newest land use "plans" and zoning nonsense that all of the laws are necessary in order to preserve our freedom. He put on a benevolent look and assured us that, of course, nobody can do exactly whatever they want with their property, in their cars, using a gun... Those were his exact words.
Say what?
Then it dawned on me. We are not using the word "freedom" in the same way. What politicians mean by "freedom" is freedom from risk, from being offended or challenged with any real responsibility for ourselves or our lives.
Through the kindness and hard work of people like him, we have a nanny to keep us safe - or at least that's the theory. But, of course, we must mind nanny and not try to go off on our own or nanny will spank.
So, here's to newspeak! War is peace, hate is love...
How about a RFID tag in in guns, or given enough time and technology advances (percussion limits, impact forces, etc), maybe also built into bullets. Then, a LEO (or anyone with a RFID scanner - check out the fun stuff written about RFID in passports) will not only know you have a permit (which will have one built-in also), they'll know which gun(s) you're carrying at the moment, and what type and how much ammo you have on you within X-feet of you (subject to the scanning tech advances down the road).
Of course companies can enforce anti-RKBA policies better also.
Hand reloading and quick microwave "nuke-a-gun" time (uh no store ammo please - that would just end very badly...) for the liberty-minded perhaps?
Just when you think it can't get worse, your bound to be surprised...
You forgot the remote control shutoff switch so police can deactivate your gun.
I think the company is Axcess. They've come up with an RFID tag that's the size of a fleck of pepper, can absorb energy from the reader so it needs no power sourse, and can be read at hundreds of feet. It costs pennies.
Toll transponders can be read at 60 miles an hour now.
Under RealID, a smart chip will be part of a driver's license. The states who don't incorporate it into their license cards will lose federal highway funds and who knows what else. (Money they send to Washington and get PART of it sent back.)
Serious decisions are coming soon for all of us.
Everybody seems to be missing a point: GPS systems are RECEIVERS not TRANSMITTERS.
A GPS chip can tell YOU where you are, but unless and until it is connected to a transmitter it can't tell anyone else ANYTHING.
Sure, you can (probably) access trip logs after the fact if you have the device in hand, but unless the device contains a TRANSMITTER or is CONNECTED to a transmitter it's just not possible to track someone in real time using such a device.
Looking back through this, I don't see where anyone, let alone everyone, made that assumption.
Uh, Sendarius... standalone GPS receivers are not what was referenced. Cellphones have for the past few years, by federal law, contained GPS receiver chips precisely to transmit location data periodically. When this law was passed, it was claimed to be for our benefit, so emergency services could find us after a 911 call. Let me reiterate, it transmits location data periodically; not just if we dial 911 and not just when we make or receive a call.
Also, the Onstar system contains a GPS receiver chip, again so it can periodically transmit location data.
In fact, based upon the year Onstar was introduced and its capabilities, I am fully convinced that Onstar was nothing more or less than a precursor to OBD-III, to prepare the public and make them want something the Feds want to shove down our throats. It is a matter of record that GM was working on OBD-III at the time it introduced Onstar.
Not familiar with OBD-III? Google is your friend.
Thanks for the clarification Tracy.
A cell phone, of course, DOES have a transmitter. Further I wasn't aware that a means of sending the GPS info was mandatory in US cellphones.
All I was seeing was hysteria about "GPS systems" being used to track people. Sorry for the confusion.
mamaliberty: your explanation of the equivocation on "freedom" is excellent. May I quote you?
more than one school has proposed or has implemented mandatory cell phones, to be carried at all times, by students. Lost the cite,
it was about a year ago or so.
disarmed and watched. great. all the best, cycjec
to david codrea: there's been reports of remote automobile disablement too. (I always wondered about those newfangled electronic systems)
someone here once mooted the idea of higher level tracking and surveillance of anyone in government, with those not currently serving doing the watching. that's also feasible. an entirely different mindset.
all the best, cycjec.
tracy: I'm not so sure that Google is our friend either but thanks for the info on Onstar, GPS, etc.
to all: even with the best of intentions, online mapping and tracking can go down, or become unreliable. Hardcopy maps are your true friends.
Continuing: One recent example.
http://mysticalpaths.blogspot.com/2008/02/notice-anything-missing.html
It's easy to imagine more locally targeted interferences. all the best, cycjec.
Post a Comment