In many ways, we already live in a police state, a country in which our government feels like they own us and treats us that way. They read our emails; they track our internet searches; they see where you spend your money (you really didn’t think the income tax was about collecting money, do you? It doesn’t even begin to cover the government’s spending.); and now…
Now, they will chip us.
Yes, in the same way that scientists chip animals to track their migratory patterns, the Federal government is moving ahead to implement plans to chip U.S. citizens.
Before you call me paranoid, realize that I’m talking about House bill H.R. 4919. This is a real bill which the U.S. House of Representatives passed for the purpose of chipping disabled people so that these poor souls won’t get lost as easily.
The problem, like with so many other government programs, is with the unintended consequences (well, we hope that they are unintended). With political liberals and education and media elites calling political conservatives and libertarians “mentally challenged,” do you think that it will be long before the next politically liberal administration uses this bill as an excuse to forcibly track those who disagree with that administration’s policies? It’s Stalin’s wildest dream.
Whitney Webb had this to say in a column:
Giving local police the authority to decide who is micro-chipped and who is not based on their mental soundness is a recipe for disaster. Though the bill specifically mentions those with Alzheimer and autism, how long before these tracking programs are extended to those with ADHD and Bipolar disorder among other officially recognized disorders. Even the dislike of authority is considered a mental disorder known as “Oppositional Defiant Disorder,” which could also warrant micro-chipping in the future. If these programs expand unchecked, how long will it be before all Americans are told that mass microchipping is necessary so that law enforcement and the government can better “protect” them? Many Americans have been content to trade their liberties for increased “security” in the post-9/11 world, particularly when the state uses these talking points. Yet, as Benjamin Franklin once said, “those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
I’m not arguing that the people who wrote and passed this bill have evil intentions. I do actually think that they probably mean well. Unfortunately, like so many other big government ideas, these types of bill are abused by people who come into office later, and, rest assured, if this bill passes the rest of Congress, the whole situation will get worse. We will wish for the days when The Patriot Act was our primary concern when it comes to the police state.
What do you think about this bill: Am I overreacting or is it as terrible an idea as I think? Tell us below.