Senate blocks mandatory ID implants in employees

[Azur]

_http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-scan31aug31,0,2715647.story

Relevant parts:

Senate blocks mandatory ID implants in employees
The bill would prevent employers in the state from requiring workers to have the devices.
By Patrick McGreevy
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

August 31, 2007

Tackling a dilemma right out of a science fiction novel, the state Senate passed legislation Thursday that would bar employers from requiring workers to have identification devices implanted under their skin.

State Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto) proposed the measure after at least one company began marketing radio frequency identification devices for use in humans.

The devices, as small as a grain of rice, can be used by employers to identify workers. A scanner passing over a body part implanted with one can instantly identify the person.

"RFID is a minor miracle, with all sorts of good uses," Simitian said. "But we shouldn't condone forced 'tagging' of humans. It's the ultimate invasion of privacy."

Simitian said he fears that the devices could be compromised by persons with unauthorized scanners, facilitating identity theft and improper tracking and surveillance.

The bill has been approved by the state Assembly and now goes to the governor.

Nine senators opposed the measure, including Bob Margett (R-Arcadia), who said it is premature to legislate technology that has not yet proved to be a problem. "It sounded like it was a solution looking for a problem," Margett said. "It didn't seem like it was necessary."

One company, VeriChip, has been licensed by the Food and Drug Administration to sell implanted identification devices, and about 2,000 people have had them implanted, Simitian said. A representative of the firm did not return calls seeking comment Thursday.

CityWatcher.com, a Cincinnati video surveillance company, has required employees who work in its secure data center to have a microchip implanted in an arm.

Similar technology has been used for years to help identify lost pets.

 

[Nienna]

Nine senators opposed the measure, including Bob Margett (R-Arcadia), who said it is premature to legislate technology that has not yet proved to be a problem. "It sounded like it was a solution looking for a problem," Margett said. "It didn't seem like it was necessary."

This is the sort of comment I would expect to hear from politicians. So I am rather surprised that there has been a bill approved to bar employers from requiring these. Interesting.

And how many of the 2,000 people that have had the chips implanted are politicians? And of those 2,000, how many were voluntary? If I remember correctly, those in prison, those who are (mental?) patients, and those in the military are some that have been chipped.

So I suppose that my last question is, how long until the neocons figure a way around this bill?

 

[j0da]

I guess employers can always give an "offer one cannot refuse", thus "forcing to volunteer". If employee stands firm against being implanted he will be fired during next employment cuts for the most flimsy reason which has nothing to do with implants. The trick has a long tradition, so this legistlative bill may have insignificant impact, imho.

 

[Charles]

Maybe all it is, is just another testing of the waters ?

IBM and the holocaust

_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfevjFskGJA

IBM, the holocaust and privacy 65 years after WW II

_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2udoNmQkR4

 

[seek10]

It is the the pattern for every thing that happened for a long time. Banking industry regulations in early 20th century, flouride impositions , pre-Iraq war resistance etc. First overwhelming resistance to oppressive laws, then resistance fades away with time, if not VA tech shooting type things happens to divert. Reasons from lobbysts can change as per the need. In the current situation, nothing seems to be able to stop , except a very very HUGE shock like planetray change which can effectively disable the STS technological devices to awake people up against the fascism.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Nine senators opposed the measure, including Bob Margett (R-Arcadia), who said it is premature to legislate technology that has not yet proved to be a problem. "It sounded like it was a solution looking for a problem," Margett said. "It didn't seem like it was necessary."

What struck me about that is how weak of an argument this was, apparently designed to be flexible. "Didn't seem like it was necessary" - is that all he has? We know that "necessary" can change in the blink of an eye, so the way I read that quote is "Not yet, wait till the next false flag, then we'll say it's necessary". Might even be employment thing first actually, the "false flag" could be someone using a false ID to get in an do a lot of damage to a huge corporation, and this whole thing can be either created or at the very least used to say now this thing is "necessary" for "employers" - and start with corporate use. My work ID has a RFID tag now - we just got ours updated from the old magnetic "swipe" system to rfid chips. Start gently and put'em in our external ID's first, get us all used to having RFID on us all the time, then say "u know, why don't we just shove it into ur arm, I mean u had it all this time anyway this will just make it more secure, u won't even notice the difference!".

The sad thing is we all knew this was the plan, it's just really sad to watch it happen like the first raindrops before the forecasted downpour - a well-rehearsed and predictable theatrical performance, and the script is publicly available on SOTT :P

 

[Mike]

Something I've been thinking about is that what states do really doesn't matter because the federal gov't, given whatever event or justification, will just roll the states decisions over. If states resist, then federal funding will be withheld and play out much like the 'Real ID Act' is slowly playing out now.