Tracking Children, right or wrong????

[letric]

They ought to be in jail.

[Sirius]

You didn't seriously expect me to condone people walking with their children on a leash did you? That's just sick. It's degrading and psychologically damaging treatment.

[kemist]

Having experienced the kidnapping of two relatives within the last 12 yrs, I have seen first hand how the anti-kidnapping squad operates - i have little to complain about their human resources, but they are restricted by procedures and lack of proper equipment. Imagine, they weren't allowed to place a phone tap to trace calls -they didn't even have equipment for that because of some law. My uncle had to use his contacts at the phone company to find out where the kidnappers were calling from. During the time of the first kidnapping, the advice we got from families of other kidnap victims were to pay the ransom and hope for the best. Ransom were paid in both cases, the first one was returned, the second one is presumed dead.

Kidnapping has very serious psychological effects on the victims and their families - every day the victim spends with their kidnappers is damaging; every hour is an hour too long. A simple thing such as having confidence in the police and hoping that the person would be returned unharmed, helps the family to cope during that trying time. I am glad that we were able to trace the calls when the police could not. By extension, if we had a way to pinpoint their locations, things may have turned out differently.

So to me, tracking devices are not about lack of trust. It is about security. It depends on how the parent uses it. One simply needs to let their child know that they are not tracking them 24/7, but it is only to locate them if they go missing.

[kemist]

Besides, as exemplified in Mexico, implant a chip into a kidnap target and the kidnappers will just carve it out.

To me, that is the only valid argument against it.

The question is, how did the kidnappers in Mexico know their target had an implant? If that can be answered, then measures can be put in place for application to Tdad. It may just be a simple matter of keeping it a secret (idk).
Also, the big difference in land mass between Mexico and Trinidad ought to be considered and used as an advantage.
Since tracking is in real time, we may be able to send in the cavalry in a much shorter period of time.

[Sirius]

^ Kem given the Mexico precedent, do you think a GPS tracker would really have had much effect? In a world where society knows GPS trackers are being implanted, I think chances are the tracker would be located and carved out before it was even realized a kidnapping was in effect. You can't promote implanated trackers to society without the kidnappers being aware too.

What about the health issues? Cancer? How about the psychological impact on a society being tracked for the 99.9% that never have to use it, but have it anyway?

What about the children who just don't take well to that sort of invasion? I can't even begin to tell you how violated and distrusted I felt, and still feel to this day, when I learned my parents were snooping outside places I went with my friends. I only found out because one day fate caught up with them and they blew out their tire outside the place and they later owned up why they were there. I think if I had a tracker in me, I would have tried to cut it out for myself after that day.

I speak as one of those overprotected, restricted, humiliated children that these recent threads seem to be promoting...you have no idea how that sort of upbringing can destroy the parent/child relationship. To this day, when times get tough, my parents are the last people in the world I wish to confide in or seek advice from. I love them, but I really just can't trust them. I love them, but I hate the indecisive, afraid to take risks person they turned me into. This is why I will never, ever agree with these kinds of ideas. I would never want to raise my children the way I was raised. That's my personal story for the day.

[kemist]

^ Kem given the Mexico precedent, do you think a GPS tracker would really have had much effect? In a world where society knows GPS trackers are being implanted, I think chances are the tracker would be located and carved out before it was even realized a kidnapping was in effect. You can't promote implanated trackers to society without the kidnappers being aware too.

That's why i recognize this point to be most valid. However i believe measures can be put in place to ensure confidentiality. The local kidnap gangs rely on their corrupt local sources for information on people's bank accounts and security measures. If one can get an implant abroad, then no one local would know about it. The only hole in this theory is whether the implant can be detected using a simple metal detector - in which case it would of course be ineffective and this argument ends here.

What about the health issues? Cancer?
Well i haven't checked if studies were done on that, but i imagine that the radiation is the most risky part of it. If tracking only occurs when a person is missing, then that risk would be minimum- a person would have a better chance of getting cancer from their cellphones.

How about the psychological impact on a society being tracked for the 99.9% that never have to use it, but have it anyway? That could work both ways. One may have a better sense of security. I know a woman who is constantly surrounded by 4 bodyguards; she hardly has any sort of privacy. The point is, when security measures are implemented, there is always a price to pay, necessary if one falls within that 1%.

What about the children who just don't take well to that sort of invasion?

I can see the damaging effect that would have on a child if they see it as an invasion of privacy. However, if they can be assured it would not be used in that way, but only for security purposes and the parents keep their promises, then it shouldn't be an issue.

...

[Sirius]

The answer to if it can be detected should be easy. The device is not the same makeup as the human body. It usually also resides just under the skin. It should therefore be quite easy to find out by way of a detector or even just a strip check. It's likely more useful for finding a lost person than a kidnapped person, and the lost person does not need an implanted tracker.

The health risk likely depends on the device. I know there have been numerous studies concerning cancer from implanted chips but there does not seem to be much available where GPS is concerned: probably because implanted GPS chips are very new - they were previously just wearable trackers while the implanted chips were RFID.

As per if the child sees it as invasion, as far as I can see, the parents who would be looking to tag their kids are likely to be the type that are already obsessing over the kids. Those children won't be the type to take well to being tracked, especially when they hit the teenage years.

There will always perhaps be that 0.1% for whom something like this simply will have to be done...but for the 99.9% that is everyone else? What kind of world are we really creating?

[letric]

You didn't seriously expect me to condone people walking with their children on a leash did you? That's just sick. It's degrading and psychologically damaging treatment.

Of course it is psychologically damaging. The child grows up feeling like a canine on leash.

[edyle]

By all means I am referring to ex convicts and persons out on bail! Many ex convicts are out in society. Some may be ensuing a rehabilitated life. However, there are still some roaming and perpetrating much heinous crimes - even worse than the ones committed before!

I could see a matter of accused persons agreeing to such a thing as a condition of bail.

I could see a matter of convicts out on parole agreeing to such a thing.

[edyle]

You didn't seriously expect me to condone people walking with their children on a leash did you? That's just sick. It's degrading and psychologically damaging treatment.

I might use a leash and a harness if it were practical; thats a big difference from SURGICALLY implanting something into a child.

[Redman]

Sirius,
I don't obsess, and at the same time I believe that I'm in the position where my views on the world aren't carried by others.
So there are people that will reach out and inflict harm.
I wear my seatbelt because I can't control the world,and other people make their decisions-thAt on the roads can inflict harm on those I'm responsible for.
My son hates the car seat and it's a struggle to get him in but it's the smart thing to do.
That it's the law is frankly irrelevant.

Kem s experience is the hard truth Kidnapping or the threat of it is a invasive almost omnipresent force that robs you of all the 'security' you feel in your anonymity.

It's really a phsycological thing when you believe you re a target.

that I don't have a problem with using the Technology available to mitigate a risk of that sort isn't obsessive.
It's pragmatic.

Chit happens to all people.

Later

[Sirius]

Redman I see a fundamental difference between a car seat and implanting a device inside the child.

Especially where it means 24/7 monitoring potentially their entire lives. The validity of the entire thing is even less given the Mexican precedent, and more so as kidnappings in this country have essentially tapered off. The health risks are largely unknown, but we do know that implanted microchips have caused cancer. Unlike a cellular phone, the implant can't be removed from the person once home. As far as I am concerned, implant trackers are of little real benefit in the event of a kidnap situation and likely serve to only endanger the victim's physical well being.

I won't even begin to argue the benefits of implanted trackers; but I will argue the dangerous precedent that it begins. Even in this age of social media, someone's physical location remains private with the exposure of location remaining a strictly opt-in situation. Implanted trackers in humans represents an era where privacy is a thing of the past.

Even children deserve the right to some degree of privacy. You can't expect someone to respect privacy and have trust when they grew up their entire lives under (potential) 24/7 monitoring.

These are all signs that our future is most decidedly a dystopian one...

[Redman]

Well I don't.
They are 2 pieces of technology that become available as our world changed and required a solution.
And that's my point
That if I feel that my family is at risk then I will do whatever I can to mitigate the risk.Up to and including chipping my child,home schooling them or exporting them to a safe environment.
Sensibilities matter until they don't.
Sticking my head in the sand and singing kumbaya isn't an effective tool in dealing with the problems.
In this context it's the lesser of two evils.

That's life in the real world.

Later