Proposal to Implant RFID Chips in Immigrants

John3 writes "Some people are OK with voluntarily implanting themselves with RFID chips, but how about making RFID implantation mandatory for immigrant and guest workers? VeriChip Corporation chairman Scott Silverman has proposed implanting RFID chips to register workers as they cross the border. According to Silverman, 'We have talked to many people in Washington about using it...' Privacy advocates see this move by VeriChip as a way to introduce their product to Latin America after a lukewarm reception in North America. Would immigrant workers trade their privacy for the opportunity to work in the U.S.? If this type of tracking is enacted, how long before the government decides to start tracking others for various purposes (for example, pedophiles who are released from prison)?"

Comments

Yay!

[alx5000]

Yay! Just like dogs! In case they get lost, any vet could read the RFID chip of your favorite immigrant/guest worker, and you could have him or her home in a matter of minutes!

BTW, that was sarcasm... NSA rapes your phones, and now this... makes me sick...

Re:Yay!

[Digital Autumn]

I bet Mr. Verichip is kicking himself that his company didn't exist back in the grand old days of slavery. He would have made a killing.

Re:Yay!

[falcon8080]

You know whats scary?
Im an immigrant, I moved here legally, from the UK, ive paid thousands of dollars just to be here, i contribute a lot of money to the US economy and employee a number of US workers... and for my efforts to play by the rules, to hand over money for fees, to wait and wait and wait patiently on different sides of the atlantic, and to fill in god knows how many forms and pay more fees.. I get the opportunity to be chipped.

Thanks for that, next youll be telling me I could have brought a cheap plane ticket, stayed here past my visa experation and payed less in fines than the fees i paid and granted would have been granted 'amnesty'... oh, wait..

Re:Yay!

[modecx]

I bet Mr. Verichip is kicking himself that his company didn't exist back in the grand old days of slavery. He would have made a killing.

Yeah, his company was doing just fine back in the day.

If I remember correctly, it was called Veri-Brand(tm) back then.

Re:Yay!

[pizzaman100]

Hey numbnuts ... this chip idea is for the illegals crossing the Mexican border. Not for the legal immigrants.

So how do you chip illegals? Do you do it when they sneak in?

Re:Yay!

[Aspirator]

I'm also a legal immigrant from the UK (and an employer). I felt that I was treated
like a criminal at the US port of entry (including fingerprinting). I doubt that
I would have come if I had to be chipped to do it.

Back then I had a perception of the US as a 'land of the free'. It is becoming less so,
OTOH so is the UK.

Counteless patriots have died to defend the freedoms we now so happily fritter away.

Now chipping ex cons (provided that it is the law at the time they commit their crime,
and that it is part of the sentence) seem altogether more reasonable to me.

Re:Yay!

[morleron]

The problem is that this process can't stop with immigrants. If the idea is to make it possible for employers to tell if the person they want to hire is legal or for INS to tell the same thing, then the lack of an ID chip will leave one in a non-verifiable condition. Obviously, the government can't have that, after all that non-chipped person may be a "terrorist". Thus, sooner rather than later, everyone who has a legal right to be in this country will be required to get "chipped" and lack of a chip will be taken as de facto evidence of illegal activity of some sort. This idea needs to be squashed ASAP and not quietly either, lest it be snuck back in to the immigration debate later on. Allowing this step to be taken is merely letting the camel get most of the way into the tent and soon our children will be "chipped" at birth.

Just my $.02,
Ron

Re:Yay!

[BiggyP]

Easy, these texans who'll be sat in front of their computers watching goings on with the new bordercams will be able aim and fire an RFID dart with the aid of a flash movie on the page.

Re:Yay!

[JimmehAH]

Tag the immigrant - win an iPod!

Re:Yay!

[d3ac0n]

Those illegal workers do work that Americans don't want to do for the wages which are required to support the prices they want to pay.

Behold! Ignorance at work! Did you ever consider, EVEN ONCE that perhaps the reason that Americans won't take those jobs is because the massive Illegal immigration over the last 30 years has reduced the wage levels for those jobs so low that no American could afford to take them?

I have a friend who used to live in the southwest (New Mexico) in the 80's. He owned a Housing construction and subcontracting company, and was an honest man. He refused to hire anyone who couldn't pass a full background check. As Illegal immigration began to become more and more of an issue, his competitors, some of whom were less scrupulous than he, started to hire the Illegals to work for them. The Illegals would work so cheap that he was literally priced right out of the market. By the time his business folded, every single one of his employees had either left the state, or left the trade. Illegal Immigration killed his business.

He had roots in the Northeast, and moved back here and re-started his life. He recently told me that he was starting to see the same kinds of issues with Illegal Immigrants here in the northeast that he saw back in the southwest in the 80's. He's nearing retirement age, and just hopes to survive long enough to be able to retire semi-comfortably.

Don't want illegal immigrants working on farms? Expect to pay more for your groceries. Don't want legal immigrants? Be prepared to live with a lower standard of living.

This is what Illegal Immigration does: It doesn't HELP the economy, it HURTS it. Illegal Immigrants take jobs that American WILL DO, and increase the rolls of the working poor. This puts an ever-increasing burden on the already strained social services, and put the American economy in danger of going into a tailspin of plummeting wage rates and skyrocketing inflation.

Now, this is VERY different from LEGAL Immigration, which brings in high-skilled labor and improves the economy. But, of course, this is too fine a distinction to make for some, who would rather demagouge the issue and simply call those who want the laws to be respected "bigots".

Stop painting the issue with such a broad and incorrect brush. All most Americans want is for the LAWS TO BE OBEYED. If you can't respect and obey our laws in coming here, then we don't want you. It's that simple.

As far as the chipping thing, I'd only be comfortable with it being done with parolees and ex-cons. I'm not comfortable with chipping otherwise law-abiding citizens.

Yeah, I know my opinions on Illegal Immigration won't win me any mod points, but I don't care. It's the truth, wether you mod me down for it or not.

Re:Yay!

[pcgc1xn]

I don't think that illegal immigration is a good thing, but I beleive that the US market demands it. I beleive your example proves it.

Your freind only hired people who could demonstrate that they were legally entitled to work. This is laudable. He was priced out of the market because his competitors hired illegals at a lower rate. This proves that the market did not value whether the work was done by illegals or not. If people cared that there construction was done by legal workers *and were prepared to pay for it* then your freind would not be out of business.

If Americans really cared that their vegetables were picked and houses built by people who were not legally entitled to work in the US, they would vote with their wallet, and entirely legal suppliers would florish. A sufficient number of American consumers do not care sufficiently to make a difference. Whether this is right or wrong is a matter of personal judgement, and I did not weigh in on it.

Immigrants have historically been used as a whipping boy and pointed to as the cause of the woes of whatever country you care to point at. I don't beleive they are. If the illegal immigration in the last 30 years is the cause of the problems the working poor have, what were the reasons 50 years ago?

I stand by my point, the American consumer demands lower prices and will accept illegal immigrants as the cost of this. When I lived in Arizona, it was obvious that illegal immigrants were everywhere, but people did not care enough to shop where the workers were legal. They would complain that there were too many hispanics (and ignore the fact that AZ was once part of Mexico), but not enough to shop elsewhere. I understand that your personal view is different, but I don't think you buy enough to sway the market

A Cautionary Tale

[TripMaster Monkey]

First they chipped the products,
    and I didn't speak up,
        because I was not a product.
Then they chipped the livestock,
    and I didn't speak up,
        because I was not livestock.
Then they chipped the house pets,
    and I didn't speak up,
        because I was not a house pet.
Then they chipped the immigrants,
    and I didn't speak up,
        because I was not an immigrant.
Then they chipped the felons,
    and I didn't speak up,
        because I was not a felon.

Then they chipped me,
    and by that time there was no one
        left to speak up for me.

(Apologies to Reverend Martin Niemoller)

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[xtracto]

As a Mexican person who prays for never needing to go to the USA (I just went once to Disney World and Universal Studios), I say, fuck the USA government.

On the other hand, I think that the idea is hilarious, this reminded me of MI-3, they surely will have to implant those chips with those mini bombs. Because if they dont do it, I am completely sure immigrants (at least mexicans) will just "un-implant" the chips and put it in a secure place like their home or things like that. Do not underestimate the power of "Tepitenses" market where you surely will be able to "buy your personalized chip" .

I applaud the decission that the USA government recently took about immigrants, but what they must understand is that "A la fuerza, ni los zapatos entran. " (by force not even the shoes fit). They provide immigrants with regulations that makes them feel safe, so , why not, create some kind of "RFID National Health Immigrant Card", which they have to show to get Health services or things like that. In that way they will feel that the ID is going to give them a new service, and the government can use it to contrl them.

Oh, and please if you are from the USA do not get offended, it is nothing personal against citizens, its about the government :).

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[mkw87]

You don't have to get chipped, but if you do, you'll get 3 cents off gas.

I think you spelled 'dollars' wrong

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[TripMaster Monkey]

You don't have to get chipped, but no loyal, patriotic citizen would conceiveably refuse...ergo, if you refuse, you automatically make the 'short list' of terror suspects.

The 'short list' is only called that by comparison...everybody is on the 'long list'.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[miskatonic alumnus]

...chips can't be removed by a person trying to claim your dog as their own, and a stray branch in the woods is unlikely to rip the chip off.

Aha! But, your pet might be EATEN by another animal. This is how your favorite poodle can polymorph into a pit bull.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[webjonesin]

(*initial reaction to the proposal*)
Oh, hell no!

(*upon further thought*)
mandatory chipping for the following:
- politicians
- lawyers
and last but not least
- a certain chairman working for VeriChip Corp.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[MBCook]

Interesting take. I think you point about people removing the chips is an excellent one. If having a chip identifies you as a previous sneak-in, then why not just remove it? If you are willing to run through a border and a desert to get into the US, you may be willing to do that too. About the only solution would be to put it where it can't be easily removed (like in someone's pelvis) but that would be a major operation compared to the quick prick putting it in their arm would be.

About the only Mexican side of this debate you hear on US TV is from the illegal immigrants already hear and people on the other side of the border (the Mexican side) who are worried it will become harder to cross.

That said, you have presented an opportunity that I can't pass up to ask you a question. What do you think about the Mexican government's role in this immigration debate? Specifically it seems to me they are the problem. We don't have Canadians flooding into the country because Canada is very good shape.

From everything I've heard Mexico has some serious problems in this area. My understanding is that 10% of Mexican citizens are living in the US (either legally or not). 12% of the Mexican work force is working in the US (again, legally or not). I have heard estimations that if flow of money from workers and families in the US to their relatives back home in Mexico were to be stopped, the Mexican economy would collapse. According to the figures I can find the underemployment/unemployment rate in Mexico is as high as 25%.

Do Mexicans blame their government for all this? Is there anything of a movement to get it fixed, or is it just easier to try to get the US government to help by taking on people?

Of course, Bush can't say any of this because we have to try to keep relations with Mexico good. Why the media doesn't mention this more would surprise me if I didn't think them all so crooked.

What do you think of the "Pay backed taxes, a fine, and prove you know English and you can become a citizen" proposal? Obviously that is somewhat simplified.

My last question is, does the issue of illegal immigration strike you as ironic at all? There are so many people (and groups, which I don't understand) that are pushing for (illegal) immigrant rights in the US and saying they should be treated like citizens. But illegal immigrants into Mexico from South and Central America face robbing, beatings, rapes, and other terrible fates from Mexican officials if they are caught. Mexico is not kind to those who sneak in, yet the President of the country is asking the US to be kind to those who sneak in. Is that issue raised at all in the Mexican media?

I don't mean to offend you, I've never heard answers to these questions and I am genuinely curious. I'll be glad to answer anything I can for you with my opinions.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[Otter Escaping North]

As a Mexican person who prays for never needing to go to the USA (I just went once to Disney World and Universal Studios), I say, fuck the USA government.

How ironic, I'm an American who knows he'll never need to go to Mexico, and I'm always saying "fuck the Mexican government."

And, to make things better, I am a Mexican who knows that one day he is going to have to return to Mexico and I am always saying "Fuck the Mexican government".

I'm a Canadian...what the fuck is going on down there?

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[GWTPict]

WHOOSH!! Congratulations, that was the sound of the whole point of the grandparents soppy poem disappearing into the distance without you noticing it. He wasn't saying you are required to microchip your dog, he wasn't saying that anyone has microchipped immigrants or proposed doing it to felons. You know, I'm confused, was your mention of great literature intended to demonstrate you're familiar with the original verse? Because if so how could you so totally fail to understand the point of it?

Yes it is a slippery slope, if you're going to fuck people over do it incrementally, they'll accept it much easier that way. If immigrants etc were chipped how long do you think it would be before someone suggested various other segments of the population could usefully be chipped? Mmm? you might trust the government you have now but what about the one 5, 10 or 15 years down the line?

I've spent the last 18 years of my life writing systems that need to identify people, to say whether they've payed their rent or not, what care are they getting from social services, is their library book overdue or not, the list is endless. From a purely job based perspective, yes, chip the buggers from birth. From a purely personal perspective, come near me with a chipping device and I'll take your arm off and beat you to death with the soggy end.

Technology is neither good or evil, the uses it's put to are another matter, the danger is once it's out of the box you can't put it back in.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[flyingsquid]

Also, they arn't being forced. It's the price of admission to America.

Frankly I'm disgusted that anyone would seriously consider this. Seriously, would you claim it was just the "price of admission" if you were required to get one before you could vote, or perhaps if you were required to have on implanted into you at birth before your citizenship would be official?

Implanting chips into people like they were a cow or your dog is just disgusting, it's treating people as less than people simply because they were born in a different country. I just can't see why having a passport that says "U.S." means you should be entitled to basic human dignity, while having one that says "Mexico" means you should be treated like an animal. But that's what supporting this proposal is arguing.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[Roduku]

Holy Crap! I hadn't thought of that.

Now terrorists will be eating immigrants to get their ID chips.

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[corbettw]

I'm a Canadian...what the fuck is going on down there?

Maybe we should borrow Canadian border guards to man the US-Mexico border. You never hear about Americans sneaking over to Canada, they must be doing something right!

Re:A Cautionary Tale

[cagle_.25]

I think what you're possibly missing here is that RFIDing someone says "I own your body. I can force you to have a piece of my equipment inside of you that allows me to know your whereabouts at any moment -- because you must transmit the right code at all times in order to do business here."

Such a claim is dehumanizing, regardless of its intent. RFID for people is exactly like yellow cards for Jews. The cards had the effect of intimidating and humiliating.

RFID for people is *not* like a visa (the "price of entry into a country") in these ways:

• a visa is only required at points of entry and under unusual circumstances, such as being pulled over by the cops. By contrast, RFID for people make it *possible* to survail people at almost all times, simply by sticking readers in discrete locations, like the merchandise protectors in stores. How did you imagine that VeriChip or whoever was proposing to sort the legals from the illegals?
• A visa can be surrendered after it has been used. RFID requires surgery to eliminate, or else some kind of electronic wiping. Like most immigrants from Mexico can afford that...

wait a second....

[MustardMan]

Before you go all "1984" on our asses, take a moment to stop and realize that this is the company that SELLS THE CHIPS making the proposal, NOT the government. What next, a company that makes bombs approving of a war? Or, shock and horror, a cigarette company talking about how harmless their product is? News flash: Guy who sells product proposes people use product. Film at 11.

Re:wait a second....

[TripMaster Monkey]

Before you go all "1984" on our asses, take a moment to stop and realize that this is the company that SELLS THE CHIPS making the proposal, NOT the government.

Are you sure about that?

Re:wait a second....

[MustardMan]

Right. Because handing someone an ID card with a chip in it is EXACTLY the same as sticking the chip in their neck.

Re:wait a second....

[realmolo]

Well, you're right. HOWEVER, as we all know, money talks in Washington. If this company bribes the right politicians, and promises some kind of benefit to a given congressman's state, then it WILL happen.

Re:wait a second....

[TripMaster Monkey]

Two problems:

• First of all, why are you comparing an unobtrusive RFID chip with a 'tattoo on your forehead'? That's a specious comparison.
  
  
• Second, what makes you think the government is going to care about how big the 'leap' from an RFID-equipped passport to the same information on an RFID chip seems to you? For one thing, this is currently being discussed for immigrants, not citizens. Second, it's voluntary. You don't want to get chipped, you don't have to...and you don't have to work in our country, either. When it comes for citizens, it will be equally voluntary, but getting along without an RFID chip will become increasingly difficult, just as it's nearly impossible to function in society today without valid ID.
  

Yes, it is a 'slight leap', if you take the long view. But things like this are seldom done all at once...they are usually introduced by degrees. Give the populace long enough to get used to an idea, and you can sell them almost anything.

Re:wait a second....

[TripMaster Monkey]

Your argument is nothing more than straw man flamebait, but it's late Friday afternoon, and I'm bored, so sure...I'll play:

Given that it's much easier to just shoot detractors than hold an electio

There's the flaw in your argument. It's much easier to hold a rigged election then it is to shoot detractors.

Disinformation is far easier and works far more effectively than brute force in oppressing populations. If you don't agree with this, just watch Fox and Friends for a little while.

Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay?

[Art Popp]

If it's not O.K. to do something to the people of one's country, it's inappropriate to do it to foreigners.

Can this be more obvious?

Re:Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay?

[TripMaster Monkey]

I fear that that's exactly the point they will be making. "Hey, we've been chipping immigrants for a while, and the program has yielded great benefits! The technology is proven, there's no reason we shouldn't have every U.S. citizen chipped!"

All entirely voluntary, of course...with the tacit understanding that anyone who refuses obviously has something to hide, and immediately becomes a 'terror suspect'...

...but this couldn't happen in the 'land of the free', right?

Re:Did they learn nothing from Guantanamo Bay?

[smellsofbikes]

I entirely agree with you. But there are lots of people who don't. A friend of mine posted something about Guantanamo on her blog and had tens of people saying, in effect, that they had no problem whatsoever with innocent people being imprisoned, tortured, and killed, if there was even a chance that some of those people might be terrorists.

That breaks my brain. Once you make that leap, then *everyone* is your enemy and you grab a gun and just start shooting until there's nobody left, to keep yourself safe.

Which, basically, is what the USA is doing in the world at large. There are lots of people who don't see a problem with this, maybe even a majority of Americans.

What the FUCK?

[mg2]

Privacy advocates see this move by VeriChip as a way to introduce their product to Latin America after a lukewarm reception in North America.

Um, um, what? Just a marketing ploy? Just looking to get more market share?

In other news, The Burger King Corporation has finished constructing it's first run of biomechanical overlord drones. These drones have been shown to be capable of both mind control and world domination. Market Analysts see this as a ploy to increase the Whopper's market share, as the Big Mac has rapidly been gaining popularity.

Business as usual

[FooHentai]

This isn't such a surprising strategy. If you can convince the masses to do something to the least favoured members of society, then you can start to gradually argue the case for doing it to everyone.

All they had to find was the lowest rung on the ladder of american society.

Surprised they didn't go with pedophiles TBH. It's probably because they were already on with the immigrant thing.

How does this solve the problem?

[pavon]

Isn't the problem with immigration that we have today due to those who enter our country illegally? How does this solve that problem? Only those legally immigrating would be tagged. It may even make the problem worse by motivating more people to risk entering the country illegally rather than be tagged if they enter legally.

Obscene violation of human rights: Check
Increased power given to government: Check
Does not help solve any real problem: Check

Sounds like another winner from the people that brought you the Real ID Card and Airline Profiling.

Slippery Slope

[spun]

This is NOT a road we want to start down. This is just an excuse to start getting people okay with this (plus an election year anti-immigant pander-fest.) Next it will be, "Chip your kids to keep 'em safe," then "chip yourself and never have to carry credit cards!" then "chip yourself or we lock you up."

All right, I'm taking off my tinfoil hat now, but this is still a bad idea.

Slippery slope?

[sharky611aol.com]

The summary actually raises a good question as to whether this sort of "tagging" should be allowed at all.

Sure, let's go ahead and tag immigrants. And pedophiles. And murderers. And rapists. Any got a problem with that? (I'm going to ignore the fact that pedphiles were the next logical step after immigrants for the time being...)

Ok, how about hackers? Jaywalkers? IP pirates? Yes, I know the whole "Slippery slope" argument is technically a fallacy, but when you're dealing with the government, it tends to be the norm. When has the gov't ever been happy with a limit on their power once a particular "right" is stripped away?

I think we all need to agree that nobody needs to be "tagged" for any reason. We have a right to have our identity hidden unless we have performed actions which forfeit this right. You have the right to refuse to show identification to a law enforcement officer if they do not have probable cause. (Before I get lots of cries of foul, Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev. still requires "suspicious activity") All that goes out the window though if all an officer has to do is wave a wand at you.

Re:Slippery slope?

[jez9999]

How is the slippery slope argument always a fallacy?

What if I say that implementing a law that allows police to use lethal force when dealing with terrorists is a slippery slope as it would make future laws allowing police to use lethal force in other situations more likely? As long as you accept that the enactment of the first law makes the others more likely, which in this case we do because it softens public resistance to them, the argument holds.

What's good for the goose ...

[plehmuffin]

Is good for the gander.

I propose that we enact legislation to track all politicians who hold governmental offices. That way we can make sure that they aren't up to no good.

Slimy Politician: This new energy policy was not influenced by the oil industry.

Citizen/Reporter: Then why does your location log indicate you visited the major oil companies' headquarters while preparing the legislation?

Slimy Politician: Umm...

One vote: No. Buh-bye.

[nick_davison]

Would immigrant workers trade their privacy for the opportunity to work in the U.S.?

No. I, for one, would be leaving.

Granted, I am here as a spouse of an American citizen and working simply because of that, not because I simply came for work.

We're in California because she was badly injured in a car accident and her injuries hurt her less in that climate (I know, another one of those selfish immigrants selfishly supporting your disabled citizens so they don't need to claim benefits - it shouldn't be allowed!). But, should any government expect to implant chips in my body, tattoo a series of numbers on my wrist or demand I wear a Star Of David, in the name of "administrative tracking", I'm sure as hell not staying. We gave that a shot in Europe back in the 30s and 40s - it wasn't too popular. Much as I'd hate putting my wife through the physical pain associated with what the British climate does to her injuries, America can do without a highly skilled and heavily in demand science worker. And then everyone who remains can post on Slashdot lamenting how, once all of those workers leave, America's strangely falling even further behind in the sciences.

I'm sorry but it's just not worth starting down that slippery slope to keep a job. I can earn just as well back in Europe and not go down that slope. Forgetting about my wife's specific case, the only people who'll really lose out are the American citizens whose country continues to fall further behind (don't worry, I'm sure your president will authorize borrowing even more to make up for it). So, granted I don't speak for all immigrants (given I have blonde hair, blue eyes, white skin, and the ability to legally work anywhere in Europe which means most Americans don't think of me when justifying their racism in the name of immigration control) but I am at least one immigrant who'd happily sacrifice living in the states for avoiding a path with disturbing similarities to something the Nazi's (with the help of another U.S. business, IBM, tried back in the 40's).

And, yes, this was just one long post to repeatedly hammer home on Slashdot that I have a wife. Some guys'll do anything to show off. ;)

OMG PONIES!!!!1!~!!one

[MrNougat]

Wait, this isn't April Fools' Day?

Re:Out of curosity

[pjay_dml]

What's really sad, is that what you have said will be viewed as an exageration, only because there is nothing directly comparable to the Concentration Camps, as if that was all that made the Third Reich so "special".

People view the Third Reich as a lawless, despotic regime, which is far from historic fact. Undeniable, especially during the last days of the war, and hence of the Reich, the law wasn't much respected. Never the less, most that happened during Hitlers time was according to German law of the time.

Another troll (and a pommy who should know better) mentioned something about "if they tag cons"...what about the visa violation convict? See convict and criminal are words that people like to use to destinguish themselves from the "good ones", but a label does not make factual evidence.

I use to highly regard the US of A for their stand on privacy, having grown up in Germany, where every one is required to be in possesion of an ID card. Then I learnt more about Social Security Numbers. Then they introduced finger printing of visitors. Then I learnt about the differences in privacy and data retention laws, and now I laugh at US citizens, because they will soon feel the guilt Germans have been carrying around with themselves for the past 60 years. All the time feeling smug about themselves. Immigrants not carrying about the political nature, just interested in being on the winners side. Just like back then, the Tschechs, the Poles, the French...

We are living on a slippery slope, with an increasing tilt.