Slashdot Mirror
Woman Tells State Judiciary Committee, "DoD Implanted A Microchip Inside Me"
The Georgia House Judiciary Committee took up a bill that would "prohibit requiring a person to be implanted with a microchip," and would make violating the ban a misdemeanor. Things started to get weird at the hearing when a woman who described herself as a resident of DeKalb County told the committee, "I'm also one of the people in Georgia who has a microchip." Not sure of what she was trying to say, she was allowed to continue and added, "Microchips are like little beepers. Just imagine, if you will, having a beeper in your rectum or genital area, the most sensitive area of your body. And your beeper numbers displayed on billboards throughout the city. All done without your permission." Further prodding revealed that the woman's co-workers would torture her by activating the chips with their cell phones and that the chips were implanted by "researchers with the federal government." The committee thanked the woman for her input, and later approved the bill.
Of course they did...look at that little "microchip"! Can you say mini-dildo? Because I can.
Living With a Nerd
Every American should have a right to a tinfoil hat.
where everyone had one of these to "torture" each other with. ;)
The committee thanked the woman for her input,
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
A Misdemeanor is a pretty light punishment for something such as this.
Wait WHAT ?
Is that while the woman in question is almost definitely out to lunch, and could probably use some psych help, the notion that somebody would implant a microchip in you has gone from "automatically crazy" to "must be dismissed as crazy based on the specific facts of the case".
Welcome to the future.
...it was probably CDC, not the DoD, that did it. CDC is based in a neighboring county (Fulton) and has offices in Dekalb. Definitely not county officials, though. The county police just shoot people.
If you can't beat them, embrace and extend them.
Driving home after two beers or smoking the wrong plant is a more serious crime than planning on sticking a microchip under someone's skin for the explicit purpose of tracking them.
Weird priorities.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
This proves that the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
This woman must be doing something right for them to write up a bill specifically for HER to get her to "stfu and gtfo already" about the government planting chips in her body.
I can just see it now "thank you, ok aye votes? motion passed" *she leaves the floor* *some legislators laugh into their sleeves* "NOW, on to real issues".
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Hopefully the SECRET GOVERNMENT CHIP sterilized her.
Perhaps one day we can get 138th trimester abortion legalized.
Christian eschatology declares that the End Times will see a split of the human race into faithful and the non-believers. The faithful will not take the "Mark of the Beast" and will suffer economically because of it. By rejecting the MotB, they will be excluded from all transactions and be essentially outcasts from the new society.
However, because of their steadfastness, they will not be condemned to hell upon the second coming of Jesus. Those who take the Mark will be torn asunder and cast into the pits of hell.
Many believe that the MotB is or will be something similar to this type of microchip implant. By grafting the mark to a person, any transaction can be monitored and tracked. This is one of the methods of governmental control via the MotB.
This lady was clearly insane. But there are MANY people out there who believe in exactly what I wrote above. These are your neighbors, Americans.
Thank goodness our lawmakers are tackling these important non-existent problems, and exploiting mentally ill people to make their case. I feel safer.
I was actually thinking about patenting this idea, (True story), now I suppose I can't anymore. In any case: " imagine, if you will, having a beeper in your rectum or genital area, the most sensitive area of your body. And your beeper numbers displayed on billboards throughout the city." sounds like fun to me! In any case true or not, we are going to have things like this soon enough. Not implanted, but self implanted. The whole point is to have ways in which you can receive informations directly into your body (literally), and connecting it with anything you want.
...but that sounds pretty damned awesome to me. I would love to have a device in me that a tickles me in my happy places. Oh, maybe she is worried the cell towers are watching her and the paint on stop signs are telling her to do "bad things"(a man told me this story in Georgia...hmm, seeing a pattern?). There are some messed up people here in Georgia.
Just proves that they are educated evil and too stupid smart to understand implanted tracking devices and timecubes.
Well, if you drive drunk you're likely to kill someone. As for the wrong plant, I totally agree.
Thank goodness our lawmakers are tackling these important non-existent problems
Surely this is as important an issue as the fact that the island of Guam might tip over...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
So, someone goofed and let a delusional person speak in a public forum on a topic related to her delusion. There's nothing to do here but make fun of people who suffer from delusions, or make fun of Georgian legislators: neither news for nerds nor stuff that matters.
Increasingly often, I can't remember if I'm reading a legitimate news source or the Onion.
Aliens micro chipped me and all I got was this chip and a lousy T-Shirt.
Obama = Socialism.
and they use it to cdwadags.
I had a chip put in my pet cat.
But I have one too, only its not by any humans.
How else is alien god gonna find me and others when the shit starts hitting the fan in 2012?
Some of us have a ticket to leave and miss the shit.
Guess such tracking devices can be used for good things too.
Its only a misdemeanour? Wow I bet that has the CIA/police/government quaking in their boots. Laughing that is.
How is violating someones body with a microchip much different from rape? It should get the same penalty.
While I emphasize to this woman's predicament, possible mental illness and/or delusional state I find it difficult to correlate her story to the eventual decision by the legislature to pass the bill.
It would be like someone petitioning against Reynolds Aluminum because they profit from aluminum foil sales. "It is all a vast conspiracy, I have to wear this aluminum hat to keep the mind control rays from Planet #10 under control."
There are wack-jobs on any side of any issue you can imagine. It was unfortunate that they did not screen this one out of the proceedings.
Tisha Hayes
What's weird about it? Driving drunk has the potential of the drunk person maiming and/or killing other drivers. Implanting a microchip in someone is a non-violent crime with no potential for the maiming or killing of others. It seems pretty clear to me that the former should be punished harsher than the latter.
Two beers isn't drunk. And no, you're not "likely" to kill someone. "Likely" means better than 50% chance which not even MADD claims. Two beers is slightly more dangerous than sober, but less dangerous than being drunk or texting.
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/versions/sb235_As_passed_Senate_5.htm
it is very self explanatory.
No one, one any condition, meaning employers too, can force you into an implant.
Frankly I am all for restrictions being codified in law
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
...this morning. Actually a whole bag full of chips. Could not stop after only one.
How many of us have microchips in our pets, in case they get lost? How many of us have them in our children for the same reason?
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Driving home after two beers or smoking the wrong plant is a more serious crime than planning on sticking a microchip under someone's skin for the explicit purpose of tracking them.
Weird priorities.
If you begin comparing crimes, their offense to society or individuals, and then the manner in which those convicted are prosecuted and punished, you're headed down a very long, confusing road. Who should be punished more severely, a rapist or a murderer? OK, what if instead of a murder, it was white collar crime, embezzling $5 million USD. Okay, what about 500 million. OK, what about retirement accounts of millions across the nation? OK, but what if the rapist actually [unimaginable details]...
I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
there was a little old lady who used to stand on 42nd street and eighth avenue handing out little pamphlets about how the devil was always trying to corrupt you via external means (i love picking up religious literature from the kooks in times square to analyze their words for entertainment value: reference timecube.com). according to her screed, one way was by putting a microchip in a grain of rice you would eat, another way from a stranger shaking your hand in such a way that 666 would be formed in the curl of their fingers, evil eyes, etc.
anyway, one day on the way to the port authority bus terminal i went into a store right near the little old lady to get a yogurt and a can of diet soda. the total came to $3.34, and i gave him a $10. the guy was insistent on me taking my receipt. i went outside and thought i would take another pamphlet from the old lady to see if she had updated her shpiel. randomly and without intent, i gave her my receipt as i took her pamphlet
my receipt that said $10 minus $3.34 change: $6.66
i never saw that little old lady again
coincidence? or was i AN UNWITTING TOOL OF THE DEVIL
absolutely true story
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It is "non-violent" in the sense that the cutting of human flesh and insertion of a foreign body into that flesh is non-violent.... Oh wait, isn't that the same thing that a bullet does, or knife?
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Focibly violating someones body to install a microchip is a nonviolent crime? I think you should re-examine your how you have defined violence.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
This woman sounds pretty nuts.
That said, I've got a colleague, ex-military, NOT a crank, who says the US Army implanted a glass-tube into his hand much like the one pictured - without his knowledge or consent. It was implanted while he was out during an unrelated surgery.
The implanted tube irritated him enough that he was regularly scratching it, and he eventually dug it out of his skin - and was surprised to see the foreign object.
The same guy has never spouted any nutty theories to me, never was paranoid about being tracked - just mentioned this experience.
For my part, I figured it was the Army experimenting with ways to inventory their humans, and maybe to posthumously ID them.
You could shoot someone in the street and it would be less of a crime, actually. Manslaughter carries a very low penalty comparatively.
I agree with what you said. FYI though, I am not a lawyer, but I know that:
You cannot talk about "potential" in legal talk. My favourite way to make a simple argument against the word "potential" is that each sperm has the "potential" to become a human being, therefore, every time a man masturbates, they commit genocide.
What you can talk about, though, is probable foreseeable future based on specific conditions, "Likely" is another term...
If you are driving drunk, you have a probable foreseeable future of killing someone due to the effects of alcohol etc...
If you have a microchip implanted in you, there is no known effect on your reactions/judgments parallel to alcohol to be considered for a probable foreseeable future of killing someone
=====
On the other hand, implanting a chip in someone has the probable foreseeable future of massive invasion of privacy amongst other questionably ethical motives.
I know that someone will come along and say "What if the guy is a pedophile? Shouldn't we know where he is at all times?" which is a clusterfuck of an argument that deals with a person's rights and privileges and how a society distinguishes between the two and how said society wants to remove a right and/or privilege from someone based on criminal acts. Not to mention how the penitentiary system has the responsibility to rehabilitate someone into society.
I don't even know where to start.
A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going somewhere. -- Groucho Marx
Unlike most slashdotters I actually read the bill as passed.
What does this mean?
'Implant' includes any means intended to introduce a microchip .... or applied to the skin of a person.
http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/versions/sb235_As_passed_Senate_5.htm
Do they mean something really weird like superglueing a passkey/ibutton to your skin? That's a new one I've never even heard of, and I've been interested in this general area of research for a long time (not for paranoid reasons, but more for medical and UI reasons)
'Microchip' means any ... electronically readable marking,
Ah, so no barcodes, no "mark of the beast" in GA etc. Technically a tattoo parlor inking a bar code would be "implanting a microchip" according to this bizarre law.
Such term shall not include pacemakers.
And there's the out. You'll get all the implants they want, just with a pacemaker feature that is not enabled.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Hey lady, no one cares or even wants to THINK about you having sex.
Maybe those numbers on the billboards are simply the number of slaps on the back of your head you need.
I hope the guy who scouted her to talk to the committee got fired.
Quickly, we need to implant microchips in Georgia state legislators while it's still legal to do so!
I'm pretty sure that the legislators and most of the state saw her as one of their own.
Have you seen the way some people drive? Lowest common denominator, here... any imparement puts you well into the 'likely' zone :P
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
post in the subject makes me look like a douchebag.
You don't do that when you write an email or a forum thread, do you?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Two beers isn't drunk.
Depends on the size of the beers and their alcohol content.
Ok, let me clarify.
Two 12-oz. American (5%) beers isn’t drunk.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Well, if you drive drunk you're likely to kill someone. As for the wrong plant, I totally agree.
If you implant microchips in someone's rectum and genitals I think that might be some form of rape or sexual harassment. Especially if you are smoking the wrong plant and drinking two beers while doing so.
and in the specific case of this article a woman's rectum and genitals were violated by The Smoking Man and his henchman so the alien's disguised as co-workers could torment her all day. This must be stopped!
That's because, unlike the former two, the latter one is not a problem affecting anyone (sane).
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
Driving drunk (if two beers qualifies) has the potential of maiming the person driving and/or other people. By definition, implanting a microchip into someone is more than a potential maiming, it's actual maiming.
Seriously, is this the sort of thing a website for scientifically minded humanists posts as a humor column?
This poor woman is evidently paranoid schizophrenic, and Samzenpus has taken it upon himself to make fun of HER (for being chemically delusional) instead of the legislature.
My "firesamzenpus" tag is half in jest, usually, but this post is just beyond the pale.
Smoking weed = Harmless
Drink Driving = Stupid/Dangerous
Mandatory Microchipping = SLAVERY
Hell yeah this much worse. The only response to tyranny is fighting back.
wethepeoplewillnotbechipped.com
with your numerical analysis skills, you might consider a lucrative career in numerology. the challenging part is keeping a straight face ;-)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
And what about the wrong plant thing?
That's an outrage! Mans laughter shouldn't even be a crime.
Locking people up for making men laugh is insane.
wethepeoplewillnotbechipped.com
The truth of that statement also depends on the size & physiology of the person drinking them, and how quickly the beer was consumed.
each sperm has the "potential" to become a human being, therefore, every time a man masturbates, they commit genocide.
It does?! Shit! That means I must have beat out the Third Reich when it comes to crimes against humanity by the time I was 15...
This ain't rocket surgery.
However, -she- volunteered for the damned study, and if the bitch hadn't started struggling when she tried to back out at the last second, I would have implanted it in her thigh, and not her groin.
As for the billboards, it's a lot easier to display subjects' numbers & have them call in for instructions than it is to compel them to buy a copy of "Catcher in the Rye".
Sheesh. I'm just trying to do my job, man.
You're an idiot.
Citation needed for being stoned on weed making you a worse driver, please.
It was a drunk driver that fucked me over, and now I smoke pot all day just to be able to get up, walk, and take my ass to the car to get groceries from the store (thank you, California.) I still drive better than 99% of the population, and I've never had an accident in my decade of motor vehicle operation.
Hell the current strongest medical-quality bud barely gives me a buzz.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Drinking two beers does not make one drunk. Maybe if you're a 100lb asian woman who chugged 2 beers on an empty stomach. Maybe.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
More people are killed by 'distracted drivers' than drunk drivers, yet in most of the US it is legal to paint your nails, talk on a cell phone and eat a burrito the size of your head so long as you do not have 2 drinks.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
They have to break the skin to implant something, that is harm. Whether or not this story is true the act of having something implanted into you without your permission (excepting life-saving medical treatment) I would consider harm of the most grievous nature.
As to non-violent they would obviously have to sedate you or do this while you were sleeping, I don't know about you but that seems pretty violent to me, using violent to mean sudden or unexpected obviously.
Bullets and knives are very seldom surgically implanted. I've never seen a marksman swab a target with alcohol or iodine before "inserting" the bullet. MacHeath may wear fancy gloves, so there's never a trace of red, however his actions still cause harm. Violence is in the intent, not necessarily the procedure.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
While I would agree with the assessment you made about drunk driving, I think it's at least worth pointing out that one is a passive activity and the other is active.
In other words, it's entirely possible that every single person in america has driven "over the limit" at least once in their life (I'm not saying they HAVE, just that it's possible), and a small fraction have gone on to crash and injure someone.
In fact, hasn't it been shown that driving whilst tired, or while staring at a phone, or while reading, are equally dangerous activities and (in most states) aren't regulated at all.
In fact, having anger control issues is probably a greater risk for accident than speeding in most cases. Driving a car with crap-ass suspension (while totally legal) is much more dangerous than a "california stop" at a stop sign with clear visibility of no other cars in the intersection (which is not legal) and being hopped up on "Rockstar" energy drinks must have at least as much effect as a 0.04 alcohol level toward being a danger toward others.
When does the small chance of killing someone warrant a steep punishment? After all, simply being a "bad driver" is apt to cause injury or death in some rare cases. Simply looking at the outcome of a single drunk driving accident yeilds an emotional response of "OH MY GOD THIS MUST BE STOPPED", but does it warrant what people do as a result?
Devils advocate. :-)
Doesn't manslaughter imply that the killing was accidental, but still your fault?
Depends on the alcohol content of the beer, how fast it was consumed, the person doing the consuming, and a host of other factors - you cannot correctly make this claim without a host of additional stipulations. What's more, the OP stated that "driving home after two beers is a worse crime" - it's only a crime if you're legally drunk. So we can reasonably assume that the OP was talking about a situation where two beers is enough to get you drunk, which is to say - at least here in the US - that you have a blood alcohol content of 0.08%. If two beers is not enough to put you to that limit, then you have committed no crime, and your case is not covered by his claim that "driving home after two beers" is a crime.
Unless you'd care to argue that alertness, coordination, concentration and depth perception are not required to operate a vehicle safely, it makes plenty of sense to tell people that they may not operate a vehicle when they're impaired, and to set up harsh consequences to dissuade them from doing so. Operating a vehicle with those faculties impaired makes you "more likely" to kill or severely injure yourself and others, and also increases the risk that you will do significant property damage as well.
You must be kidding. Are you seriously arguing, that death is the worst thing that could happen to you?
Oh boy. My mother used to have contact to an insane person. That person would make your life such a living hell, that you would wish to die, but couldn’t.
Believe me. Death hasn’t got shit on someone dedicated enough to implant a microchip into you and drive you crazy.
This video right there is the best example of how that would turn out for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VDvgL58h_Y
But instead of spoons, there would be “just”words, gestures and maybe buzzing implants.
And: Yes, there are people out there, who can do shit as evil as this. I’ve seen it myself.
That dude even had original paper from the highest police authority in the country, AND could forge his signature!
That’s how he got out of a dozen mental hospitals!
(Luckily, he’s in a closed hospital/jail right now, where he doesn’t even have the right to use a phone. [Because that’s all he needs, to get out again, and sometimes even get his nurse IN.])
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Somebody needs a rudimentary vocabulary course.
Maim:
1 : to commit the felony of mayhem upon
2 : to mutilate, disfigure, or wound seriously.
Explain how "implanting a microchip" constitutes "maiming"? Does it cause pain? probably. Could it have negative effects? Certainly. Does it result in long term loss of a limb or limbs or other severe disfigurement? Not so much.
Having a limb blown off by a roadside bomb = maiming. Being run down by a drunk driver and losing a limb, or being permanently disfigured as a result = maiming. Having a rice-grain sized microchip embedded under your skin = painful, uncomfortable, but not maiming.
Let's get some perspective. I know everybody loves to protest unfair drug laws, but implanting a microchip is not equivalent to maiming any more than slapping someone is equivalent to first degree murder.
The Peaches-and-Nuts state.
I'm not sure I understand your objection - is it that you think implanting people with microchips wouldn't be a problem, or only that it's not a problem yet, because no companies have started requiring it as a condition of employment?
... bad Karma with the slash/GOP genuflecters. Take this reference to this smart GOP legislator down immediately or the whole site will get bad Karma.
You know, it is crap like this that puts us in the same league as Democrats that ban salt in restaurant food preparation.
Like to see you make a NY hot dog with out salt...
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Anyone got her beeper number?
Let's make all of those you mentioned (rape, murder, embezzlement $5 million and up) capital crimes. Problem solved... and I bet the crime rates would go down as a result.
And of course the local definition of drunk, which varies state by state and may not match the individuals definition of drunk.
I'm pretty sure 'forcing' in your case involves violence and would also carry assault charges. 'Forcing' in the case of the bill means "install this chip or you're fired".
Lets say the feds want to chip you. They will just say "We can put this chip in you, or we can [nsert absurdly horrible alternative here]. It is your choice."
It is like how the federal government can't interfere with state schools, so they just tax the state then say "if you want funding for your schools, install mandatory filtering software and teach things this certain way." Another example is when states offer to bring you to trial faster if you plead guilty. (I forget if that is Maryland or just Baltimore City). They can still claim they are providing due-process and giving you your right to a speedy and fair trial.
Then "drinking two beers and driving home" is not a crime at all, and the GP is just talking out his ass.
You may disagree that 2 beers makes you drunk, but if you have a BAC of 0.08%, you are legally drunk, and you are demonstrably impaired.
And I know plenty of people who would (and some who HAVE) claim "I only had 2 beers!" to police no matter how long they were at the bar and how much they drank.
Two 12-oz. Dogfish Head (Milton, DE) 120 Minute IPAs (~21% abv) IS seriously drunk.
USDOT Study. Their conclusion is that it doesn't make you "as bad" a driver as alcohol or other drugs, but that it does impair driving performance, and as such, does pose some safety concern, though should be considered secondary to the risks of alcohol impairment. From the linked article:
I think they were installing her brain.
You know, it is crap like this that puts us in the same league as Democrats that ban salt in restaurant food preparation.
DemocratS? Who have banned salt in restaurant food preparation? So you're saying multiple Democrats have successfully banned salt in restaurant food preparation? Where was this?
who want us to accept completely far out bullshit as fact, but plain as day obvious common sense requires citations and research study (that we're going to do for them, apparently) before they accept common fucking sense
yeah dude: weed doesn't impair you mentally. that's why SO MANY PEOPLE USE IT RECREATIONALLY. you know, because it has NO MENTAL EFFECT WHATSOEVER </sarcasm>
"Hell the current strongest medical-quality bud barely gives me a buzz."
oh i see. so you just smoke it for the pretty haze it puts in your car
what an ignorant low iq douchebag
hey, asshole: smoke all the weed you want. you have my blessing
JUST DON'T FUCKING DRIVE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANYTHING, YOU IGNORANT TWATSTAIN
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I agree that drunk driving is probably more dangerous, but implanting something isn't exactly harmless. If the implant isn't completely sterile an infection could easily cause the person to lose a limb, or die. Heck, even if it were sterile a person might be allergic to something in it, go into anaphylactic shock and die. Or the chip could physically break and pieces might go to the brain/heart/lungs and cause a stroke, heart attack, or pulmonary embolism. Or perhaps the chip has a toxic metal inside that leaks out. Or it's magnetic so the person gets an MRI and the chip gets torn out... through the other side. There are dozens of ways this could maim/kill.
I've never seen a marksman swab a target with alcohol or iodine before "inserting" the bullet.
Does putting on a condom make it not rape?
If you read the text of the bill (here), you will see that it also prohibits things like requiring employees to have a microchip implanted as a condition of their employment, which could be reasonably construed as "nonviolent". Actual forcible surgery against someone's will is already assault in many jurisdictions; if someone were to actually implant a microchip against a patient's will, they would be in trouble for a lot more than violating just this law.
Two pints of 5% beer consumed in 1h makes me completely unfit for driving tho. I'd be having a hell of a good time while unfortunately ignoring what effect a brick wall doing 100mph has on a car. I'm 150lb, male, not asian, and according to my physician perfectly healthy, just with the alcohol tolerance of a 10 year old.
God damnit that hurt too. My gums are swolen, tightening it's clench and making it more painful. Whenever I prod at it with a pick it's as though it crawls away from me and embedds itself deaper. It's like it has a mind of it's own. Very alien-like. Friends have stopped talking to me because they say my personality has changed. No longer was I the kind happy man with well-brushed teeth. Now they say i'm always crying about some sort of implant pain, and the trauma had casued me to have bad breath and not bathe ever since...it happened.
because i get angry at douchebags who don't consider driving under the influence a big deal?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
That's why I said 2 beers. You're more likely to kill someone while on a cell phone than after drinking 2 beers.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
You'd think so...but it doesn't actually work in practice.
England tried making theft and whatnot a capital crime and...murder went up. Once you already had already earned the maximum penalty, people were willing to murder not to get caught. That's also an argument why rape shouldn't be a capital crime...otherwise, why leave the victim alive afterwards?
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
It was a tense situation, and I used the wrong one. =)
"would ban"
My point is that stupid legislation is the only thing bi-partisan in politcs.
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
is that implant stuff won't ever have to be done in secret.
The government is collecting a SECRET massive database of everything you do! Right. Do you have a Loyalty card for this store?
When Nintendo Wii mark 3 requires an implant to control your virtual avatar, people will happily pay 30 bucks for it.
Including the conspiracy nuts. Because conspiracies are fun, but not as much fun as a Nintendo Wii.
Yeah, and 2 pints contain 33% more alcohol than 2 12 ounce beers, as a pint is 16 fluid ounces.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
I don't know about you, but I can see why having two drinks, along with a burrito as big as your head, in your hands while you're attempting to drive would get you a ticket. The cops would pull you over for being a freak with three hands.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
I am not a doctor, but my best understanding of the situation is this. In most normal people, when we imagine things we know we are imagining things. Like you are reading a description of iPad and you have a mental image of iPad, and you know you created this mental image of iPad because one part of your brain is reading about it.
But in some brains this connection is lost. Suddenly the image of iPad pops up, or some voices are heard, but the brain does not know what caused it. It is very very confusing, interferes with the perception. Most of the time it is sound, rather than images. Most people have "the tune stuck in the head" and all day the same song plays over and over. For these abnormal brains, the sound track that is being played back would be some old conversation or a movie dialog or even an imagined conversation they have had. They hear the voice, very distinctly, over and over again, and there is no one around saying these things. The only way the square their sensory input from ears and eyes is to come up with wacko theories like implanted micro chips. In another era they would imagine radio waves are doing, and before that they would blame black magic or possession by the devil.
I know it is quite funny to hear her testimony and imagine the faces of the senators hearing it. But she just needs medical care. And let us not be too hard on that lady. Given the advances in medecine, we all might live long enough in the shell of our bodies long after our brains have decayed to nothing. We could be that lady, when we are 80 or 90 years old.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Why, "Yes, I am a member of the Tea Party!" "Why do you ask?"
I'm sorry but do you think its a bad thing this bill got enacted? Who cares why ... its now illegal for your employer or doctor or parents to force you to get an implant and it wasn't before.
Its not illegal to get one. Its illegal to FORCE someone to get one. Big difference.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
I had a chip in my rectum once... it was pretty shitty.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Weird priorities.
government priorities.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I did the same thing with a Burger King receipt to get rid of the religious zealot that plagued our little college town. When I saw the total come up I had to ask 3 employees to get me a receipt (two didn't know how, this was before they had a give everyone a receipt policy,) so that I could non-chalantly hand it to him while I took his "pamphlet" which was actually more like a 11 page mini-book on 8.5x11". Anyway, point being he never came back to that town that I ever saw.
I think we have stumbled across the solution to crazy religious annoyance...
I parsed that as "You're more likely to kill someone on a cell phone than someone drinking 2 beers."
Which is probably true.
It's a little wrong to say a tomato is a vegetable. It's a lot wrong to say it's a suspension bridge.