It seems too far-fetched to be true, especially in the “land of the free” where the Constitution supposedly recognizes and enshrines certain “inalienable” human rights like individual choice and privacy, but it’s true nonetheless: In the United States, we have all come one step closer to being microchipped by mandate.
Six years ago, NBC Nightly News boldly predicted that all Americans would be fitted with RFID microchips by the year 2017. Though at the time, NBC’s prediction seemed far-fetched, the House recently passed a bill that would bring a micro-chipped populace closer to reality before year’s end. Which would allow the US attorney general to award grants to law enforcement for the creation and operation of “locative tracking technology programs.”
H.R. 4919 would, among other things, authorize federal grants to local agencies to fund the voluntary use of tracking devices to locate and safeguard patients with dementia or developmental disabilities (such as autism).
On 8 December 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives passed House Resolution 4919, a bill reauthorizing the Missing Alzheimer’s Disease Patient Alert Program — a program that, until it expired in 2013, provided federal grants to locally based agencies and organizations for the purposes of protecting and locating missing patients with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (with an added provision supporting the same services for missing patients with developmental disabilities such as autism).
The bill is known as Kevin and Avonte’s Law, and the idea behind it is that mentally disabled people who are microchipped will be easy to locate if they get lost. This is a giant step toward universal microchipping of everyone. Unfortunately, most Americans did not even realize that this bill was being discussed.
H.R. 4919, which passed 346 to 66 in the lower chamber, mandates the U.S. attorney general award grants to law enforcement officials so that those agencies can create, establish and operate “locative tracking technology programs.” The bill was approved by a margin of almost 300 votes which means that it had support from representatives in both parties. Now we wait and see what the Senate will do, and then it will be up to our President to either veto it or not.
Giving 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.”
In reality the bill opens the door to give police the ability to microchip dissenters, and force cooperation on the part of the general population. In effect anyone who doesn’t go along with the mass conditioning will be labeled “mentally ill” and branded with a track-and-control chip. At the first sign of suspicious behavior, a troubling social media profile, or a misunderstanding during an encounter, police and medical personnel will have the authority to declare someone ‘mentally disabled’ (or incapacitated, or temporarily insane, or unsound of mind, or whatever label is handy) just because they express discontent, anger or outage at the state of the world and political affairs. “Fake news” journalists can be shut down, and “conspiracy minded” individuals controlled… and of course, it will be abused which will lead to a very nasty police state.
The bill’s sponsor, Republican Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, explained the motivation behind it as follows (in part):
“Having worked with the Alzheimer’s and Autism communities for years, I know how important this program can be in advancing the health and safety of persons who wonder as well as advancing awareness and education about the problem,” Smith said. “What is shocking is that while almost half of all children with autism wander from safety, only half of those affected families have received any guidance or training on addressing the concern and keeping their child safe, according to a study published in Pediatrics.”
Smith said the funding can be used to provide proactive educational programming to prevent wandering and assist in locating missing individuals, as well as innovative locative technology to help find those who may wander.
“According to the Alzheimer’s Association, half of Alzheimer’s patients who wander will suffer serious injury, sometimes fatal, if not found within the first 24 hours,” Smith noted. “This legislation will provide funding to law enforcement agencies and non-profits to help implement locative tracking technology programs for individuals with dementia/disability and implement a notification or communications system of alerts,” he said.
Though the program’s mission is to find “individuals with forms of dementia or children with developmental disabilities who have wandered from safe environments,” it provides no restriction on the tracking programs inclusion of other individuals. The bill would also require the attorney general to work with the secretary of health and human services and unnamed health organizations to establish the “best practices” for the use of tracking devices.
The government will decide who is ‘mentally unfit’ and must be tracked
That prediction doesn’t appear to have come true—and with Hillary Clinton soundly defeated Nov. 8, it doesn’t look like it will happen anytime soon.
But what if it did? What if somehow some of us began to be “chipped,” sold to us as a way to ‘enhance public safety’ (which is always the excuse government uses to take away our rights and freedoms)?
Don’t look now, but it just happened.
In other words, the legislation—known as Kevin and Avonte’s Law—makes it “legal” for police to track certain U.S. citizens, despite the fact that their privacy is guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.
The program, which many have likened to the opening of a Pandora’s Box of wider tracking in the future, gives local police the authority to use technology to locate “individuals with forms of dementia, such as Alzheimer’s disease, or children with developmental disabilities, such as autism, who have wandered from safe environments.”
Advocates of the legislation, including Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, and Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., say the measure can help police intervene to avert tragedies through the use of location technology before the mentally disabled wander into trouble. But opponents, like Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, see it as a way for government to broadly interpret how it uses the technology.
As noted by the Daily Caller, in recent days the U.S. House of Representatives “overwhelmingly” passed a bill that would require the U.S. attorney general to provide grants to local law enforcement agencies so they can create, establish and operate “locative tracking technology programs.”
“While this initiative may have noble intentions, ‘small and temporary’ programs in the name of safety and security often evolve into permanent and enlarged bureaucracies that infringe on the American people’s freedoms,” he said. That is exactly what we have here. A safety problem exists for people with Alzheimer’s, autism and other mental health issues, so the fix, we are told, is to have the Department of Justice start a tracking program so we can use some device or method to track these individuals 24/7.”
Later, Gohmert said the bill’s sponsors implore lawmakers and the American people not to worry because it has language saying that any tracking device cannot be invasive and is totally voluntary.
What’s to stop some future authoritarian from widening a tracking program?
But he added that he was confused as to why Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress—the party historically at odds with big government and the massive federal bureaucracy—would be taken in and fooled into approving yet another massive, invasive government program.
He was also astounded that the GOP-controlled Congress would allow the tracking of people with “developmental disabilities”—a term that could have very broad applications—but not approve any tracking of illegal aliens, criminals and other malcontents.
Therein lies the rub: Who gets to define “mentally incapacitated?” And is that description only limited to persons who have been medically, clinically diagnosed with a “mental” problem?
Because in the recent past, Left-wing activists, politicians and academics have accused alternative media types of being mentally deranged and “propagandists.” Should alternative media journalists be tracked, for the public’s safety?
It’s not that farfetched anymore to think that could happen someday, especially when a “program” establishing ‘official’ tracking of ‘certain’ persons has already been implemented.