Have These Parents Gone To Far ?

What if the kidnapper removes the chip? Unless you want it implanted deep within their bodies, and disable as soon as their vessels have completed eighteen circles around the Sun.

 

Yes, these parents have gone too far.

Their whole justification for taking these extreme measures is fatally flawed; it reminds me of that old saying:

"The road to Hell is often paved with good intentions."

 

Well, I don't have children, but having been a child, I have been seperated from my parents a time or two.

It happens, no matter how well you look after kids. Hell, I've lost track of my girlfriend when we are out shopping!

Maybe I should insist that she get a chip.

Or am I a "lazy" boyfriend?

And if you think putting a chip in a child is being overprotective, what is keeping an eye on your child 24/7?

Ok, I've been lost in a mall, as well. You know what I did when I was six? I went up to a security guard, said I was lost. He took me to the security office, asked my name, I told him and he called my parents.

Now why did I do that? Because my parents TOLD me to.

As opposed to:
"Oh, no where's Chris? Wait, let's checkk my radar."

 

Ok, I've been lost in a mall, as well. You know what I did when I was six? I went up to a security guard, said I was lost. He took me to the security office, asked my name, I told him and he called my parents.

Well, what about kids younger than that? Like, say, a 2 year old?

 

"Ok, I've been lost in a mall, as well. You know what I did when I was six? I went up to a security guard, said I was lost. He took me to the security office, asked my name, I told him and he called my parents.

Now why did I do that? Because my parents TOLD me to."



Well I just glad you ran into a security guard first, instead of a child abductor.

In addition, do you blame your parents for losing you? Were they being lazy?

I'm also glad that you listen to EVERYTHING your parents TOLD you.

Why do you blame the parents for lazy parenting, yet when they try to do something to ensure that their child can be located if they disappear, you object to that?

To me that seems like responsible parenting.

As has happen to you and me, children can and do disappear right under the watchful eye of a parent.

True, there are parents that are not as involved or provide enough parental supervision as they probably should. But then again, who's to say how much is enough and how much is too little.

We are mainly talking about children who are too little to fight back against an abductor or find their way to safety if they get lost.

But then again, people in their teens also get abducted, as do adults.

Would I want one, no. But I am old enough to make that decision for myself. As far as I know, a parent is responsible for their child until the child is 18 (unless otherwise deemed not fit in a court of law to do so.)

If they want to place a chip in their child, that is between them and their child. It's not for me to judge how they go about trying to protect their kid.

Latre!

EDIT: Stupid spelling. My parents weren't that involved in my spelling. I wish they had a spelling chip back then!

 

Well I just glad you ran into a security guard first, instead of a child abductor.

In addition, do you blame your parents for losing you? Were they being lazy?

Actually, yes, they lost sight of me in a mall, they had their attention elsewhere and I got lost.

I'm also glad that you listen to EVERYTHING your parents TOLD you.

Ok, so instead of getting your point across, you have to be sarcastic, nice, real nice.

Why do you blame the parents for lazy parenting, yet when they try to do something to ensure that their child can be located if they disappear, you object to that?

Because they're not a car! You shouldn't be able to put a Lo-Jack in child! What's next? Mind control? Everytime a kid has an unpure thhought, he gets a shock (ala Cartman in the South Park movie)?

To me that seems like responsible parenting.

Yeah, it seems like reaponsible parenting to allow your child to undergo surgery to get a locator put in him. While we're at it, let's set up an electrical fence around the house and everytime he runs at it, he'll get shocked.

As has happen to you and me, children can and do disappear right under the watchful eye of a parent.

Watchful? I don't know. If you don't have confidence that the child will find his way to proper people if lost, then you should be on guard all the time.

True, there are parents that are not as involved or provide enough parental supervision as they probably should. But then again, who's to say how much is enough and how much is too little.

This is the real question here, isn't it? How far can a parent go in rasing their child? Well if this country(USA) doesn't allow parents to raise a hand on their child, then why would they allow dog tags on the kids?

We are mainly talking about children who are too little to fight back against an abductor or find their way to safety if they get lost.

So what about the 15 year old who sneaks out of house to go hang out and before she can get down the block, her dad's there in a car waiting for her? And how does this prevent people from getting kids? My mom's car was stolen, but it had a Lo-Jack. Oh, they found the car, but all that was left was a frame.

But then again, people in their teens also get abducted, as do adults.

Yes, they do. Look at Chandra Levy.

Would I want one, no. But I am old enough to make that decision for myself. As far as I know, a parent is responsible for their child until the child is 18 (unless otherwise deemed not fit in a court of law to do so.)

As I said before, how is a fifteen year old going to react when she has to deal with an electronical tag?

If they want to place a chip in their child, that is between them and their child. It's not for me to judge how they go about trying to protect their kid.

Like a two year old is gonna have an opinion on the matter.

 

I have a little boy and I would do this in a second. I would do anything to protect my son.

 

I saw a report on this subject a while ago. They mentioned this chip surgically installed but at the same time showed these bracelets which are basically watches that are on the kids at all times and can trace a child's movement as well but not with the range that the chip has.

I think it's a okay idea, and it's pretty sad these are the extremes that must be done in today's terrible sick world we live in and tollerate.

However you must ask yourself. What ever happened to good parenting? What I'm concerned about is that these parents will let their own guard down as a result. I think good supervision and knowing where your child is the first step in safety, and this should be a reinforcement device.

Personally I think that career criminals should have devices surgically put into them instead of the other way around. Why should someone who has never done anything wrong and is innocent wear something like this. I think were tracking the wrong people here.

 

"Personally I think that career criminals should have devices surgically put into them instead of the other way around. Why should someone who has never done anything wrong and is innocent wear something like this. I think were tracking the wrong people here."


Piggy, I couldn't agree with you more. But, I could see lawyers coming out of the woodworks to defend their clients right to privacy.

Look what happens to child molesters when they are released back into a community. They must register with the local law enforcement on where they are living.

I have seen cases where they are harrassed, subjected to people picketing for them to get out of their community, and sometimes even worse.

Know, I'm no friend of the child molester, but in our court of law, I always thought that if you have done your time for your crime, and those in charge believe you are fit to be released back into society, you should be able to go about your life like everyone else. (Althought I don't believe that I would right out release a child molester. Getting them help with their problem would be a better solution to me, or else let them just sit in jail for the rest of their lives.)


Yodave27,

I'll try to keep this short.

First thanks for the comments on my sarcasim.

Second,

"Because they're not a car! You shouldn't be able to put a Lo-Jack in child! What's next? Mind control? Everytime a kid has an unpure thhought, he gets a shock (ala Cartman in the South Park movie)?"

Why not put a Lo-Jack in a child, or is a car more important than a child to you?

Is mind control next? Well if you really think about it, parents control the minds of their children from the day they are born until the child is old enough to start thinking for themselves. You even pointed this out with you comment about the 2 year old not being able to have an opinion on the matter. So, mind control has always been around. Parents even have their children take behavioral/mind altering medications in order to keep them under control.

As for your South Park example, (and I love South Park by the way) if your only example for mind control is of a cartoon movie, I just hope you don't also believe that a child can really die every day like Kenny does in episode, and then come back again. If so, maybe that is where you are getting confused with the worth of a child, and the need to try and protect that child from harm.

"Watchful? I don't know. If you don't have confidence that the child will find his way to proper people if lost, then you should be on guard all the time."

And I'm sure that you are "on guard" all the time in your life? That would only occur in a perfect world, but sadly we don't live in a perfect world.

"So what about the 15 year old who sneaks out of house to go hang out and before she can get down the block, her dad's there in a car waiting for her? And how does this prevent people from getting kids? My mom's car was stolen, but it had a Lo-Jack. Oh, they found the car, but all that was left was a frame."

As I said before, that is between the parent/s and their child. If the kid is in their teen, they could have it removed.

But, if the kid is sneeking out of the house, it is the parents job to keep an eye on them and know where they are going. You even said that. So isn't the parent just doing their job?

As for your mom's car, they found it at least didn't they, or what was left of it?

It's not meant to PROTECT, but to LOCATE. Hopefully the protection can come about from the ability to locate the child in a timely manner. But than running around looking everywhere and wasting time I would say.

"Yes, they do. Look at Chandra Levy."

Exactly.

"As I said before, how is a fifteen year old going to react when she has to deal with an electronical tag?"

Once again, that's between the parent/s and their child. If they want them to have it, their is not much the child could do about it. It is not harming the child in anyway as far as I see it.

And didn't you ever have to

 

Look, the problem I have with the whole deal is that when the child gets older, 14-15-16, they still don't have a say in wheher or not the chip gets removed, because the parent is still a legal guardian.

Ok, let me be honest here. What does this device actually do? Let's say, God forbid, your kid gets kidnapped. So you turn on this device, locate him(her) and when you find him, the child is dead. All the kidnapper is going to need is an hour or two and that's it. Once word hits the criminals that some kids have this, they'll to their horrible deeds faster, that's all.

 

Ok, I'm 17 and I have to say this would suck. I'd sooner move out, take on more hours at my pretty crummy job, go to school at night or as much as I could and rent some crummy ass apartment, the cheapest I could find, maybe find a roomate too, than have one of these chips put in me so my parents (and I do love my parents) or anybody else could know exactly where I am at all times.

And as for the good it does, all it does is help the cops find dead bodies faster. Kids getting abducted should be very rare. If you live in a bad neighborhood don't let them outside by themselves until they're old enough. Teach your kids streetsmarts and if they're too young site them in the seat in the shopping cart at the store. Hold their hands, keep physical contact constant even if they are just holdng your legs or w/e.

It's not that hard to keep your kids from getting abducted and these chips are an infringment on privacy. And I know kids under 18 have no rights, their parents can do w/e especially with thir privacy, but you try telling me or all the other 16 and 17 year olds in the world that they can't have any privacy at all, they can't even go anywhere without their parents knowing.

Even for two year olds it's not that great an idea. The system could be hacked and now it's a dangerous tool for criminals. You get a bad police officer manning th controls and that's not good. And of course the kids will grow up eventually. Just pay attention to your kids. Don't get an electronic mother and father.

 

So what about the 15 year old who sneaks out of house to go hang out and before she can get down the block, her dad's there in a car waiting for her?

Well for one thing, that's not the proposed purpose of the chip, although I could see some parents wanting to have that kind of tracking ability all the time.

But the thing is, what if that 15-year-old's father installed motion detectors around the house, so he could catch her if she tried to sneak out? There will always be controlling parents, and as long as they are the legal guardians of their children, you can't stop them, no matter how mature you think their 15-year-old really is.

 

I can tell you right now that if someone had implanted one of those chips in me when I was 11 I would have dug it out with a knife and a pair of scissors.

 

Actually, I just went and read the whole article.

Nothing protects your kid's security like putting their full name (and parents' names and ages, just in case) in the newspaper!

(Only, the smart crooks will kidnap her younger sister, who hasn't yet had the chip implanted. Thanks for the tip! )

 

What if the pervert cuts off her arm? Stupid, stupid idea.

I see this as a doorway for all of us having tracer implants.

 

Do any of you have any idea how the criminal mind works?

They are not just going to grab the child off the street and kill them right then and there. Depending on the method of killing, it might take a minute or so to do. Or else it is messy/bloody.

Not an act you would feel comfortable doing in the middle of a heavily traveled area.

They usually try to find a remote area, which means that it would take some time to get there, make sure it is secure, and then commit the act.

And if they don't even know a chip is in the kid, how will they cut it out or off?

And what if the abductor is not a killer? What if they are only a molester or a parent/relative of the child?

Even then, I doubt the act of cutting out the chip or cutting off a limb would sit well with them. A parent wouldn't want to hurt their child, and the molester is looking to do their evil deed, and be rid of the child as fast as they can.

What the chip does is give the child a chance to be rescued quicker than they would if they didn't have the chip.

Once again, if the parents and their teenage child want to have it removed, that is between them.

And I don't see us lining up in the near future to get a chip installed into each and every one of us. But if one came along that allowed me to do transactions at banks and when I go shopping instead of having to carry money or credit cards around, I might think about getting one.

Latre!

 

I am reluctant to accept this idea. It is a blatant infringement on personal privacy, and it probably won't deter abductions anyway.

 

I have 3 kids and would never do this. In some ways I can see why a parent would want to do this, but I think there are better ways to protect your children. My youngest two are watched constantly. When they are outside, I am outside. My oldest we do role-playing and teach what to do when a stranger approaches them, who they can run to ect. The likelyhood of a stranger coming into our house while we are sleeping is low and with two dogs they would never get in without us knowing.

The idea of having chips implanted in my children I find distrubing. Proper supervision and teaching your child survival skills are more likely to protect them, then a chip.

 

Proper supervision and teaching your child survival skills are more likely to protect them, then a chip.

So, what you are saying is that it is the responsibility of the parent to raise their child?


Isn't that was the government is for?

 

Tracking your children's movements is liable to fall *way* out of hand. The problem arises when children are told to come straight home after school, and don't. I know we're talking about all ages of kids, from 4-16 )Or thereabouts), but I say if a kid wants to disobey their mother, and go play in the gravel pit after school with friends, they have the right to be disobedient without a homing beacon attached to their arm. The potential for parental abuse of this practice is far greatre IMO than any dangers presented by the information falling into the wrong hands, or even the potential health hazards of a radio-emitting microchip in your flesh

 

The problem arises when children are told to come straight home after school, and don't. I know we're talking about all ages of kids, from 4-16 )Or thereabouts), but I say if a kid wants to disobey their mother, and go play in the gravel pit after school with friends, they have the right to be disobedient without a homing beacon attached to their arm.

Yeah, REALLY, parents don't have the right to know where their kids are! They could be abducted from the gravel pit, but really, who cares?!?!?!

 

One needs to consider the numbers. There are, satistically, four deaths per year of children in the hands of strangers. There are, however, 3500 deaths per year of children on the road. This frenzy that is created by the media only makes parents more hysterical and hence foreigners to reality. Besdies, parents have a responsibility for the child to grow up as a decent human being. Anyone who knows that they are being watched at all times from the youngest of ages is not going to turn out normal.

(The above numbers are for the UK)

 

Odd ball question. If this is not too far, what would be? IF safity is the primary concern, could we go too far for the safty of our kids?

 

Another thing that most people don't realise it that most child abductions happen at the hand of people they know. As Al said there have been 4 in the UK in the recent past. Three of these have been at the hands of people the children know.

In the case of Holly & Jessica, which prompted this debate the accused is the caretaker from the school, and his girlfriend who was a supply teacher there (although she has only been charged with, basically, lying to the police).

The previous high profile case of the girl (whose name escapes me) from Tilbury was abducted by a man in a white van. This later turned out to be her uncle.

In these cases wouldn't the abductor reckon they have more time with the child (e.g 'I've rung your parents they know you are here'- a reasonable statement from a relative or known school figure? after all (apologies for bluntness) what use is a dead child to a paedophile? If in these instances the children would have had these tracking devices maybe, just maybe, they would have been found alive - isn't that more important than objections based on the big brother paranoia?. As Celera said on page one The chip can backfire too. What if a stalker hacks into the system and kills you? . Every animal that enters the UK has to be electronically tagged (or spend 6 months in quarantine). Here's a challange to the paranoics. Hack into that system and kill or control a dog using the chip.

 

It's great to see so many people willing to let a child go missing without a way to find them.

Those of you with children who wouldn't put a chip in them sure as hell would have wished you did if your child ever went missing. At least I hope you would.

Play the odds all you want. I know the statistics too, but if I had a child, and they were taken, you sure wouldn't here me crying on national T.V. for everyone one to find my kid. I would just use the chip to track them down.

As I said before, it is not meant to be used to prevent abductions, but to locate a child when they do go missing.

Latre!