|
I agree that it is wrong |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Definitely agree. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree that an implanted chip would be a good idea for all convicted criminals. It is very
important to be able to track these people. Research has shown that criminals are very likely to
commit additional crimes if given the chance. Therefore, I believe that it very important to know
their whereabouts all hours of the day or night.
However, I disagree that criminals should receive an implant then be set free. If this is the case,
then they will commit their crimes, receive an implant and return to society. There is no punishment
here. Criminals should not be released from prison until their time has been served.
I do believe that implants are a great idea for criminal. Maybe the threat of an implant will force
them to change their minds about future crimes. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Surely it is better to be able to keep track of convicted criminals than have them roaming the
streets as they please?
At least an implanted chip should be much harder to circumvent and less visually intrusive than an
electronic tag. And if those ordered to wear them are not engaged in breaking the law then they
should have no reason to complain about serving a sentence in the community rather than being banged
up in an overcrowded jail for 23 hours per day.
The implant then has the double advantage of freeing up jail cells for serious criminals and
enabling offenders to be rehabilitated in a less hostile environment than that which otherwise be
the case.
Do agree, though, that the use of implanted chips could spread. How long would it be before credit
card companies jumped on the bandwagon and replaced cards with implanted chips? It would also
presumably make credit card fraud more difficult. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Less freedom is their punishment. I think everyone should have these. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Convicts, can be persons who have been WRONGFULLY-ACCUSED AND IMPRISONED by an Entrapment-set-up, or
by lying witness-testimony, or by the powers that be need a scapegoat to hang a crime around the
neck of someone they just don't like, or would like to get rid of conveniently for them.
That is why we have a jury system, and "beyond a reasonable doubt"......in place.
To protect EVERYONE's Rights.
Human Rights, and Civil Rights.
Remove someone's rights? You set your own up to be removed.
If everyone does not have rights no one has rights eventually.
Besides, Entrapment, used by officials, is illegal also. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
The biggest argument against this is personal rights, and you forfeit certain rights when you commit
a crime.
Besides, the convicts in prison are under surveilance too. Its not like they have privacy. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I don't think it will work anyway just as the tagging doesn't work.
But I don't think the culprits have a say. If you can't do the time don't commit the crime.
The answer is to make prison so horrid they don't want to go their. Prison overcrowding will then be
solved. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I do believe that electronic chip implants do certainly impose a threat upon what could well be said
to be a human right, and human rights are, of course, absolutely essential and must be upheld.
However, this must be weighed up against the advantages of these implants; they are to keep
criminals, many of which are dangerous, under watch, so they can be found and prevented from causing
harm to society, if necessary. This, I believe, is very important.
Also, with respect to use in the UK in general, I certainly believe it is a very good idea;
especially with more and more instances of escaping prisoner, and prisoners mistakenly set free, and
the number of repeat offenders.
I therefore believe that, though imposing upon prisoners in such a way, the benefits outweigh this. |
| |
 jsh4  19 Feb 2008 23:37
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Science has been producing mankind with its latest inventions the life is thus getting accelerated
in each and everyday. The latest addition in this is the micro-chip implant to the prisoners. This
chip will make them to be traced out easily. This implant of chip is a very good idea to me and I
believe strongly that this will make the criminals to get frightened to make any further crime after
being released from the prison. It will be surely going to change their mind of doing any offense in
future. However, the criminals should not be set free after the implant and before their punishment
periods get completed. Research shows that criminals mind are usually inclined to make another
offense after getting free from the prison but this chip implant would make the numbers so little. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I believe all citizens should have a chip implanted at birth. After all, what do you have to hide?
It would also prove useful in situations beneficial to you, like if you were lost and had to be
found. Implanting it in prisoners keep them and us safe. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
What about if the so called criminal has been falsely convicted? Innocent! California, Texas,
Illinois, and New York are four states that have the highest faulty imprisonment rate. Some people
are falsely incarcerated due to
* Erroneous Eyewitness Identification
* False Confession
* False Informant
* Official Misconduct
* Rigid Thinking
So what about these people? The criminals would be the Ginny pigs for the government right? It is
already happening in animals! Next, it'll be a way to supposedly protect our children. It's a bunch
of baloney and should be banned. WE as a suffocated people should be able to come up with another
more ethical and moral solution. People make mistakes and they get put away for it, but it does not
make them less human. They are not 3/5 human!!!! As was once suggested of African American!!!! They
bleed the same, breathe the same, and will die and disintegrate the same as we do! I for one don't
think that anyone needs a big brother in every aspect of their life. It would not only involve the
criminal but all other people who he or she comes into contact with and that is just plain and
simple and invasion of privacy!!!! Who will be their next pawn? |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I disagree and think that something has to be done to stop offenders going out and re-offending as
so many do.
I'm not sure that I think implants are ethical but some form of tagging is needed.
These offenders didn't think of the rights of the people or property they hurt or violated and I
think we need to give more support to victims of crime than to offenders.
No it's not very nice to implant forcibly but perhaps it'll make people think again before they
offend and abuse the rights of others.
I think we have to balance the lesser of the two evils; implants or a higher crime rate and choose
the options that make people and society in general safer. If there is a loss of rights , then,
these have to be those of the offenders. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. If any government puts computer chips into one group of
people, then eventually the government will chip everyone. Adolph Hitler would have been very happy
if all German citizens already had been implanted chips to identify if they were Jews, mentally ill
or disabled in any way, homosexuals, people with certain political opinions, and on and on. He
could have exterminated more people more quickly. HORROR!
I hate that pedophiles who will never never quit assaulting and killing children, are left alive and
are returned to communities after serving a number of years in prison where there are no children to
assault. I would rather that all of them be subjected to some form of location detection, but that
wouldn't work because it would never indicate whether a child was with him being assaulted or
killed.
Government planted chips in any person's head must never be used. NEVER. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
No its alright they sud be . Its also a good way to make sure there out of restricted areas. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree that it is wrong to force prisoners to accept electronic chip implants, mainly because of
the implication that the obligatory use of this technology may have on society at large. Attaching
an electronic tag (usually to the ankle) is the standard way of tracking prisoners on parole, those
under house arrest and convicted individuals serving their sentences in the community. A few years
ago, Martha Stewart was required to wear one of these as well, when she served the last months of
her sentence under house arrest.
Electronic chip implants, however, amount to a medical procedure (however minimal) and the
alteration of one's body. This would be a very disturbing development. Additionally, it raises grave
concerns about privacy and what type of information the government stores on its citizens. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
