You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Question for parents
- Thread starter Johnsonontheleft
- Start date
The thing is you worry more as they get older, when a child is very young you know where they are 24hrs a day or you should do, it's when they get older you have to trust you have brought them up the right way and are behaving like responsible young people.
citytill1die84
Well-Known Member
10000000000000000000% yes
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
Im lucky I lived in a village and everyone knew everyone so strangers stood outbobmcfc said:BoyBlue_1985 said:bobmcfc said:We never really had the freedom we thought we had. All this jimmy savile stuff is a stark reminder of that
I had a great childhood with strict rules from my parents on playing outside. Im still alive I wasn't bummed or kidnapped or murdered when i rode to the shops on my bmx
Yeah but I bet there was someone waiting at the park gates wanting to bum you
SWP's back said:Yes we did.bobmcfc said:We never really had the freedom we thought we had. All this jimmy savile stuff is a stark reminder of that
And no, the Jimmy Savile case means sod all. He was one, well known, wrong un. We were safer than our parents or their parents and children are safer still. The advent of media and hearing about every case in its minutiae does not change how safe we were. All it changes is perception, not the reality.
As I said, 60 people are struck by lightening in the UK each and every year but we don't look at clouds and hide do we.
Strange analogy there I'm affraid, if being struck by lightening doesn't kill you I very much doubt the fact would lay deep in your sub-conscious, affecting your personality in the way a rape/abduction would.
What I meant is that things that are openly discussed and talked about now wernt when we were kids in the 70s and 80s. This illusion of being safe when really alot of people just covered stuff up and didn't discuss things. Yes we wernt all bummed but there were loads if dirty old codgers knocking about trying to give you sweets and push you on the roundabouts. We just didn't take things seriously when we were young.
Presumably these chips would be removed once the child gets to 18?
Or maybe if you had a criminal record or were just a bit undesirable, the state could take over parental monitoring when you reached adulthood?
The only reason I've read in support of them ( and I have skimmed through it a bit) is it increase your chances of finding a kidnapped child.
Therefore if I was a kidnapper, the first thing on my list would be to very crudely and probably very painfully remove the chip.
Or maybe if you had a criminal record or were just a bit undesirable, the state could take over parental monitoring when you reached adulthood?
The only reason I've read in support of them ( and I have skimmed through it a bit) is it increase your chances of finding a kidnapped child.
Therefore if I was a kidnapper, the first thing on my list would be to very crudely and probably very painfully remove the chip.
LongLang
Well-Known Member
SWP's back said:And yet 60 people are struck by lightening each year and no one has the same paranoid fear of clouds so they.LongLang said:If the tech was sound, i would. Without a doubt.
Whoever asked about the odds of being kidnapped in this country, just ask the parents of millie dowler, james bulger, Marie wells & jessica chapman etc (the list is frighteningly long), if they like those odds.
As a parent, i would give my life to protect my child, so i would certainly ask them to give some of their 'freedom' (if there is such a thing) until they are 18 and then they can choose to have the chip removed if THEY wish, as long as i can do everything in MY power to keep her safe until then.
Freedom is an over-rated illusion.
It is just irrational thinking.
So your comparing an unstoppable act of nature to child murderers and peadophiles to validate your point??
Thats irrational if you ask me, and a little insulting to those who have lost children in these circumstances.
If it was your child/children (i truly hope not), you would be screaming at the police to do all they can to find them. This technology (if it were real) could have your child safe in hours, not dead in days!!
How is that remotely a bad thing? Paranoia is sometimes justified.
On your playong field though, if there were an invention to safely negate the effects of a lighning strike, that was easily implinented and had no impact on your daily life, im sure many people would be interested. As far as i can see, aside from a rubber suit and/or lighning rod pn your hat thats not going to happen soon.
A
A
Anonymous
Guest
Absolutely not .....
for any number of reasons.
for any number of reasons.
bernabias home shirt
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 14,916
tidyman said:Presumably these chips would be removed once the child gets to 18?
Or maybe if you had a criminal record or were just a bit undesirable, the state could take over parental monitoring when you reached adulthood?
The only reason I've read in support of them ( and I have skimmed through it a bit) is it increase your chances of finding a kidnapped child.
Therefore if I was a kidnapper, the first thing on my list would be to very crudely and probably very painfully remove the chip.
As horrible as it sounds very true
Skashion
Well-Known Member
Or could easily use any device capable of generating an EMP.The cookie monster said:tidyman said:Presumably these chips would be removed once the child gets to 18?
Or maybe if you had a criminal record or were just a bit undesirable, the state could take over parental monitoring when you reached adulthood?
The only reason I've read in support of them ( and I have skimmed through it a bit) is it increase your chances of finding a kidnapped child.
Therefore if I was a kidnapper, the first thing on my list would be to very crudely and probably very painfully remove the chip.
As horrible as it sounds very true
Challenger1978
Well-Known Member
The cookie monster said:tidyman said:Presumably these chips would be removed once the child gets to 18?
Or maybe if you had a criminal record or were just a bit undesirable, the state could take over parental monitoring when you reached adulthood?
The only reason I've read in support of them ( and I have skimmed through it a bit) is it increase your chances of finding a kidnapped child.
Therefore if I was a kidnapper, the first thing on my list would be to very crudely and probably very painfully remove the chip.
As horrible as it sounds very true
Or the horrible cunts will try and get their hands on a taser so they can zap the chip and fry it. Or they could just use a strong magnet near the chip to disrupt the signal from it. Or maybe if they have a saloon car they could turn the boot in to a kind of Faraday cage to block any signals from the chip then just drive out to somewhere in the middle of nowhere were you wouldn't be able to pick up the signal.
There are lots and lots of ways of getting around some kind of tracking chip if your a determined psychopath ready to kidnap,rape and murder a child.
johnny on the spot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2006
- Messages
- 24,748
So the kids get this chip removed once they're old enough? Or do they keep it in out of convenience and have additional information added to the central database by successive manipulative governments profiting from irrational terror propagated out of minority crimes in the minds of stupid, frightened motherfuckers?
Skashion
Well-Known Member
Well, look at the bright side, it'll be easier to get kids to pay attention in Science. Now, today's lesson is going to show you how you knock out your parent stalker chips. Bet they all get an A* on that module.Challenger1978 said:Or the horrible ***** will try and get their hands on a taser so they can zap the chip and fry it. Or they could just use a strong magnet near the chip to disrupt the signal from it. Or maybe if they have a saloon car they could turn the boot in to a kind of Faraday cage to block any signals from the chip then just drive out to somewhere in the middle of nowhere were you wouldn't be able to pick up the signal.
There are lots and lots of ways of getting around some kind of tracking chip if your a determined psychopath ready to kidnap,rape and murder a child.
johnny on the spot
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2006
- Messages
- 24,748
Cue market stalls offering 'child unlocking' services.
Unknown_Genius
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 5,840
It's ridiculous ideas like the one by the op, that give people like Alex Jones, and New World Order theories, credibility. Talk about an Orwellian, big brother is watching you society. Next week there will probably be a thread wondering whether a hidden camera should be installed in your kids bedroom, to make sure they're not looking on Al-Qaeda's 'How to build a bomb, with an eggbox, Mento's, and Red Bull, in 5 minutes' website section, or, even worse, absolutely God forbid, they're not jacking off. What could be worse than that.
brass neck
Well-Known Member
No. It's just plain weird to wish to track a human. I wouldn't of wanted my dad to of tracked me when I was young and I wouldn't want to track my kids. We are all born free. As for this "all these cranks and weirdo's" argument. I doubt there has never been more pervs behind bars than there is now and statistics say there are no more in sociaty than there ever was. Kidnap is to rare to give up civil liberty's for!
DavidSilvasLeftFoot
Well-Known Member
If I found out today that my parents had me chipped as a kid I would find a way to cut it out.