... by inserting a transmitter with a GPS tracker, under their skin, would you do it.
Let's say it would be inserted a birth and becomes inactive 18 years later.
What would be the pros and cons, and would you consider it?
Imagine the amount of children that become missing or run away from home, and how many children this sort of system would protect.
2007-01-15 04:08:37 · 16 answers · asked by I am Crystal S. 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
That is something I've always agreed with!!
Think of how it would prevent all the child abduction from going on!! They have similar trackers out there for pets,,,Why not kids?
I 100% agree with the concept!!!!!!!
2007-01-15 04:13:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
HMM that is a very good question. Im sure that it would actually be a VERY good thing to help with abducitons, BUT I worry about people who have to hide... like people who have to hide from their spouse, or boyfriends or girlfriends for the childrens sake. I think that It would help more than it would hurt but It would have to be proven safe and make sure it didnt cause risks of cancer or other diseases. And there would need to be a way to remove this incase of the need to HIDE. There are programs through the gov't that hide people for many reasons and at times that involves the children too. So for safety reasons I do feel this idea is a good one, but it would have to have some ways to deactivate if needed in a situation such as they are in a witness protection program or such. I would definately consider this in the future if i had kids.
2007-01-15 04:15:53 · answer #2 · answered by carrie h 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is a hard one. It is very hard to say.
I guess I would say yes. People seem to think doing stuff like that makes them (kids, pets, etc.) robots or something. But all it does is track them
So I guess I say yes. What harm could it do knowing where your child is? As long as you could have it taken out when they are older it would help with missing children and stop some of the sickos in this world.
I hope others see my point of veiw on this. Maybe they will have this someday. It could save a lot of kids.
2007-01-15 04:18:58 · answer #3 · answered by Jason J 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO! Anyone who abducted them would be cutting them open looking for the transmitter. The GPS would not prevent abduction, it would just add to the pain.
It's a great idea for finding someone who is lost, but a cell phone can do the same thing.
2007-01-15 04:13:09 · answer #4 · answered by Faith 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the form between little ones and vehicles or pets is that vehicles and pets are property. little ones are not any further. A traceable microchip would look like with the intention to counter baby abduction before each thing look, notwithstanding it opens up an finished move of human rights and privateness arguments. Who has get entry to to this assistance? moms and dads/guardians? Police? college officials? how will you likely make sure that this assistance continues to be one hundred% protect and would not fall into the fingers of would-be baby abductors or molesters? How lengthy will others have get entry to to this assistance? till the baby is eighteen years old? 21 years old? eighty years old? How receives entry to to this assistance be terminated on the "acceptable" time? you won't be able to easily "turn off" a microchip, it would likely must be bumped off and that does no longer be almost as difficulty-free as implanting it (no longer in trouble-free words would the elimination be harder, notwithstanding it truly is widespread for puppy microchips emigrate from the unique area to elsewhere). i do no longer imagine that's a good theory. in some unspecified time sooner or later of their lives (ie even as they are adults) someone has a excellent to in trouble-free words disappear in the experience that they opt for to finish that. Microchipping does no longer avert abductions from going on in the first position, and on condition that the lacking baby grow to be suggested as we communicate would it not make any distinction in the top result for the baby (it may advise prosecutors have more suitable evidence in a homicide or molestation trial, notwithstanding it does no longer quit the violent act from happening).
2016-10-31 04:13:51 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I've heard a lot of overzealous Christians saying that said microchip could be the mark of the beast. Personally, I believe that they're all off their rockers, but anyway....
I would have no problem with inserting a chip in my child's skin. It's better than having to cope with the fact that your child's been murdered.
2007-01-15 06:28:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
that wouldn't prevent them from being abducted, but it would facilitate them being found. (alive or dead) that's the pro, and the reason behind the idea.
cons: cost, possible infection / rejection, possible misuse by unsavory types, privacy and possible objection by the child later.
would I do it? I don't think so, but I am intrigued by the "tracker" shoes..... but my personal opinion is to be a good parent and watch the child, take precautions, know where he is, make sure he's supervised and safe, etc.
2007-01-15 04:20:28 · answer #7 · answered by Squirrley Temple 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's like putting a tracker on your dog so he won't run away. Not the same thing, humans are slowly becoming animals by the minute. What is this world coming to?
2007-01-15 04:15:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Definitely, NO! That would be terrible, in many ways. A nice analogue to this would be the movie "The Final Cut". Watch it.
2007-01-15 04:17:11 · answer #9 · answered by vanman8u 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would agree with it, as long as it was safe. But I think it should continue after 18 years because adults go missing as well. :)♥
2007-01-15 04:11:53 · answer #10 · answered by summer ♥ 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋