Government's right to track you with GPS

[C-dub]

What's the harm in tracking people without permission?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 41100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Other than being able to get $$$ for the school by saying that the student was there, when they can only prove that their badge was, I don't see too much downside to this.

Because pedophiles and parents without visitation rights could never come up with a way to abuse it, of course.

The technology is readily available, and pretty discreet. A few cheap used cars parked around the area with scanners would get you a route mapped in great detail, and since the other kids are tagged, would tell you if and when your target is walking home alone, too.

Wouldn't they have to know which tag belonged to which child? Because of the extremely short range of RFID it probably would not be used this way due to the cost. Why waste the money when in this case it really would be cheaper to just follow the child.

[KD5NRH]

The technology is readily available, and pretty discreet. A few cheap used cars parked around the area with scanners would get you a route mapped in great detail, and since the other kids are tagged, would tell you if and when your target is walking home alone, too.

Wouldn't they have to know which tag belonged to which child?

Pretty easy to do if you have even momentary access to the child, access being defined as getting within range to read the card. Readers aren't very large, so just walking by with a daypack and a directional antenna would be enough.

Because of the extremely short range of RFID it probably would not be used this way due to the cost.

$50-100 for a basic reader. A directional antenna and receive preamplifier is simple stuff you can build from any ham's junk box. Get the range up to even 10ft and it will cover a sidewalk from a car parked on the street. Depending on the tag frequency, a $500 off-the-shelf unit can read some RFIDs at up to 450ft. Keep in mind that TollTags are just RFID tags, and are read by directional antennas from several feet away. If the kids aren't having to scan the badge at every doorway, then it's safe to assume their tags are designed to be read from at least the width of a typical classroom.

Why waste the money when in this case it really would be cheaper to just follow the child.

Well, it would be cheaper to just sit out in my yard and watch for vandals and thieves...if my time had no value at all. Since I have to work for a living, I have about $2k worth of alarm and surveillance gear instead. For a couple hundred to a thousand, our hypothetical kidnapper could put a system in a $200 beater car, park it along a street near the school, and check the data at the end of the day. He could move the car as needed, and within a couple of weeks, he would know the kid's route to and from the school, and a high probability of when the target will be at any given point along that route.

Sure, it's not something a disorganized, opportunistic pedophile would do, but there are plenty of very clever and well-funded criminals out there.

[Dave2]

Because of the extremely short range of RFID

When did RFID become "extremely short range"? The current record is 66 meters (with a reader that costs around $250), but the guy who holds that record says 10 miles would be easy if you don't mind boosting the power to your antenna. The tag reader is supposed to discard any signals that take longer than 100 microseconds to come back, but if you allow late signals and use a big enough antenna, he thinks up to 317 miles is possible.

If you're ok with really smart bad guys being able to tell where every school kid is in a 317 mile radius, go ahead and issue them RFID-tagged ID cards. Incidentally, a circle with a 317 mile radius works out to have an area of 100,489 sq miles, which is bigger than 42 of the 50 states.

RFID Range: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/02 ... ange_rfid/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Area of States: http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/area.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[VMI77]

I'd like to believe our law enforcement agencies would use such a tactic against criminals/terrorists and not as a fishing tool used arbitrarily against just anyone, cuz hey, you never know what you might find...

I want to believe the various U.S. agencies are ethical (obviously there have been exceptions...) and wouldn't use such a tactic unless it's necessary to catch criminals/terrorists.

Am I being naive?

Here are just two examples.....Ever heard of CONINTELPRO? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

It went on from 1956 to 1971, over four administrations. Given who most of the targets were maybe you're ok with it, but you should consider who's in office now and how government power without adequate constraints is easily abused.

How about this recent tidbit in the news: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39456324/ns ... al_health/

From the article: "U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago."

Yes, these two events occurred 40-60 years ago, and one isn't a product of errant policing, but I'd pose this question: do you think the present government is more honest and trustworthy than the government we had when these things happened, between 1946-1971? To me, I just have to think TARP and the answer is no. So in my estimation, since we have a government of men, the potential for abuse is always there. It's happened before and it will happen again, and that makes it vital to have a system with good checks and balances that make it harder to abuse power, and more likely the abuses will be discovered. You don't find out about these abuses as they're occurring --COINTINELPRO went on for over 20 years, so who knows what might be happening now? You trust the Obama administration not to abuse power? I don't.

[OldCurlyWolf]

When I was in school, if the technology were available and the school wanted to "tag" me, I would have zapped the RFID in a microwave and destroyed it. I would do the same today if a company or government agency wanted to to that to me.

[i8godzilla]

What's the harm in tracking people without permission?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/met ... 41100.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Other than being able to get $$$ for the school by saying that the student was there, when they can only prove that their badge was, I don't see too much downside to this. I'm sure there is, but I'm not seeing it yet. I do think the benefits will far outweigh the negatives.

Haven't thought deeply about this, but it sure makes my spidey senses tingle. One downside that immediately comes to mind is that it conditions the coming generation to have their every movement tracked by "the authorities".

I can already see problems.

Mill this over............Mom picks up son from football practice and the 'tracking tag' is thrown on the car seat. Later that evening Dad and Mom go out for a night on the town. Mom sees the 'tracking tag' on the seat and puts it in her purse. Off to the night club for a great night. Next day at school the son is removed from the football team for violating the school's Zero Tolerance policy of student athlete being anywhere alcohol is available. If my kids or grandkids were given this tracking device it would be in the microwave over faster than you can say 4th Amendment!

[Katygunnut]

Have I overlooked evidence that proves that there's widespread governmental GPS tracking of law abiding U.S. citizens and is a commonly used fishing tool.

If so, then yes, it's wrong.

All the hullaballoo I've read so far regarding this subject sounds like conspiracy theorists hard at work...

Good point. Until this can be proven to be a widespread infringement, beyond any reasonable doubt, then those that want to keep their freedom are clearly fringe lunatics. Even then, once this is a common practice, and people can see that there is no breal harm, then why would there ever be a need to change it? After all, why do you care if the government can track your every move unless you were planning to go somewhere that you shouldn't. You weren't actually planning to do that now, were you?

Using this logic, we will be rid of that pesky bill of rights thingy in no time!!!!!

[chasfm11]

Let's take this in the completely opposite direction.

We all understand that the recidivisim rate on CONVICTED criminals is very high. Let's tag and track all of them that aren't in prision, with the penalty that if the tracking device is ever lost or altered, they go back to prison. Inject the RFID device under their skin or something else that is going to make it hard to remove.

When society, the ACLU and the courts accept that, then let's talk about tracking INNNOCENT people.

This is the same logic that we use at border crossings. Honest, normal people who want to enter or leave the US are subjected to all manner of evil under the guise of "protecting the country". The guy who wants to crawl under the fence a couple of miles away is completely ignored. We allow thousands across the border, have pictures of them doing the crossing and double the number of people inspecting at the approved crossings to harrass those whose intent is to obey the law and cross correctly. I've got to be tracked closely if I leave and re-enter the US. 12 Million illegals don't have any tracking at all. It is OK for teams of guys to haul bushels of marijuana across the border on their backs but heaven forbid that I should buy an extra bottle of wine in Canada.

[Bart]

How about we shoot the feebs with a tranquilizer dart, attach a wildlife tracking collar, and drop them in the middle of the wilderness? Maybe we should do a pilot project with Abraham because he likes GPS tracking so much.

Easy now.

Why are you crying fowl? The suggestion sounds like sauce for the goose, or duck in this case.

[C-dub]

How about we shoot the feebs with a tranquilizer dart, attach a wildlife tracking collar, and drop them in the middle of the wilderness? Maybe we should do a pilot project with Abraham because he likes GPS tracking so much.

Easy now.

Why are you crying fowl? The suggestion sounds like sauce for the goose, or duck in this case.

Not crying foul. I just didn't want it to go any further than that. I assumed there was a sarcastic tone, but still didn't want things to get any more serious. It was more of a request to be careful that no one descended to saying we should do anything to any one just because we disagree.

[C-dub]

Within the realm of tracking devices, 100m does sound short range to me. To boost the range further seems like more trouble and expense than most BG will go through.

Many people already wear RFID badges for employment. I do. If I were to inactivate mine I would not be able to open many doors that I need access to and it would cost me $15 to have another made.

I'm not saying that I'm all in favor of doing this, but I do see more positive applications that I think outweigh the probability of it being used negatively.

Regarding earlier comments about being able to track my daughter, I'm an enigma. What can I say? Hopefully, my wife and I would be the only one's with the code with the ability to track her. I wouldn't track her every movement, but it would be nice to be able to find her when she doesn't show someplace she was expected.

[Bart]

Not crying foul. I just didn't want it to go any further than that. I assumed there was a sarcastic tone, but still didn't want things to get any more serious. It was more of a request to be careful that no one descended to saying we should do anything to any one just because we disagree.

Not because we disagree, but because hypocricy is wrong. If they think GPS tracking of people who haven't been convicted of a crime is a good thing, there are two possibilities.
1. GPS tracking of them is also a good thing, or
2. they're morally bankrupt.

[anygunanywhere]

Chain of events.

9-11.

Patriot Act.

Dept of Homeland Security.

Gun owners, Christians, Veterans, Pro-lifers are known as domestic terrorists.

I rest my case.

Anygunanywhere

[WildBill]

Let's take this in the completely opposite direction.

We all understand that the recidivisim rate on CONVICTED criminals is very high. Let's tag and track all of them that aren't in prision, with the penalty that if the tracking device is ever lost or altered, they go back to prison. Inject the RFID device under their skin or something else that is going to make it hard to remove.

When society, the ACLU and the courts accept that, then let's talk about tracking INNNOCENT people.

This is the same logic that we use at border crossings. Honest, normal people who want to enter or leave the US are subjected to all manner of evil under the guise of "protecting the country". The guy who wants to crawl under the fence a couple of miles away is completely ignored. We allow thousands across the border, have pictures of them doing the crossing and double the number of people inspecting at the approved crossings to harrass those whose intent is to obey the law and cross correctly. I've got to be tracked closely if I leave and re-enter the US. Twelve million illegals don't have any tracking at all. It is OK for teams of guys to haul bushels of marijuana across the border on their backs but heaven forbid that I should buy an extra bottle of wine in Canada.

By jove, I think he's got it.

[anygunanywhere]

Also, with obamacare you gave the government total access to all of your bank accounts, financial records, and medical records. No warrant required. They can withdraw unlimited funds directly from your bank accounts to pay for what they want you to pay for.

We don't have to worry about warrants because the elected elite will just pass legislation to make the constitution obsolete.

If you think that electing a bunch of repubs in Novenber will solve this I have some oceanfront proprty i Arizona I want to sell you.....

Anygun