Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Wisconsin Could Ban Mandatory Microchip Implants 395

01101101 writes "The Duluth News Tribune is reporting that Wisconsin could be the first state to ban mandatory microchip implants in humans. The plan was authored by Rep. Marlin Schneider, D-Wisconsin Rapids and Gov. Jim Doyle plans to sign the bill. The bill still leaves an opening for voluntary chipping." Slashdot covered one instance of mandatory microchip implants back in February.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wisconsin Could Ban Mandatory Microchip Implants

Comments Filter:
  • Choice (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Shadow Wrought ( 586631 ) * <shadow,wrought&gmail,com> on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:27PM (#15198196) Homepage Journal
    I realize that people have a choice as to their jobs and could choose to have a different job rather than be implanted, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Having chips planted into the body of an emloyee is pretty darn good place to start.
  • victory for privacy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gravesb ( 967413 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:28PM (#15198207) Homepage
    Its good to see someone is looking out for individual rights. Maybe its because the law was passed prior to the industry growing large enough to have an effective lobby. I hope that more states see the potential and pass similar laws. If it is passed, it will be interesting to see how it is enforced, and how many companies try and get around it. Also, I could see health insurance giving big "discounts" to people who sign up to get a chip.
  • by Silver Sloth ( 770927 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:35PM (#15198274)
    will be transferred to work in the call centre.

    Well that's how they did it at my place of work. Ok, so it wasn't microchips but I'm sure they'll use the same principle when the time comes. Usual 'security reasons and if you've nothing to hide...' bollocks.

  • Would this apply (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jessecurry ( 820286 ) <> on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:36PM (#15198293) Homepage Journal
    Would this bill apply to the company that requires the RFID injection? It stated in the previous story that the RFID chips were not required to maintain employment, so taking a job in the area that requires the chips would be voluntary wouldn't it?
  • by RafaelGCPP ( 922041 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:40PM (#15198336)
    I can imagine the dialog between a candidate and the future employer: "Yes, I think you are just perfect for the job. Now, all you have to do is fill those forms, get chipped, and..." "Whoooa! Isn't it illegal? You cannot force me to that!" "You are right but I am not forcing you to take the job either!" The guy takes then the second best, which in turn will accept the chip promptly...
  • by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:49PM (#15198431) Homepage
    Its good to see someone is looking out for individual rights. Maybe its because the law was passed prior to the industry growing large enough to have an effective lobby. I hope that more states see the potential and pass similar laws.

    Indeed! I'd like to see this extended beyond simple RFID, and worded in such a way as it is illegal for any agency, government or otherwise, to mandate any modification to the body of the individual. (Short of requiring a hair cut, bodily hygeine, and other such things.)

    You can't bar code me, tattoo me (that's my job), implant anything in me, or otherwise manipulate my body for purposes of employment, identification, being provided services, or any non-medically-necessary procedure. You can't ask. You can't deny me those services. Nothing. I don't care if I'm a job applicant or a criminal.

    Even the remote possibility of mandatory implantation -- in any situation -- reeks of loss of control over one's body, and scares the crap completely outta me.

    I appluad the person bringing forth this legislation.
  • by Foobar of Borg ( 690622 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:49PM (#15198435)
    Are you implying that Americans will just sit back and let that happen in the first place?

    Yes, they usually do. Fighting back takes time out that they could be spending making money or watching television to relax from working so hard making money so that they will have the money to watch television to relax. Or something like that...

    I don't know a single person that would stand for the government pulling that one over on us.

    Well, I wish I knew some, too. Unfortunately, most people (at least in the US) are not like that.

  • Re:Small comfort (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Billosaur ( 927319 ) * <(wgrother) (at) (> on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @01:53PM (#15198470) Journal
    A legal ban on mandatory microchip implantation is pointless in a way, as the real threat is that they will become so pervasive that it will be impossible to lead a normal life (e.g. buy groceries, vote, hold a drivers license) without one.

    It starts with businesses using them for employee access and security. Admittedly you don't have to work for a company that has mandated their use, but they will slowly become ubiquitous, as more companies realize the benefits of implanting employees with an id they can't lose (unlike a badge or tag). Not only will they use it for security, but you'll be able to buy your lunch in the company commisary without having to carry your money. Then, once people get used to the idea of that, they'll demand the technology be available elsewhere.

    It only takes a small group to start a technological revolution. Look how the whole PC concept began. But this is one technological revolution that needs to be monitored carefully. The risk to individual privacy is too great.

  • Re:Choice (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nelsonal ( 549144 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @02:01PM (#15198528) Journal
    Than I for one will quit, cash out my 401(k) and IRA and buy an acre or two of farmland someplace quiet and happily live out my days.
  • by xmorg ( 718633 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @02:39PM (#15198873) Homepage
    It could still technically be Illegal to force implants, but if you are "forced" to economically such as not being able to buy or sell (Bible's prediction) then you are still compelled to be implanted... "causeth" (jkv) is not forced.

    Silly politicians, You cannot legislate the end away, you must watch for it and be ready.
  • by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @03:12PM (#15199156)
    If it's not illegal, what the hell else is there to stop an employer from requiring it? Morality? What are you smoking?

    There is no society on earth "good" enough to rely entirely on its citizens' moral fiber to prevent abuse. Bad news, my ass. The sorry condition of humanity is not news to me at all.

  • by DesireCampbell ( 923687 ) <> on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @03:23PM (#15199243) Homepage
    Firstly, get off your high horse about being 'forced' to work. The way you're talking it seems you'd want to shut down half the country. Everyone has a choice, it might not be a very appealing choice, but it's still a choice. People die in certain jobs. Actually die. Miners, soldiers, oil rig workers...

    If you don't want to work at a "dangerous" job, or one that infringes on your rights - DON'T. There's always another job, or at least welfare.

    Oh, and the smoking thing? That shits as dangerous as putting a chip in your arm. I direct you to the facts [].
  • by shaitand ( 626655 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @03:28PM (#15199281) Journal
    How does this post makes sense in reply to a post that points out that an additional law is needed to prevent employers from requiring the implants? I'm not sure how comprehensive this law is but I hope it would prevent a de facto requirement in additional to a hard requirement.

    For instance, if the chip were required to participate in social security or to use US Currency. Nobody is forced to use cash but it is not practical to do otherwise in our society. Or if the new edition of the state id card and drivers license were microchip only. Nobody is forced to get a card, it is technically optional but in reality everyone has to have one to function in society. No government service or service enhancement should every depend on an implant whether mandatory or not.
  • by sumdumass ( 711423 ) on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @04:12PM (#15199708) Journal
    Yea, who was it that installed that backdoor trojan anyways?

    I means which president started using the commerce clause to get around the other little anyances of rights, limits of power and the asumption of freedom.

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama