The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 10, 2020, 09:34 PM   #1
dfwkid
Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2017
Location: Like the name says: DFW
Posts: 26
Microchip prohibited persons

Would there be any Constitutional issues if felons, etc were microchipped? If not, then why not do it? The technology has been around for years and is almost foolproof. Parolees have to report to their PO's who would verify/monitor the chips for signs of tampering and hacking. You could do the same for any prohibited person.
dfwkid is offline  
Old January 10, 2020, 09:55 PM   #2
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,927
Microchips can be easily foiled by an uncooperative host. They are far from foolproof.
My guess is most of your target population would not be totally cooperative.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old January 10, 2020, 10:26 PM   #3
Sharkbite
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,402
Orwell....the mark of the Beast....im seeing a lot of push back on that idea.
Sharkbite is offline  
Old January 10, 2020, 11:44 PM   #4
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 14,191
Personally, I'm against the concept just because I don't trust technology or the government that far. Once we start microchipping prohibited persons, does that open the door to microchipping other segments of society for whatever the justification du jour happens to be?

Since the question was related to Constitutional issues, how about the 5th Amendment right to not incriminate oneself? I believe there is legal precedent that says a person who has a warrant out for his/her arrest cannot be compelled to tell a police officer who they are because the honest answer would be incriminating, and a false answer would also be incriminating.

If that's correct, then how would wearing a microchip while attempting to illegally purchase a firearm NOT be incriminating?

Further -- what about private, face-to-face sales? Would every sale have to be finalized at a gun shop large enough to be equipped with a chip scanner?
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor
NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO
1911 Certified Armorer
Jeepaholic
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:30 AM   #5
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,927
There is a more effective way to “scan” prohibited persons: Facial scan connected to a national prohibited database.
The technology is already in use and reasonably effective and tamper resistant compared to microchips.
On the other hand, should microchipping become a requirement, expect to see a small industry pop up in selling very inexpensive chip spoofers and blasters.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:57 AM   #6
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 23,027
I don't think there would be constitutional issues for doing something like that to felons as there are pretty solid precedents for restricting the rights and privacy of persons convicted of certain types of crimes.

I just wonder how effective the technique would be. I think it wouldn't be that hard to pull one out and put a new one in.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 08:18 AM   #7
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 662
I doubt it would be worth the effort.

I don't see any constitutional issues, but I'll betcha the religious fanatics would go completely ballistic!
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 08:44 AM   #8
JERRYS.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,740
what's the difference in tracking a convict with an ankle monitor or a micro ship?
JERRYS. is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 09:13 AM   #9
olddav
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 21, 2008
Location: Lower Alabama
Posts: 712
Let me see.
1.) All government programs are expanded over time so one would have to be concerned with what info the chip will contain as well as how it can and will be used.

2.) With the expansion of the program private industry may seek to participate with their own needs for data thus expanding the data in the chip.

3.) Embedded chips will need a reader and readers can and will be acquired by those with no legitimate need leaving you exposed to identity theft and/or data manipulation.

4.) For the system to work everyone will need to receive a chip. You have to provide a negative (prohibitive person)as well as a positive (non prohibited person). An absence of a signal indicating a prohibited person can not mean “Ok to proceed”.

Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.
__________________
Never beat your head against the wall with out a helmet
olddav is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 10:45 AM   #10
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,350
Quote:
There is a more effective way to “scan” prohibited persons: Facial scan connected to a national prohibited database.
Except to check if someone is prohibited, you’d have to scan their face - which over time would give you a database of facial scans of everyone who tried to purchase a gun.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:05 PM   #11
unclenunzie
Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 2016
Location: Texas.
Posts: 90
The suggestion that any government entity could by force of law surgically implant a device into someone, felon or not, sickens me. As to whether it is constitutional to do so, I don't know. It strikes me almost as hard as a government marking an individual's skin.
__________________
I reject your reality and substitute my own!
this space for rent
unclenunzie is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:20 PM   #12
Wag
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 22, 2010
Location: Rio Rancho, NM
Posts: 830
The microchips don't work the way people tend to believe. Why not just brand a guy in the forehead?

--Wag--
__________________
"Great genius will always encounter fierce opposition from mediocre minds." --Albert Einstein.
Wag is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:20 PM   #13
dogtown tom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 23, 2006
Location: Plano, Texas
Posts: 2,573
Quote:
dfwkid Would there be any Constitutional issues if felons, etc were microchipped? If not, then why not do it? The technology has been around for years and is almost foolproof. Parolees have to report to their PO's who would verify/monitor the chips for signs of tampering and hacking.
What do you think a microchip would prevent? After all, an ankle monitor guarantees that the felon never leaves his residence, never drives a car, never picks up a gun, never molests a child, never commits a robbery, and stays on the straight and narrow path forever.



Quote:
You could do the same for any prohibited person.
Sure, lets microchip everyone under the age of eighteen, all foreign tourists and the mentally ill.

Dumbest idea ever.
__________________
Need a FFL in Dallas/Plano/Allen/Frisco/McKinney ? Just EMAIL me. $20 transfers ($10 for CHL, active military,police,fire or schoolteachers)

Plano, Texas...........the Gun Nut Capitol of Gun Culture, USA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
dogtown tom is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 12:24 PM   #14
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 7,945
Not going to happen !!! JMHO

Quote:
Would there be any Constitutional issues if felons, etc were microchipped?
I believe that there would be some Constitutional issues, when challenged. I do believe that convicted felons should lose "some" rights but this is not one of them. By the time this would become lawful, there will be better and less intrusive ways of tracking. ……

Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 05:33 PM   #15
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 6,763
I certainly respect the right of anyone to have whatever spiritual belief they may have.
I'm quite happy to leave your/my spiritual beliefs in the "None of my/your business" department.
My beliefs are irrelevant to the discussion,but I object to the labeling of "religios fanatics" or "fundamentalists'" to those who reject such implants,tattoos,etc as "mark of the beast"
Whether you or I feel the same way does not matter,and I will not comply with any requirement for an implant.

I am also highly suspect of people who sit around dreaming up schemes of "We can cure societies ills if we just impose this burden on YOU."

Get off imposing by force . How about an identification number tattoo'd on the forearm?? No,thank you. Hell No! No thank you!

I had to submit my fingerprints to the FBI database to get my carry permit.

I do not advocate submission of fingerrints and an FBI fingerprint check to buy a firearm....that's not my point, but reading my prints as a form of positive ID along with any history associated with those prints is far different than being invaded by an implant.

I don't see much difference in the thought process of the folks who would require the implant and the people who would require you to eat LSD or empty your wallet or engage n a carnal act.

Its about a lack of respect for where you end and I begin. Personal Boundaries.

Last edited by HiBC; January 12, 2020 at 03:37 PM.
HiBC is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 06:56 PM   #16
jmr40
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 9,984
Quote:
Except to check if someone is prohibited, you’d have to scan their face - which over time would give you a database of facial scans of everyone who tried to purchase a gun.
Your facial scan is already in data bases somewhere. With the proliferation of security cameras we are all in a system somewhere. It would just be a matter of centralizing the data.
__________________
"If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong"

Winston Churchill
jmr40 is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 07:20 PM   #17
Pathfinder45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2008
Posts: 2,892
It would be a gross violation of a person's inalienable rights. It's what NAZI Germany would have done if the technology was available at the time; instead, they used tattoos. Felons are humans and as such, they will continue to have some rights until they are no longer alive. With government over-reach, anyone could be legislated into a defacto felon. Just being born Jewish made a person a defacto felon in NAZI Germany. We have the Constitution that is supposed to help prevent government over-reach. But things that are legal today, could become felonious tomorrow with the stroke of a pen. The law is supposed to be a servant of the good and a punisher of the evil. And yet, at times, it has been just the opposite, even in America. Let's not be so naive as to confuse legal-versus-illegal, with right-versus-wrong.

Last edited by Pathfinder45; January 12, 2020 at 02:00 PM. Reason: hyphens added for clarity
Pathfinder45 is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 07:35 PM   #18
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 3,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts View Post
Except to check if someone is prohibited, you’d have to scan their face - which over time would give you a database of facial scans of everyone who tried to purchase a gun.
Not necessarily. You can use a cryptographic hash to determine if there is a match without storing the actual facial data. That's actually a pretty common way to determine if something is a match without looking at the picture / data set.
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابياً
TXAZ is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 07:51 PM   #19
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,350
Do you trust the government to use it that way?
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 08:11 PM   #20
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 23,027
Quote:
You can use a cryptographic hash to determine if there is a match without storing the actual facial data.
That works with very simple data sets, such as passwords. Once the data set size exceeds the length of the hash output, it doesn't work very well unless the only use is as a quick and dirty check of the file integrity.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old January 11, 2020, 08:22 PM   #21
Ben Dover
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 11, 2013
Location: High up in the Rocky Moun
Posts: 662
In Biblical times, felons were stoned. Being more civilized today, we should hang them.
__________________
The soldier's pack is not so heavy a burden as the prisoner's chains. Dwight Eisenhower

It is very important what a man stands for.
But it is far more important what a man refuses to stand for.
Ben Dover is offline  
Old January 12, 2020, 06:13 AM   #22
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,254
The Fourth Amendment comes to mind.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old January 12, 2020, 07:54 AM   #23
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfwkid
Would there be any Constitutional issues if felons, etc were microchipped?
So I'd need a chip-reader for a transfer? Technology changes and becomes obsolete.

A tattooed letter wouldn't become obsolete. You could have it in an easy to see color, like scarlet.
zukiphile is offline  
Old January 12, 2020, 10:01 AM   #24
stinkeypete
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Posts: 548
“What could possibly go wrong?”
I think that one of the problems with the question is the appearance that “a felon” is somehow “someone not like me.”

There are horrible sociopaths that commit premeditated acts that we all would abhor. What about finding a curious looking stone in a stream bed and putting it in your pocket?

If an unjust government had it out for you and it was an ancient artifact such as an arrow head, you might have committed a felony. There you are, lumped in with professional grave robbers and cultural artifact thieves. Now you have an electronic chip in you and your every motion might be tracked.

Marking people with special arm bands and tattoos went horribly wrong about 100 years ago; people have not changed, only technology and how many of us are crowded on to our planet. The guys that wrote our constitution and the people that have interpreted it for the past 250 years were pretty smart, and they were us.

It’s good to talk about this stuff.

In the end, simple solutions to complex social issues are always lacking.
stinkeypete is offline  
Old January 12, 2020, 11:32 AM   #25
buck460XVR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 28, 2006
Posts: 4,194
I don't see how micro-chipping a felon would be any different than the system we have now when buying from a FFL. A background check is doing the same job as the chip. Felons aren't getting their firearms thru legal methods anyway. They are using straw purchases, buying FTF or just stealing the firearms they want. In any of those scenarios, a micro-chip is not going to stop them from obtaining them.
buck460XVR is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09533 seconds with 10 queries