Friday, April 25, 2008

Leave well enough alone.

RFID tags have been extremely valuable as a business aspect. They provide a faster, more accurate, and reliable way to track production, shipping, and purchasing than any other technology we have to date. The impact they have made on operational management alone is staggering.

And while I think it is admirable California has put legislation in place banning forced implantations of RFID tags, I don't think there is a judge in the country that would set a precedent making a forced surgery ok. And that is what I really want to talk about.
Is it necessary to put legislation in place before any incidents have occurred? Rather than rushing to place restrictions on every possible scenario we have or can imagine, shouldn't we let the scope of the law and our judges follow the direction of society's values without the executive branch's intervention?

It is a basic question of balance of power, and I just feel like the excess laws that are put in place will begin to restrict our freedoms rather than grant them. A judge that sets a new precedent is a very different scenario than getting a law repealed.


Blogger Kyle said...

I agree with Aubrey, why is California jumping the gun and banning something that is not even an issue to date. No one knows where RFID technology is headed and maybe one day a RFID "surgery" could be a painless quick procedure. There is no way to know what could be acceptable in the future or even what might become a major need. No one has anyright to even deny this possibility before it comes about. Therefore, laws should not be put in place as a preventative measure that restricts the freedom of people. This is such an obscure procedure currently that if a company happens to require this an employee could easily leave and find comparable work at company that does not. This is the foundation of our country not laws being enacted to prevent people from having options.

10:47 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home