You don't microchip all dogs in WA? Why not? As far as I know, we do in NSW. It's a great idea.
So far no symptoms have shown up, although I am not sure my dog pays attention as much as before. I think she has probably been dumbed down. She doesn't handle integrated calculus anywhere near as well as she did before ;-)
On the plus side, when she escaped the yard and got hit by a car, they knew to ring me by scanning her and looking up my details. Its a good system, and luckily for me, she was perfectly okay.
Can't see any potential 'other uses' formula,like a signal from the the computer to the chip?
Perhaps David Icke is daft for even bringing up that valid point.
Select to expand quotepetermac33 said...
Can't see any potential 'other uses' formula,like a signal from the the computer to the chip?
Perhaps David Icke is daft for even bringing up that valid point.
I am not sure what other uses could be useful to anyone. My dog doesn't know any state secrets, and she doesn't have a built in camera.
RFID chips need to get power from a scanner, and that scanner needs to be in relatively close proximity in order to do this. Even if they were able to get more than a simple identifying number from my dog, who cares? They can get much more than that from my computer and its connected to the internet.
Shhh!Select to expand quoteelmo said..
Don't worry Peter, you've already been micro chiped
Maybe he is worried somebody might be able to see he has 37 cats, 23 dogs and a gerbil in his 'no pet' rental flat.
Generally I can already tell if a dog is a dog by the four legs, slobbery tongue and woof-woof sound, and I can tell who owns it by the person holding onto the other end of the lead shouting 'down boy'. I am not sure a chip to identify it's owner and the person responsible for its actions is the final mark in state control.
Maybe it will be wikileaks next giant earth shattering disclosure - a poodle called Puggs is number #43728945-E.
Quick - everyone grab the pitchforks
Maybe the Catholic Church should jump on a program like this and microchip all dangerous priests
as the new priest turns up at the school or church a quick scan as he walks through the door it would save a lot of stuffing around
The only downside I can see is the Minister has no idea. Boofy for PM first, then Pope afterwards! (separation of church and state is overrated lol)
Select to expand quote"Dogs that have attacked or been aggressive towards people can be declared dangerous and are then subject to controls designed to protect the public.''
Rather than just fining owners, their dogs would be forced into a training program, Mr Simpson said.
How about you let people keep whatever dog they want.
If the dog becomes aggressive towards / injures people then shoot the dog in the head and the owner in the leg.
Maybe then owners of aggressive dogs will learn to keep them under control... 
Isn't the whole concept that you can't buy anything unless you have the "Mark of the Beast" permanently attached to you, which enables "the powers that be" to track you.
Now think about credit cards, and so called "Rewards" cards...
I could be wrong though.
I had a friend years ago that was worried about all the ways people could track him. I never understood why. He had nothing to hide.
If you don't want someone to record your purchase, pay with cash. If you think it could work this way, don't take your dog with you.
Why do some people think that the world wants to track them? For what purpose? A lot of us just aren't that interesting to anyone else, and if we are, for the wrong reason, isn't it sort of comforting that we can track people?
