Kirkburn Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I'm a troll because I have a different opinion than you? You are the loony one IMO. Anyone that willingly gives up their right for protection is crazy imo. No, you're a loony because of second half of your comments in the post I quoted. Fluoride free water to break free of the matrix, indeed. Can we at least keep to the topic at hand, rather than have you list your personal craziness? I know you think you've posted how it's an invasion of privacy, but you really haven't. At least, not when seen in context of that which was specified as the method (junk DNA hash, NOT DNA SAMPLES FOR CHRISSAKES), and what governments already have. Edit: thanks iamawesomewicked. At least it confirms he's either attempting to troll us (no idea what the point of that is) or he seriously is delusional (in which case, get out some more). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Yep, it's official. Having an unpopular opinion is "trolling"... Being plain wrong.. yes, is trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I know you think you've posted how it's an invasion of privacy, but you really haven't. At least, not when seen in context of that which was specified as the method (junk DNA hash, NOT DNA SAMPLES FOR CHRISSAKES), and what governments already have. How do you make sure they are only keeping "junk dna'? I posted the story I did from Texas because they were caught deceiving people once already about dna. If they are willing to deceive people once why trust them again? Asking me to prove this is an invasion of privacy is like asking to prove the sky is blue; if you took one second to stop and look it would be obvious. Being plain wrong.. yes, is trolling. I guess you should stop trolling then... :whistle: :wacko: :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 How do you make sure they are only keeping "junk dna'? I posted the story I did from Texas because they were caught deceiving people once already about dna. If they are willing to deceive people once why trust them again? Asking me to prove this is an invasion of privacy is like asking to prove the sky is blue; if you took one second to stop and look it would be obvious. "Them" being some guys in Texas. Not sure why that suddenly applies to every person in government. In any case, there would be a legal framework preventing them from doing so. In that case the specific intention was retention of DNA samples. This, again, for perhaps the tenth time, is not the intention for the concept presented in this thread. There would be no reason for the government to keep the samples after making the hash. You can leap to paranoid conclusions that they might ... but not only would be it pretty obvious (it would be a conspiracy involving millions to keep it quiet ... which the Texas thing wasn't), but even if they did, what use would it be? They can't use the DNA to "control" you, or make pretty much any assumptions about you as a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I guess you should stop trolling then... :whistle: :wacko: :rofl: Thanks for the laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 "Them" being some guys in Texas. Not sure why that suddenly applies to every person in government. In any case, there would be a legal framework preventing them from doing so. In that case the specific intention was retention of DNA samples. This, again, for perhaps the tenth time, is not the intention for the concept presented in this thread. There would be no reason for the government to keep the samples after making the hash. You can leap to paranoid conclusions that they might ... but not only would be it pretty obvious (it would be a conspiracy involving millions to keep it quiet ... which the Texas thing wasn't), but even if they did, what use would it be? They can't use the DNA to "control" you, or make pretty much any assumptions about you as a person. "Junk dna" is just the justification. I know most people like to trust the government, but I don't (and for very valid reasons). The dna is just another step in the control grid that is being constructed around us. Next it's microchips. These microchips will be the only way of being payed and paying for something. If you **** off the wrong people they turn off your chip. After microchips it's cameras in homes. Heed this warning of the slippery slope... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mokthraka Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 "Junk dna" is just the justification. I know most people like to trust the government, but I don't (and for very valid reasons). The dna is just another step in the control grid that is being constructed around us. Next it's microchips. These microchips will be the only way of being payed and paying for something. If you **** off the wrong people they turn off your chip. After microchips it's cameras in homes. Heed this warning of the slippery slope... if you **** someone off now they can close your bank accounts, or they could just shoot you. im not sure why credit chips or w/e would be diffirent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 if you **** someone off now they can close your bank accounts, or they could just shoot you. im not sure why credit chips or w/e would be diffirent Right now it is still possible to work for cash, however illegal it may be. What I'm talking about is completely removing paper money from the system. It would be extremely easy to silence dissenters which is exactly what the nwo needs right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mokthraka Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Right now it is still possible to work for cash, however illegal it may be. What I'm talking about is completely removing paper money from the system. It would be extremely easy to silence dissenters which is exactly what the nwo needs right now... its really easy right now, you **** someone of, they kill you. problem solved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 its really easy right now, you **** someone of, they kill you. problem solved Which is exactly what is going on. This causes a problem because it raises too many questions like "how does someone shoot themselves twice in the head?". Less questions=more success Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mokthraka Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Which is exactly what is going on. This causes a problem because it raises too many questions like "how does someone shoot themselves twice in the head?". Less questions=more success I think you fail to see the point, its not going to matter, mircrochips for money would be better, considering you couldnt steal them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I think you fail to see the point, its not going to matter, mircrochips for money would be better, considering you couldnt steal them. But they could shut you off if you ****ed the wrong people off!!!!OMGWTFBBQSAUCE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 "Junk dna" is just the justification. I know most people like to trust the government, but I don't (and for very valid reasons). The dna is just another step in the control grid that is being constructed around us. Next it's microchips. These microchips will be the only way of being payed and paying for something. If you **** off the wrong people they turn off your chip. After microchips it's cameras in homes. Heed this warning of the slippery slope... You realise of course that most people pay for most things electronically now? Carrying and storing cash is a foolish idea much of the time. Banks are very unlikely to entirely lose money (governments generally back them up if something terrible happens), and it's far more secure than physical cash. So far, doesn't seem to have been a problem. No-one just gets their cards turned off without reason. Hell, that's why the government exists, to prevent stuff like that happening. You know, those things called laws they make, which keep you safe? You really just sound like you're scared of technology, any kind of change or outside "control", which is odd for someone posting on a tech news site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mokthraka Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 But they could shut you off if you ****ed the wrong people off!!!!OMGWTFBBQSAUCE. I know huh! its not like people wont sell you stuff illegally ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 17, 2010 Member Share Posted March 17, 2010 Seriously, can people stop shouting "privacy", "liberty", and stuff about tracking and crap. It doesn't make sense. Explain how it's an invasion of privacy. Explain how it's taking about your liberties. Explain how it could be used to frame or track people. Then you'll have a good argument. I think saying this taking away from our liberties or this can be used to frame or track people is a little silly. However, it could be an invasion of our privacy if that DNA information was released without our express consent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I think saying this taking away from our liberties or this can be used to frame or track people is a little silly. However, it could be an invasion of our privacy if that DNA information was released without our express consent. I agree to an extent, assuming the information was directly linked to a specific person - then it would be more like getting someone's fingerprints or social security number (else it's really just a jumble of meaningless numbers) - but even then the potential for harm is still pretty minuscule if we're talking about a junk DNA hash. (It would literally just be a unique identifier for a person, telling you nothing about them.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I agree to an extent, assuming the information was directly linked to a specific person - then it would be more like getting someone's fingerprints or social security number (else it's really just a jumble of meaningless numbers) - but even then the potential for harm is still pretty minuscule if we're talking about a junk DNA hash. (It would literally just be a unique identifier for a person, telling you nothing about them.) I linked a story earlier where the government was taking infants' dna to make a database without even getting the parents' consent. What would stop the government from deceiving us again by keeping more than just the "junk dna"? Personally I think it's hard to trust the government when they are forcefully medicating us with fluoride. This was a tactic perfected by Hitler and Stalin because it makes us complacent. Not only that but fluoride is linked to lowering our IQ! :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 And this is why conspiracy theorists annoy the heck out of me. It doesn't matter how unlikely the idea is, just because it could happen, it means it MUST be happening. Yeah, all those doctors and politicians conspiratorially attempting to lower IQs. Including their own. It has nothing to do with Hitler and Stalin, but thanks for Godwinning the thread anyway. For the last time, the point of the Texas thing was to keep DNA samples. It was the POINT. It is specifically NOT the point of the concept discussed in this thread, and thus is not relevant. This concept is also specifically not "on the sly", it would be widely known and thus regulation would be obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 And this is why conspiracy theorists annoy the heck out of me. It doesn't matter how unlikely the idea is, just because it could happen, it means it MUST be happening. Yeah, all those doctors and politicians conspiratorially attempting to lower IQs. Including their own. It has nothing to do with Hitler and Stalin, but thanks for Godwinning the thread anyway. For the last time, the point of the Texas thing was to keep DNA samples. It was the POINT. It is specifically NOT the point of the concept discussed in this thread, and thus is not relevant. My POINT is that the government was being dishonest to keep those samples, what would make you think it can't happen again?! What if they claim to only be keeping "junk dna" but really keep the whole thing? It's very relevant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 17, 2010 Member Share Posted March 17, 2010 My POINT is that the government was being dishonest to keep those samples, what would make you think it can't happen again?! What if they claim to only be keeping "junk dna" but really keep the whole thing? It's very relevant... That's true. You never know with the government. However, collecting information on people is not wrong. It only becomes a violation of our piracy when that information is released. The government already has tons of information on us. This would only be one more piece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 That's true. You never know with the government. However, collecting information on people is not wrong. It only becomes a violation of our piracy when that information is released. The government already has tons of information on us. This would only be one more piece. I would disagree. I don't like how much data is already collected on average citizens. Criminals I could understand, but it's not right imo to collect information on average people. This is exactly what police states like, to turn ordinary citizens into criminals. Next people will be thrown in jail because their dna shows they are a risk to national security... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamawesomewicked Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I would disagree. I don't like how much data is already collected on average citizens. Criminals I could understand, but it's not right imo to collect information on average people. This is exactly what police states like, to turn ordinary citizens into criminals. Next people will be thrown in jail because their dna shows they are a risk to national security... Yeah.. you keep believing everything Alex Jones tells you... yep.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s1k3sT Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Yeah.. you keep believing everything Alex Jones tells you... yep.. While you keep believing everything Glenn Beck tells you... Honestly I would rather believe Jones before I would Beck and I don't even trust Jones much at all. Regardless of whether I like Jones, he is a lot less biased than the CIA controlled MSM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+LogicalApex MVC Posted March 17, 2010 MVC Share Posted March 17, 2010 I'd say no. Our constitution bars the government from compelling a person to self-incrimination. So they wouldn't have the legal right to collect your DNA at birth in hopes of incriminatiing you in the future, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tablet_user Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Someone came out last year saying with a sample of DNA, they can place it at a crime scene to make it look like someone else did it. There are also stories that the gov has been collecting DNA from people and babies for the last few years already. This is a big No No. you know who says that?? the criminals that get caught and say thier dna was planted lol. If you have nothing to hide then its not a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts