The bracelet, called an Electro-muscular Disruption device, would be issued at a passenger’s check in at the ticket counter. The bracelet would include electronic data such as a boarding pass, checked luggage information and GPS tracking. The darker aspect of it is that it would allow an airline crew member to issue a radio signal that would kick the device into “shock and awe” mode, disabling the passenger for a period of time. Supposedly, the idea is to prevent terrorism. Presumably, the next step would be a more “efficient” security screening process at the TSA checkpoints.

If you’re a natural cynic like me, you might be able to imagine more nefarious uses inside and outside of air travel as the technology “proves itself”. For instance, an autistic kid could be subdued using such technologies. Maybe a wife “disables” her husband because she doesn’t feel like arguing anymore. Or a credit card company disables a cardholder for being 60 days late on their payment. The possibilities are endless in a society that has proven it’s inability to exercise restraint over time.

I did a WHOIS search on the company proposing this technology to the US Government and discovered that the domain lamperdlesslethal.com is registered to Barry Lampered, a known law enforcement consultant in Canada and has an extensive record in “minimal force” policing.

While I respect Canada and I have many Canadian friends, I’m not sure their brand of socialism should be something we strive for in the United States. Edit: Not that I believe that all Canadians believe in this. In fact, I tend to think they don’t. To appease my Canadian friends, such as Paul Short in comments, the title of this post is meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Relax guys!

On a related note, how many of you saw I, Robot (or better yet, read the book)?

Added: For those like me who wonder how this sort of thing would work from a tech perspective, my guess is that there would be some kind of blowfish public/private key pairings combined with RFID (depends on if the issuance of such bracelets really stayed limited to air travel or if the bracelet became more of a requirement, a la national ID card). On checkin, the bracelet would be scanned much like a hotel room key is granted room access and the public-private pairings would designate a “trust” between the pilot (or whomever) and the passenger allowing a master/slave relationship (pardon the pun).

For the really conspiratorial, I give you Revelation 13:18.

Adam Liptak at New York Times indicates that potential lawsuits will follow challenging gun laws in other cities but notes the caveat that the Court decided on a law in the District of Columbia making the decision applicable to federal law only and not necessarily state and local law.

What is interesting to me about the decision is not the gun aspect of this law. Somewhat of a pragmatic realist and a natural cynic, I see the decision (which I commend) as fraught with the possibility of other problems.

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

The decision, in essence says that no public policy may supersede that which is established in Constitutional law, a thesis that is somewhat vague. And therein lies our problem. By setting this precedent, we have to ask, “Hasn’t this always been the case? Haven’t we relied on the courts to tell us if a law passed by the legislature and signed by the executive branch was Constitutional or not? What is the Court saying here?”

My feeling is that this decision sets up extra-Constitutional authority to the Judiciary to also have to sign a bill into law. Congress passes. Thee Court rubber-stamps. The President signs.

This is not what our forefathers had in mind when they established a system of checks and balances.

Some might think I’m smoking crack. I just generally believe that where there is smoke, there is fire.

A spokesman for the National Security Agency, Don Weber, told the Free Press in 2006 in an e-mail that “it is important to note that NSA takes its legal responsibilities very seriously and operates within the law.”

A sad day indeed.

What the hell is going on here? What hope do we have when even the Supreme Court is unwilling to halt the lawless behavior of this criminal administration?

What have we come to when we can’t even find FOUR JUSTICES to stand up and protect our civil liberties?

Predictably, the very influential Dr. James Dobson, Founder of the Focus on the Family endorsed former Governor Mike Huckabee, who unlike former Governor Mitt Romney, will not depart the race and unite around the presumptive nominee. You have to laugh at Dobson calling Mitt Romney “pro-family” (obvious code for pro-life, as if someone that tortured themselves for days before painfully deciding that they needed an abortion is against every single family in this country). Will Huckabee carry the mantle for the base against McCain or will he see the bigger picture and try to heal this damaging divide? Regardless of who wins in November, this country remains more divided than ever while facing substantial issues in the near future. These problems will require cooperation if they are to be solved. Will President Hillary Clinton, who would most likely govern with a fifty plus one model be able to pull it off? McCain? The future does not look very promising this morning in America.

The lesson that we have all learned from the past seven years is that competence (not personality) matters.

Telephone companies have cut off FBI wiretaps used to eavesdrop on suspected criminals because of the bureau’s repeated failures to pay phone bills on time.

A Justice Department audit released Thursday blamed the lost connections on the FBI’s lax oversight of money used in undercover investigations. Poor supervision of the program also allowed one agent to steal $25,000, the audit said.

In at least one case, a wiretap used in a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act investigation “was halted due to untimely payment,” the audit found. FISA wiretaps are used in the government’s most sensitive and secretive criminal investigations, and allow eavesdropping on suspected terrorists or spies.

“We also found that late payments have resulted in telecommunications carriers actually disconnecting phone lines established to deliver surveillance results to the FBI, resulting in lost evidence,” according to the audit by Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.

Regarding Mike Huckabee:

“What he’s trying to say to the evangelicals in western Iowa (is): I’m the real thing. You know what, sell yourself on your issues, not on what your religion is.”

Do you think Donahue would feel the same way if Huckabee was Catholic?

Maybe New Jersey can be a model for national change (instead of its usual position as punch line).