Current Events One

Commentary By Tony Sarrecchia The T-Files

Time: Some point in the near future

Gate Agent: You’ll have to wear this please.
Passenger: What is it?
Gate Agent: Oh, just our new safety bracelet. It snaps on your wrist so we can track your movements throughout the plane.
Passenger: I’m not wearing that.
Gate Agent: I’m sorry, but if you want to fly on the plane you will have to let Bubba and Binky the TSA representative attach this to your wrist.
Passenger: Fine.
Gate Agent: Oh, one other thing. If you get unruly–
ZAPP
Passenger falls to the terminal floor and flops around like a fish on a deck. By the way, the passenger is an older man in his 70s.

That’s not science fiction, or the hopes of a gate agent who wished she had made different career choices. Per Hahne has invented the bracelet in the scenario, and he wants US airline passengers to wear it. After all, it’s for their own good.

According to an interview with Conservative news web site World Net Daily (Inventor: Use shock bracelet or pay $14 billion a year” by Bob Unruh), Mr. Hahe said: “I would venture to say most people who are on board with a hijacker would welcome any kind of relief,” he said. “Today the only thing there is is the bullet.” The implication here is that using a bullet to stop a hijacker is a bad thing, but asking passengers to give up what little rights they have left is okay. Personally, I vote for the bullet.

The bracelet, technically an Electro-Muscular Disruption device, marketed by Lamperd Less Lethal (http://www.lamperdlesslethal.com) magnetically locks on to your wrist and contains your passenger information, and the ablity to track your movement throughout the plane. And let’s not forget the electro-muscular disruption function—the stun-gun on the wrist. That’s the part that has our government all twittery and dewy. Jeffery Denning, in a Washington Times story titled Want Some Torture With Your Peanuts quoted a letter from Paul S. Ruwaldt of the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) Science and Technology Directorate to the inventor as saying “To make it clear, we [the federal government] are interested in . . . the immobilizing security bracelet, and look forward to receiving a written proposal.” (See the complete letter here)

Does this mean that the shock bracelet would be mandatory couture for every passenger, young and old? How would you feel about some TSA employee putting this bracelet on one of your children? What happens if your flight attendant is feeling a little cranky that day? What if it malfunctions?

I appreciate the need for security, but total security can only be achieved at the cost of total freedom—let’s not move any further in that direction.