This year, some Japanese researchers applied their marvelous engineering talents to one of the most abominable creations in modern history: the SpeechJammer.
The SpeechJammer is essentially a gun that, when aimed at a speaking person’s mouth, prevents them from talking mid-sentence.
Go ahead and search YouTube for it — a video demonstrating it has gone viral.
If the video does not invoke rage, then you’re not taking the First Amendment seriously enough.
When I first read about this “thing” last month, I expected a firestorm of political controversy. It was not forthcoming.
The invention was mainly covered by technology blogs and the science section of newspapers.
Where were The New Republic and The New York Times with cover stories on the dangers such a device poses to freedom of speech?
I fear that this device, relatively under the radar now, will have disastrous results for democracy.
The inventors of this gun have been very coy about its application, suggesting that it could be used in libraries or other such nonsense.
There is something much more sinister at work here.
Imagine the market for such a machine.
Despotic regimes could order the thing in droves once it left the prototype stage, not to mention private citizens.
The researchers involved with this device are not stupid — they know exactly who the buyers of the SpeechJammer will be.
In a just world, they would be called to an international court to explain themselves.
Over and over, the modern age has presented technological hurdles to overcome.
We no longer have to fight battles only with other human beings. Now we must also do so with technology.
Think for a moment about the effects of a SpeechJammer in one of the wings of the U.S. Capitol.
Sure, the reason to have it would be something mundane, such as to keep long-winded congressmen from exceeding their allotted time to speak.
Yet in an instant, it could be turned to malicious uses by a government intent on quelling dissent.
Imagine the dangers if it were used in private, as well.
Do we truly want people roaming the streets with the ability to impinge upon others’ freedom of speech with the click of a button?
Again, it would start out as mundane.
Perhaps it would be used by pranksters to interrupt a stranger’s cellphone conversation.
But this device works by sending radio signals directly into someone’s consciousness.
That is nothing short of cognitive rape.
Americans should not expect other countries to fight against this devilish machine.
No other nation values freedom of speech as highly as we do.
While other countries have laws against “hate speech” and other such legislative claptrap, we in the United States believe that speech is always legal, no matter how insensitive or unwelcome it may be.
Congress should immediately move to outlaw this device and any additional renditions of it.
If there is no public outcry, then we deserve our fate.
The battle for freedom is never won; people must constantly fight for it.
That may sound revolutionary for a stodgy conservative such as myself, but those on both the political right and left can agree that dissent should never be silenced.
We may disagree on how dissent should be expressed and by what mechanism — for example, whether Occupy protestors should be allowed to infringe on public property indefinitely — but one thing should never be questioned: The act of speech itself is invaluable and should be protected by every possible measure.
These Japanese researchers should hang their heads in collective shame, for they have introduced a potential menace to the free world.
Luke Bailey is a history junior at UF. His column appears on Wednesdays.
