Wireless Technologies : Providing Convenience Subject to the “Rule of the Road”
Posted On June 27, 2020
Wireless technologies have enabled mankind to live life a lot easier, as improvements have been made on many aspects of day-to-day living conditions. Through transmissions of electromagnetic waves, people are able to communicate long distance, listen to and view different media broadcasts, as well as activate and navigate different electrically connected tools for occupational, educational, recreational or security purposes.
The benefits are all-encompassing and wide-ranging. So much so that continuing developments of wireless applications, necessitated legislation of policies in regulating the use of wireless technology. Different sectors and organizations have varying opinions and positions, whilst demanding the so-called “rule of the road” that ensures mutual safety for all concerned.
The “Rule of the Road” as Basis for Wireless Technology Laws
One such example to which the “rule of the road” served as basis for the legislation of wireless technology laws, is the wireless containment system for dogs. The system allows homeowners to set up invisible boundaries for their pets without need to install physical fences. The invisible fences use the same wireless technologies of typical remotely controlled electronic products, but with one important difference.
In order for the wireless fence technology to work, the dog being fenced-in has to wear the electronic collar that receives and processes the electromagnetic waves sent by the transmitter.
However, the technology has raised concerns among animal welfare activists around the world. Mainly because the e-collar is designed to give the dog an electric jolt as a way of preventing the animal from crossing the invisible boundary. By and large, the issue centers on the aspect of mutual safety, which oppositionists contend has no credible scientific justification to support claims that e-collars provide protection to the animal.
The matter received legislative attention from various governments, which in some countries, resulted in prohibitions against electronic dog collars as components of containment systems. EU countries like Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Slovenia, including Scotland and Wales, and certain Australian territories had upheld the opposition of animal activists.
Still, other countries have taken a more progressive stance by formulating legislative guidelines. Dog owners must observe rules and regulations in the use of wireless dog fence systems and electronic collars. Manufacturers on the other hand are licensed by rule, as duly certified producers of electronic products, subject to safety inspections.
Justifiable Reasons Why Some Countries Allow Wireless Dog Fences
Jackspets.com (https://jackspets.com/best-wireless-dog-fence), which provides comprehensive information about the best wireless dog fence systems available in the market, says there are non-scientific but justifiable reasons why countries like the U.S. allow this type of pet containment system; albeit subject to rules and regulations.
Most pet owners have built homes in subdivisions that do not allow the building of physical fences. Some others live in suburbs that impose specifications on the type and kind of fence installations, which do not work toward the safety and protection of their dog.
The correlated scientific benefit is that through invisible fences that harness wireless technology, they are able to provide their dog/s the benefits of physical exercise, by having the freedom to run outdoors but within safe boundaries.