Children=Cattle? - Page 3

anonymous0726 · #41 02-19-2005, 12:11 PM

The problem is a social one, and in a democracy, so there isn't a good fix short of a sweeping moral movement -- like the sweeping 'relative morality ' movement that came out of the 60's that has us where we are today.

**Damon Rondeau** · #42 02-19-2005, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mchildree

And, as usual, lots of vocal critics and not one of them is able or willing to offer a viable alternative.

Suspecting I might be viewed as one of these, I went back and re-read the news story (I was guilty of skimming first time around.)

This time around, I glean that the guy wanting to do this is principal AND superintendent of this one-school district. The reason he wants this system: to simplify attendance-taking. Oh yeah, it will help reduce vandalism and make the kids safer.

Here's the alternative I suggest he pursue: define real problems or significant opportunities. Do things to address those real problems and significant opportunities.

In this case I suggest he drop the scheme as ill-conceived and ill-planned. As far as I can tell from the news story, I have a hard time imagining that he needs anything like what he wants. Is attendance-taking such a rotten apple of a process that he needs this system? Bathroom vandalism: how exactly will the sytem help out there? Safety? I just don't see it. Is someone monitoring all that data to prevent? Is it used to sort out stuff after it happens?

In the end it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn he was sold this scheme by some outfit that bought him a nice lunch down at the Denny's.

mchildree · #43 02-19-2005, 06:15 PM

Hey! There's one! LOL!

No, Damon, I wasn't speaking specifically of you. But what occurs to me is that we are all making lots of generalizations based on a news story on the Internet...the output of inveterate sensationalistic liars. I'd guess that maybe half of what that school official actually said made it to the story and only what the writer figured he could twist into a scandal. I've had first-hand experience with this and I know for a fact those guys are damn good at it.

**Damon Rondeau** · #44 02-19-2005, 06:56 PM

Yeah, I know what you mean about the news and first-hand involvement. I'm always shocked at how badly stories can be screwed up, at how badly even basic facts can get garbled, and at how much spin there is in the way things are presented.

I've also had some security evaluation experience through work, and was involved in some employee discipline stuff where we tried using card swipe "come and go" data. That card swipe data was completely useless to us in a situation very much like the one this principal envisions needing the same kind of information.

But it's absolutely true, Mike: we don't really know what went down there. I certainly found lots of spin in the way the story was written.

Davidoc · #45 02-20-2005, 10:02 PM

I remember when my old high-school (I'm in college now) started implementing a scan-card system. There was tons of fussing, but it was really no big deal in the end. I'm going to suspend judgement on the radio tag thing for now.

Steve Killingsworth · #46 02-21-2005, 05:41 AM

Looks like it has all fallen apart according to this from CNN.

John Sprague · #47 02-21-2005, 07:48 AM

Quote:

This isn't a civil liberties issue.

A government funded agency putting tracking hardware on your children isn't a civil liberties issue? Can they put one on your car, also? I'm not much into politics, but I know a rat when I smell one, and a radio tag on a human is a rat.

anonymous0726 · #48 02-21-2005, 09:07 AM

Kinda like the GPS locators in cell phones, you mean?

mchildree · #49 02-21-2005, 09:23 AM

Quote:

A government funded agency putting tracking hardware on your children isn't a civil liberties issue? Can they put one on your car, also? I'm not much into politics, but I know a rat when I smell one, and a radio tag on a human is a rat.

Are you ready to sign a waiver, absolving the school from all responsibility for the safety of your kids, then? Much of the discipline problem and decline of educational standards are due to the fact that "Johnson & Johnson Parents" want to remove any authority the schools have to deal with issues, but they don't want to assume the responsibility themselves. You can't have it both ways.

This reeks of the Utopians who want their First Amendment rights staunchly defended while they attack the rights of others under the Second Amendment.

anonymous0726 · #50 02-21-2005, 09:38 AM

Or -- use the First Amendment to ATTACK the first Amendment, a la 'congress shall make no law...'

Tom Hutton · #51 02-21-2005, 11:05 AM

The devices in question here, and in several similar schemes in Texas, are RFID tags, which only work in close proximity to a detector - they have no power of their own and send out no signals when not close to a detector. These devices cannot be used to track anyones whereabouts short of putting detectors similar to the ones in store doorways roughly one every square metre across the entire world.
In any case, regardless of any civil liberties/constitutional amendment rights arguments, I just don't think these systems stand up to any sort of cost/benefit analysis. The system proposed in Sutter, California was simply a glorified and doubtless hugely expensive system of attendance taking - the other benefits espoused, such as increased safety and reduced vandalism could not, in my opinion, be met by this type of device.

Tom

John Sprague · #52 02-21-2005, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Kinda like the GPS locators in cell phones, you mean?

Yes! Man, they're sneaky. Of course I won't complain if the same locator saves my butt when I have a broken leg in the woods.

And Mike, I agree in part, our schools do lack the authority to manage kids. My feeling is that if someone is required to watch your kids all day, then they should have similar disciplinary rights as the parent. If the kid needs a swat, swat him or her. Teachers are there to teach school, not teach your kid manners.

I remember the first day of business law class in HS, this new teacher stands up in front of the class, tells us his name, and then told us that if he gets a hard time from anybody his copy of the (very heavy) textbook is going to fly across the room at you, and he would not miss. Smooth sailing from there.

I don't agree with jumping to technology to solve a social issue. I don't feel society should legislate the hell out of everything, especially if it means losing freedoms on the way. I do feel that parents should raise responsible children, and be held accountable for their actions until that kid is 18. That would wake up alot of people who take parenting casually.

Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

tplyons · #53 03-03-2005, 06:59 PM

As a high school student I see both the pro's and cons of this.

To access certain rooms, I believe it should be necessary, not around the neck, but more as a credit-card type deal, run through a scanner on the side of the door to enter certain rooms, log onto computers, and potentially buy lunches.

Attendance can easily be taken by teachers, but when it's to the point that students are tracked without their express consent, there is a problem.

tplyons · #54 03-03-2005, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray Parker

Kinda like the GPS locators in cell phones, you mean?

They can be disabled. I choose to leave mine on in the case of an emergency. The location cannot be accessed very easilly, only by the service provider I believe.

anonymous0726 · #55 03-03-2005, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tplyons

...but when it's to the point that students are tracked without their express consent, there is a problem.

They -- or their parents, really -- consent by attending the school, where they are the responsibility of that institution. As I said before, if the school is liable for the well-being of the students, despite the students' good or bad behavior, then school has the postition to do just about anything that is moral to cover its own ass.

The student, by virtue of being a minor, has a limited set of 'rights' -- both by law and in concept. The same way no child has the right to vote or own property, UC?

tplyons · #56 03-03-2005, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray Parker

They -- or their parents, really -- consent by attending the school, where they are the responsibility of that institution. As I said before, if the school is liable for the well-being of the students, despite the students' good or bad behavior, then school has the postition to do just about anything that is moral to cover its own ass.

The student, by virtue of being a minor, has a limited set of 'rights' -- both by law and in concept. The same way no child has the right to vote or own property, UC?

Well, is this a public school? In that case, I do not believe the consent is implied by attending the school. In the case of a private school, the consent is implied.

anonymous0726 · #57 03-04-2005, 01:24 AM

Home-schooling is a universal option, I believe, as are (as you point out) private and parochial schools.

John Sprague · #58 03-04-2005, 08:08 AM

I understand your reasoning Ray. I wouldn't consider these things moral. Tracking devices on free people don't wash with me. In the case of minors, I don't want them to be accustomed to the idea by permitting it in their youth.

I'm really not some hard-core liberterian, I hardly even notice politics. But some things jump out, and this one breaks one of my own personal rules:
No government shall hang a tracking beacon on a free citizen.

There are other ways to handle this, like responsible parenting with accountability.