Aa
Texas School Permitted to Use Tracking Devices
..SAN ANTONIO (Reuters) - A public school district in Texas can require students to wear locator chips when they are on school property, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday in a case raising technology-driven privacy concerns among liberal and conservative groups alike.
U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia said the San Antonio Northside School District had the right to expel sophomore Andrea Hernandez, 15, from a magnet school at Jay High School, because she refused to wear the device, which is required of all students.
The judge refused the student's request to block the district from removing her from the school while the case works its way through the federal courts.
The American Civil Liberties Union is among the rights organizations to oppose the district's use of radio frequency identification, or RFID, technology.
"We don't want to see this kind of intrusive surveillance infrastructure gain inroads into our culture," ACLU senior policy analyst Jay Stanley said. "We should not be teaching our children to accept such an intrusive surveillance technology."
The district's RFID policy has also been criticized by conservatives, who call it an example of "big government" further monitoring individuals and eroding their liberties and privacy rights.
The Rutherford Institute, a conservative Virginia-based policy center that represented Hernandez in her federal court case, said the ruling violated the student's constitutional right to privacy, and vowed to appeal.
The school district - the fourth largest in Texas with about 100,000 students - is not attempting to track or regulate students' activities, or spy on them, district spokesman Pascual Gonzalez said. Northside is using the technology to locate students who are in the school building but not in the classroom when the morning bell rings, he said.
Texas law counts a student present for purposes of distributing state aid to education funds based on the number of pupils in the classroom at the start of the day. Northside said it was losing $1.7 million a year due to students loitering in the stairwells or chatting in the hallways.
The software works only within the walls of the school building, cannot track the movements of students, and does not allow students to be monitored by third parties, Gonzalez said.
The ruling gave Hernandez and her father, an outspoken opponent of the use of RFID technology, until the start of the spring semester later this month to decide whether to accept district policy and remain at the magnet school or return to her home campus, where RFID chips are not required.
(Editing by Daniel Trotta and Peter Cooney)
...
http://news.yahoo.com/texas-school-force-teenager-wear-locator-chip-judge-021126100.html
"Texas law counts a student present for purposes of distributing state aid to education funds based on the number of pupils in the classroom at the start of the day. Northside said it was losing $1.7 million a year due to students loitering in the stairwells or chatting in the hallways."
So, they decided an electronic tracking device was the way to deal with loitering students hanging out after the bell rang??? Seriously??? WTH is wrong with using your staff?? Oh dear me. So, they were losing 1.7 million yearly due to loitering. Wonder how much they are going to lose paying for lawsuits? How freaking absurd!!!
U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia said the San Antonio Northside School District had the right to expel sophomore Andrea Hernandez, 15, from a magnet school at Jay High School, because she refused to wear the device, which is required of all students.
The judge refused the student's request to block the district from removing her from the school while the case works its way through the federal courts.
The American Civil Liberties Union is among the rights organizations to oppose the district's use of radio frequency identification, or RFID, technology.
"We don't want to see this kind of intrusive surveillance infrastructure gain inroads into our culture," ACLU senior policy analyst Jay Stanley said. "We should not be teaching our children to accept such an intrusive surveillance technology."
The district's RFID policy has also been criticized by conservatives, who call it an example of "big government" further monitoring individuals and eroding their liberties and privacy rights.
The Rutherford Institute, a conservative Virginia-based policy center that represented Hernandez in her federal court case, said the ruling violated the student's constitutional right to privacy, and vowed to appeal.
The school district - the fourth largest in Texas with about 100,000 students - is not attempting to track or regulate students' activities, or spy on them, district spokesman Pascual Gonzalez said. Northside is using the technology to locate students who are in the school building but not in the classroom when the morning bell rings, he said.
Texas law counts a student present for purposes of distributing state aid to education funds based on the number of pupils in the classroom at the start of the day. Northside said it was losing $1.7 million a year due to students loitering in the stairwells or chatting in the hallways.
The software works only within the walls of the school building, cannot track the movements of students, and does not allow students to be monitored by third parties, Gonzalez said.
The ruling gave Hernandez and her father, an outspoken opponent of the use of RFID technology, until the start of the spring semester later this month to decide whether to accept district policy and remain at the magnet school or return to her home campus, where RFID chips are not required.
(Editing by Daniel Trotta and Peter Cooney)
...
http://news.yahoo.com/texas-school-force-teenager-wear-locator-chip-judge-021126100.html
"Texas law counts a student present for purposes of distributing state aid to education funds based on the number of pupils in the classroom at the start of the day. Northside said it was losing $1.7 million a year due to students loitering in the stairwells or chatting in the hallways."
So, they decided an electronic tracking device was the way to deal with loitering students hanging out after the bell rang??? Seriously??? WTH is wrong with using your staff?? Oh dear me. So, they were losing 1.7 million yearly due to loitering. Wonder how much they are going to lose paying for lawsuits? How freaking absurd!!!
Ugh, is right. We just have to hope for the best!
Its the stuff on TV and those video games that concerns me..perhaps they should higher the age rating on them ..all those movies about zombies and dracula's are taken quite seriously by young kids
I agree, sm. Knowing what we did, and then knowing that kids today are doing even more...is just scary. Plus, they are developing faster, too...so the things WE did at 16, they are doing at 13, 14. Ugh!
Okay, no joke. I've told you all that my husband is pretty religious. When WE had this discussion about microchipping, he said that it is the mark of the beast and part of Revelations!! He was dead serious.
In all honesty, I think kids today have way too much freedom. Didn't you as a kid too and remember the stuff you did? Whew, when I think about that and my own beloved cherubs . . . I get a bit panicky. But then again, I lived to tell (or NEVER tell) about it. . .
In all honesty, I think kids today have way too much freedom. Didn't you as a kid too and remember the stuff you did? Whew, when I think about that and my own beloved cherubs . . . I get a bit panicky. But then again, I lived to tell (or NEVER tell) about it. . .
Oh heck yes...it would probably be very easy to design and implement. We do it for our pets! LOL at the LoJack comments.
OR... on your 18th b'day, you go to some clinic, or gov't office, show them your birth-certificate, and they pass a magic-wand over the implant and deactivate it.
They have technology available now, that can "kill" the functionality of RFID's, so why not incorporate that same technology into the implants.
How to regulate, how to regulate... hmmmm.
I guess then you'd have to worry about black-market "deactivation services", for kids under the age of 18 that DON'T want to b tracked.
Interesting...
(to me anyway)
They have technology available now, that can "kill" the functionality of RFID's, so why not incorporate that same technology into the implants.
How to regulate, how to regulate... hmmmm.
I guess then you'd have to worry about black-market "deactivation services", for kids under the age of 18 that DON'T want to b tracked.
Interesting...
(to me anyway)
How about a micro-chip implant that automatically turns itself off upon your 18th b'day?
I'm sure they could design & manufacture a battery that would last EXACTLY 18 years, from the time of implant.
Just thinking out loud...
I'm sure they could design & manufacture a battery that would last EXACTLY 18 years, from the time of implant.
Just thinking out loud...
I think children should be "LoJacked" at birth.
Implant a micro-chip... child abductions would be a thing of the past. Kidnapping would be a thing of the past. Blah, blah, blah.
I'm all for it.
My opinion... if you're not doing anything "wrong", then you don't have to worry about it.
That said, defining the word "wrong" then becomes an item of contention. As long as peoples definition of what's considered "right" and what's considered "wrong" is kept in check...
Shoot... there goes THAT idea. Politicians can't agree on ANYTHING, let alone matter of morality.
Scratch that. No LoJacking of children.
Back to the drawing board.
Implant a micro-chip... child abductions would be a thing of the past. Kidnapping would be a thing of the past. Blah, blah, blah.
I'm all for it.
My opinion... if you're not doing anything "wrong", then you don't have to worry about it.
That said, defining the word "wrong" then becomes an item of contention. As long as peoples definition of what's considered "right" and what's considered "wrong" is kept in check...
Shoot... there goes THAT idea. Politicians can't agree on ANYTHING, let alone matter of morality.
Scratch that. No LoJacking of children.
Back to the drawing board.
Parents put tracking devices on phones these days with the same concept.
I hear ya, and that, IMO is a LITTLE bit different I think, than the school doing it. I just think it's odd...seems so extreme as a way to deal with stuff like loitering. Just probably a wasy to keep closer tabs on the kiddos.
Veering off course a bit...but an interesting topic to ponder none the less...
I had a convo once with my hubby about putting a GPS chip in children. It was an interestesting convo. We were discussing whether or not we would be okay with an implanatable locator chip, when they are a minor.
I was all for it...I mean, could you IMAGINE how wonderful that would be in instances of abduction? He was adamantly against it...I mean adamantly. It's funny, we're on the same page about most everything, but he was passionate about that being a violation of the child's right to privacy. I asked him if he would be okay with it if it wasn't used in ANY way, only as a means to find a child in an emergency. He still said no way, opening too big a can of worms. He's NOT fond of anything that increases the ability of big brother to watch us. I told him I would do it in a heartbeat...he said, "not with my kids you wouldn't...put a chip in yourself if you want". LOL Then, of course we had a laugh, being that I don't go too many places most days....lol.
Interesting thing to discuss I think. I would have more of an issue with something like that for an older teen, approaching 18, but I would still do it. I TOTALLY understand the objections to something like that and the implications, and no doubt, for a lot of people, they would abuse it to spy on their kids. God forbid a parent finds themselves in the situation where their child goes missing, wow, what a godsend...just even the time factor...it would buy law enforcement some time, instead of spending that time looking.
I hear ya, and that, IMO is a LITTLE bit different I think, than the school doing it. I just think it's odd...seems so extreme as a way to deal with stuff like loitering. Just probably a wasy to keep closer tabs on the kiddos.
Veering off course a bit...but an interesting topic to ponder none the less...
I had a convo once with my hubby about putting a GPS chip in children. It was an interestesting convo. We were discussing whether or not we would be okay with an implanatable locator chip, when they are a minor.
I was all for it...I mean, could you IMAGINE how wonderful that would be in instances of abduction? He was adamantly against it...I mean adamantly. It's funny, we're on the same page about most everything, but he was passionate about that being a violation of the child's right to privacy. I asked him if he would be okay with it if it wasn't used in ANY way, only as a means to find a child in an emergency. He still said no way, opening too big a can of worms. He's NOT fond of anything that increases the ability of big brother to watch us. I told him I would do it in a heartbeat...he said, "not with my kids you wouldn't...put a chip in yourself if you want". LOL Then, of course we had a laugh, being that I don't go too many places most days....lol.
Interesting thing to discuss I think. I would have more of an issue with something like that for an older teen, approaching 18, but I would still do it. I TOTALLY understand the objections to something like that and the implications, and no doubt, for a lot of people, they would abuse it to spy on their kids. God forbid a parent finds themselves in the situation where their child goes missing, wow, what a godsend...just even the time factor...it would buy law enforcement some time, instead of spending that time looking.
This was talked about before and in some regards, i honestly don't have a problem with it. Ditching school isn't cool for a number of reasons and I can't argue with taking steps to disallow this. Parents put tracking devices on phones these days with the same concept.
However, this is a bit of overkill i do agree. I would be ticked off if a student was hanging out in the cafeteria and either skipping class or rolling in late--- but I'd write it up as a tardy which is recorded and goes home to parents. And after so many, school districts have consequences. So agreed with you that it is a bit of overkill.
However, this is a bit of overkill i do agree. I would be ticked off if a student was hanging out in the cafeteria and either skipping class or rolling in late--- but I'd write it up as a tardy which is recorded and goes home to parents. And after so many, school districts have consequences. So agreed with you that it is a bit of overkill.
I agree with you there is too much 'regulating' going on the pld ways seem a lot better to me .
I think this is just one of those areas where it's not a good idea to give them that kind of 'power" if you will...I mean look, they have already abused it.
I just find it amusing that THIS is their solution to tardy kids and loitering. Seems a bit much, no? God forbid you use teachers and staff to monitor and enforce. It HAS to be cheaper than this nonsense.
I just find it amusing that THIS is their solution to tardy kids and loitering. Seems a bit much, no? God forbid you use teachers and staff to monitor and enforce. It HAS to be cheaper than this nonsense.
I just want to point out, that the RFID (in this particular instance) only works ON SCHOOL PROPERTY.
That said, I heard on the radio (950AM, KPRC, Houston) that the school district overstepped their bounds a bit, and put up RFID "readers/trackers" that tracked movement off-campus as well, extending to a radius of 1-2 miles OUTSIDE of school property (a local gas-station was being monitored and a local convenience store as well, where truant students would loiter).
That said, I can understand the concern, of the ACLU and parents, that the RFID technology was being used to track off-campus activity, not just on-campus activity.
Listen, if you want to track ON-campus activity of students, I'm okay with that, but tracking OFF-campus activity... I have to draw the line there.
Big-Brother is watching you!!!
That said, I heard on the radio (950AM, KPRC, Houston) that the school district overstepped their bounds a bit, and put up RFID "readers/trackers" that tracked movement off-campus as well, extending to a radius of 1-2 miles OUTSIDE of school property (a local gas-station was being monitored and a local convenience store as well, where truant students would loiter).
That said, I can understand the concern, of the ACLU and parents, that the RFID technology was being used to track off-campus activity, not just on-campus activity.
Listen, if you want to track ON-campus activity of students, I'm okay with that, but tracking OFF-campus activity... I have to draw the line there.
Big-Brother is watching you!!!
I can remember when we skipped a class. They took attendance, our parents were called and we were in trouble!! In between classes or at lunch time, we were welcome to chat with each other and "loiter" on school property. Am I so old that I am actually saying the "good old days" now. I would not be keen on my child wearing a tracking device, although with all the crazies out there now, perhaps I should put one on him. I don't know, nothing seems to make sense anymore. Armed guards in schools, tracking devices on our children....does anyone else think this seems crazy? What the heck is going on out there.
You must join this user group in order to participate in this discussion.
You are reading content posted in the News from the past to the future to share and discuss Group
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.
