• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker

blaxshep said:
I'm from the government and I am here to help.
Click to expand...

These types of policies are made on a state and local district level. I thought the whole "evil government" argument was against the federal government...
 
jamesrage said:
I hope the student wins.**** like this could be used to used to breed compliance with government and corporate monitoring of what we do.

Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker | Threat Level | Wired.com

A Texas high school student is being suspended for refusing to wear a student ID card implanted with a radio-frequency identification chip.
Northside Independent School District in San Antonio began issuing the RFID-chip-laden student-body cards when the semester began in the fall. The ID badge has a bar code associated with a student’s Social Security number, and the RFID chip monitors pupils’ movements on campus, from when they arrive until when they leave.
Radio-frequency identification devices are a daily part of the electronic age — found in passports, and library and payment cards. Eventually they’re expected to replace bar-code labels on consumer goods. Now schools across the nation are slowly adopting them as well.
The suspended student, sophomore Andrea Hernandez, was notified by the Northside Independent School District in San Antonio that she won’t be able to continue attending John Jay High School unless she wears the badge around her neck, which she has been refusing to do. The district said the girl, who objects on privacy and religious grounds, beginning Monday would have to attend another high school in the district that does not yet employ the RFID tags.
The Rutherford Institute said it would go to court and try to nullify the district’s decision. The institute said that the district’s stated purpose for the program — to enhance their coffers — is “fundamentally disturbing.”
“There is something fundamentally disturbing about this school district’s insistence on steamrolling students into complying with programs that have nothing whatsoever to do with academic priorities and everything to do with fattening school coffers,” said John Whitehead, the institute’s president.
Click to expand...

Just trying to make the younger generation complacent, so they don't question when these actions are brought forth on a grander scale in the future. Thanks for keeping us "safe" Big Brother.

What sickens me the most are all these supposed Americans whom cheer and applaud the death of freedom.
 
Ikari said:
Just trying to make the younger generation complacent, so they don't question when these actions are brought forth on a grander scale in the future. Thanks for keeping us "safe" Big Brother.

What sickens me the most are all these supposed Americans whom cheer and applaud the death of freedom.
Click to expand...

how can wearing this device work to the student's detriment?
 
justabubba said:
how can wearing this device work to the student's detriment?
Click to expand...

Why should an individual succumb to big brother monitoring? The school has no license for this amount of infringement. This isn't one of those "if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" bs areas. I applaud anyone who stands against aggressive and unwarranted policing. Could Big Brother keep us safer? Maybe, but that's not license for using it.
 
Ikari said:
Why should an individual succumb to big brother monitoring? The school has no license for this amount of infringement. This isn't one of those "if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" bs areas. I applaud anyone who stands against aggressive and unwarranted policing. Could Big Brother keep us safer? Maybe, but that's not license for using it.
Click to expand...

I see no conern over this in a rights or freedom regard.

Before the tags the students have no rights or freedoms to go anywhere on school property they please and any time they want

after the tags, that still remains true but can now me monitored me efficiently :shrug:

nothing is lost
 
Ikari said:
Why should an individual succumb to big brother monitoring? The school has no license for this amount of infringement. This isn't one of those "if you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" bs areas. I applaud anyone who stands against aggressive and unwarranted policing. Could Big Brother keep us safer? Maybe, but that's not license for using it.
Click to expand...
i missed the part where you described how wearing this device works to the student's detriment
 
Objective-J said:
I see no conern over this in a rights or freedom regard.

Before the tags the students have no rights or freedoms to go anywhere on school property they please and any time they want

after the tags, that still remains true but can now me monitored me efficiently :shrug:

nothing is lost
Click to expand...

The same is true in public, would you object to being forced to carrying RFID when you are not in your own home? Nothing lost, yes?
 
Ikari said:
The same is true in public, would you object to being forced to carrying RFID when you are not in your own home? Nothing lost, yes?
Click to expand...

uhm no these are not even close to the same thing, there are many places outside of my home that i am free to go to anytime i please when ever i want. SO sorry that example is a HUGE failure.

however are you free to come into my home anytime you want whenever you want? nope
do i have the right to monitor you if you do? yep

sorry nothing IS lost.

Right now my kid is at school and they dont have tags, they most certainly cant go anywhere in the building they want at anytime the want.
 
When I was in High School...I made consistent good grades. Sometimes I felt like leaving and did so...was it skipping? Yes it was, but that happened back in the day.

School kids are being herded in these schools like inmates. They don't have the freedom to wear a hat in school, a certain color, or sometimes they can't even wear the clothes they want. It is an egregious violation of freedom. We try to teach our kids the value of freedom by taking them away?

Schools have one job to do...teach the kids. That is it. They have no obligation to track them or see where they are within that school. While the kid is on campus...they are under the school supervision...if that kid leaves...that school is no longer responsible. The teenager has decided to take on the responsibility for themselves. Guess what? 16-18 year olds like the idea of freedom of what they do. The school can not be an institution of control and imprisonment for 8 hours a day. It needs to be a place of freedom of expression, and academics.

I would be outraged as a parent if the school had this on my child. I want the school to let ME do the parenting and they can do the teaching. While my kid is in school, I know they may choose to skip...if they are keeping up their grades...what is the problem? If he skips and doesn't keep up the grades...well I'll find out why and use appropriate punishment.

Freedom is NOT safe people. It is not meant to be. To allow a school to herd around your kids at school like a bunch of inmates in a prison goes against the very fabric of freedom and good parenting.
 
I think the school is foolish to implement RFID tagging. Since they have the ability to track the whereabouts of each student, don't they also have an obligation to actually monitor this?

What I'm getting at is this - say a student sneaks off campus, heads to the wrong part of town to buy weed, and gets shot. Now, thanks to the RFID tags informing the school of the student's whereabouts, the school is partially liable for what happened to the student.

By implementing this program, the school is assuming additional responsibilities and liabilities that I doubt the school is prepared to handle from a staffing and financial perspective.

It's what's called "pandora's box." :lamo

jamesrage said:
I hope the student wins.**** like this could be used to used to breed compliance with government and corporate monitoring of what we do.

Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker | Threat Level | Wired.com

A Texas high school student is being suspended for refusing to wear a student ID card implanted with a radio-frequency identification chip.
Northside Independent School District in San Antonio began issuing the RFID-chip-laden student-body cards when the semester began in the fall. The ID badge has a bar code associated with a student’s Social Security number, and the RFID chip monitors pupils’ movements on campus, from when they arrive until when they leave.
Radio-frequency identification devices are a daily part of the electronic age — found in passports, and library and payment cards. Eventually they’re expected to replace bar-code labels on consumer goods. Now schools across the nation are slowly adopting them as well.
The suspended student, sophomore Andrea Hernandez, was notified by the Northside Independent School District in San Antonio that she won’t be able to continue attending John Jay High School unless she wears the badge around her neck, which she has been refusing to do. The district said the girl, who objects on privacy and religious grounds, beginning Monday would have to attend another high school in the district that does not yet employ the RFID tags.
The Rutherford Institute said it would go to court and try to nullify the district’s decision. The institute said that the district’s stated purpose for the program — to enhance their coffers — is “fundamentally disturbing.”
“There is something fundamentally disturbing about this school district’s insistence on steamrolling students into complying with programs that have nothing whatsoever to do with academic priorities and everything to do with fattening school coffers,” said John Whitehead, the institute’s president.
Click to expand...
 
AreteCourage said:
When I was in High School...I made consistent good grades. Sometimes I felt like leaving and did so...was it skipping? Yes it was, but that happened back in the day.

School kids are being herded in these schools like inmates. They don't have the freedom to wear a hat in school, a certain color, or sometimes they can't even wear the clothes they want. It is an egregious violation of freedom. We try to teach our kids the value of freedom by taking them away?

Schools have one job to do...teach the kids. That is it. They have no obligation to track them or see where they are within that school. While the kid is on campus...they are under the school supervision...if that kid leaves...that school is no longer responsible. The teenager has decided to take on the responsibility for themselves. Guess what? 16-18 year olds like the idea of freedom of what they do. The school can not be an institution of control and imprisonment for 8 hours a day. It needs to be a place of freedom of expression, and academics.

I would be outraged as a parent if the school had this on my child. I want the school to let ME do the parenting and they can do the teaching. While my kid is in school, I know they may choose to skip...if they are keeping up their grades...what is the problem? If he skips and doesn't keep up the grades...well I'll find out why and use appropriate punishment.

Freedom is NOT safe people. It is not meant to be. To allow a school to herd around your kids at school like a bunch of inmates in a prison goes against the very fabric of freedom and good parenting.
Click to expand...

the bolded is 100% false, the school most definitely has the obligation to know where the kids are on school property. they simply do not have the right to be anywhere on school property they choose at anytime if the school doesnt want that.

as far as hats and stuff, my OPINION of that stuff my agree with you but no rights or freedoms are lost or violated.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I think the school is foolish to implement RFID tagging. Since they have the ability to track the whereabouts of each student, don't they also have an obligation to actually monitor this?

What I'm getting at is this - say a student sneaks off campus, heads to the wrong part of town to buy weed, and gets shot. Now, thanks to the RFID tags informing the school of the student's whereabouts, the school is partially liable for what happened to the student.

By implementing this program, the school is assuming additional responsibilities and liabilities that I doubt the school is prepared to handle from a staffing and financial perspective.
Click to expand...

this doesnt change and risk of liablity
 
I agree this is too much.

What's worrisome is the next step. When do businesses, other government branches, and eventually most citizens are required to wear these chips? I can see this concept spreading and becoming more sophisticated.
 
Wake said:
I agree this is too much.

What's worrisome is the next step. When do businesses, other government branches, and eventually most citizens are required to wear these chips? I can see this concept spreading and becoming more sophisticated.
Click to expand...

some business and government branches already do it on site, its their right to do so. My work does this, we are a secured facility.

What "next step" are you referring too
 
Peter Grimm said:
I appreciate your opinion, but we'll have to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...

its not an opinion, the liability risk doesnt change. Its an on property monitoring system.

without the tags they are responsible for the kids whereabouts, with the tags the same is true

there is a liability risk with or without the tags, thats a fact

if you want to debate % of risk thats fine but the risk is there regardless
 
Objective-J said:
the bolded is 100% false, the school most definitely has the obligation to know where the kids are on school property. they simply do not have the right to be anywhere on school property they choose at anytime if the school doesnt want that.

as far as hats and stuff, my OPINION of that stuff my agree with you but no rights or freedoms are lost or violated.
Click to expand...

The bolded things are true. What if a student is merely using the restroom, or running an errand for the teach? Should school administrators be tracking them electronically within that school? No. The assumption is always that they are up to no good, but that isn't always the case. Here's what you do...if you don't want students in a particular location...lock the doors to it, or have someone looking at the area.

Students shouldn't look at a school like it is a prison. While they are on campus...they should go to class. Of course, but if they don't..well their grades will suffer and likewise their hides from their parents. The assumption that the school should know a students whereabouts at all times is flawed. The student understands there are consequences if they break rules and are caught doing so, but not all students who are in the halls while class is in session are necessarily doing anything terrible.

There is a such a thing as going too far, and I believe electronic tracking is going too far.
 
Objective-J said:
some business and government branches already do it on site, its their right to do so. My work does this, we are a secured facility.

What "next step" are you referring too
Click to expand...

I wonder to what extent this ID-chipping will go.
 
AreteCourage said:
The bolded things are true. What if a student is merely using the restroom, or running an errand for the teach? Should school administrators be tracking them electronically within that school? No. The assumption is always that they are up to no good, but that isn't always the case. Here's what you do...if you don't want students in a particular location...lock the doors to it, or have someone looking at the area.

Students shouldn't look at a school like it is a prison. While they are on campus...they should go to class. Of course, but if they don't..well their grades will suffer and likewise their hides from their parents. The assumption that the school should know a students whereabouts at all times is flawed. The student understands there are consequences if they break rules and are caught doing so, but not all students who are in the halls while class is in session are necessarily doing anything terrible.

There is a such a thing as going too far, and I believe electronic tracking is going too far.
Click to expand...
sorry they are not true, its not the students property and they have no right to go where they want where they please, this is just a fact

now to be clear, if you dont like it that fine, if you think it goes to far thats fine but its not a rights or freedom violation and the school is obligated to know the kids where about. The kids are their responsibility.

just be clear what im actually debating
 
Wake said:
I wonder to what extent this ID-chipping will go.
Click to expand...

as to what, give me an example
I dont really by into slippery slopes to much with out logical reason.
 
justabubba said:
i missed the part where you described how wearing this device works to the student's detriment
Click to expand...

How would it work against any of our detriments if we were to adopt this policy on whole? Yet would you support the government tagging you with RFID everywhere you go?
 
Objective-J said:
as to what, give me an example
I dont really by into slippery slopes to much with out logical reason.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there are many examples. Some benign, some extreme.

It's my opinion that strapping these chips on people can and likely will lead to more things involving chips. If I am wrong, do you know the concept of strapping chips to people will go no further, ever?
 
Objective-J said:
uhm no these are not even close to the same thing, there are many places outside of my home that i am free to go to anytime i please when ever i want. SO sorry that example is a HUGE failure.
Click to expand...

Many places in the school students are free to go during school time as well. Is it a huge failure only because you cannot rectify these two uses of authoritative force and wish to deflect away?

Objective-J said:
however are you free to come into my home anytime you want whenever you want? nope
do i have the right to monitor you if you do? yep
Click to expand...

So long as I am not forced onto your property, such as the use of government force mandating school attendance.

Objective-J said:
sorry nothing IS lost.
Click to expand...

"Nothing is lost" is not valid argument for expansion of force. A man has a right to keep himself, his property, his effects, and his papers from unwarranted search and seizure. In today's electronic world where it is possible to monitor location, that becomes part of my papers. If you have WARRANT to monitor my position, then by all means. Otherwise, bugger off.

Objective-J said:
Right now my kid is at school and they dont have tags, they most certainly cant go anywhere in the building they want at anytime the want.
Click to expand...

And they most certainly are not prevented from going anywhere either. So what's your point here? This little "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear" argument you've constructed? Those are almost always a sign that what you want is amoral and likely unconstitutional.
 
Ikari said:
1.)Many places in the school students are free to go during school time as well. Is it a huge failure only because you cannot rectify these two uses of authoritative force and wish to deflect away?



So long as I am not forced onto your property, such as the use of government force mandating school attendance.



"Nothing is lost" is not valid argument for expansion of force. A man has a right to keep himself, his property, his effects, and his papers from unwarranted search and seizure. In today's electronic world where it is possible to monitor location, that becomes part of my papers. If you have WARRANT to monitor my position, then by all means. Otherwise, bugger off.



And they most certainly are not prevented from going anywhere either. So what's your point here? This little "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear" argument you've constructed? Those are almost always a sign that what you want is amoral and likely unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

1.) only by choice of the school not by rights
2.) again not even close, its school property and you can get home schooled
3.) good thing i didnt say its a good argument its just a fact nothing changes rights and freedom wise, on school property they have that right, again your example does not apply

4.) wrong again, she most certainly is stopped from going places all the time

like i said no rights or freedoms are being infringed and your examples are not relevant at all to this situation.
 
This is one of those things where just because you could do a thing, doesn't mean you should.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom