School Can Force Teenagers To Wear RFID

This is what i used to believe, and was my biggest argument against home schooling my own kids.

The truth, however, is that it mainly depends on the parents and how they go about it. If their goal is to shield junior, then they will certainly accomplish it. But many of the people i know who home-school are part of co-ops that bring a lot of kids together and offer a lot of sports and other social things.

I have seen it both ways, and met some home-schooled kids who probably should have been kept away from their parents as much as possible, and know many home-schooled kids who are socially just fine, as well as academically trounce their peers.

It depends on the parents and the children. Some parents aren't good at teaching, and some kids can't learn in a home schooling environment. It could be the parents might not know enough of a subject, or the child has special needs not being met. There's also an issue if the child doesn't respect their parent as a teacher.

Still, I bet there's a lot of children that would benefit greatly from homeschooling. Although I will admit my impression of US schools are skewed since I grew up in Canada.
 
The only problem is they will not learn social skills.
Makes you wonder how people ever coped before there were public scools doesn't it?
Schools love to spout the whole "social skills" thing to help deter homeschooling (among other often baseless things), but there are plenty of other ways and environments to promote social skills in the community. Many form area groups and get together for socializing, especially for young kids. Here's a novel idea; make the kids go outside and meet people in the neighborhood. :p
 
That is as uninformed a statement as I've ever heard. You obviously have never home-schooled, or been home-schooled. If you WERE either of these, and this is what happened, it was done wrong.

Home schooling is done wrong quite often..




On topic..... I've read the arguments in this thread, and others before I still see no good reason RFID tags are needed.

The judge did.
 
Home schooling is done wrong quite often..






The judge did.

A. So is public education.

B. Well we better pack our bags and end all discussion then. Judge ruled it, therefore we should all just accept it because there's nothing we can do, right?
 
I'm actually a Libertarian. Oops!

I just believe there is a huge difference between sub-adults having to abide by school rules when at the school, and an adult citizen that SHOULD have an expectation of privacy and freedom to do what he/she wants when he/she wants without justification, so long as that action does not directly and clearly impede on the life/liberty of his peers.

Big difference brah! ;)

the sub adults thing bothers me. I get where your general mindset is, but that concept of adult and sub-adult is what causes a lot of problems.

kids are people too, yes they don't have life experience, but that doesn't entitle them to any less life liberty or pursuit of happiness. they need parental guidance at some level, but also need the ability to make decisions (and be scolded if it is wrong of course) and have them play out with supervision to not let things get out of hand. the only way they learn to think for themselves while at the same time having some basic guidance to keep them relatively on the straight.

the overbearing adult/parent thing is part of the problem, not part of the solution. we have a whole generation of parents that feel the need to be lord and master because of some of their own personal hangups, which are passed down into the raising on our youth.

how many of you played hookie from school, played games during class and snuck out when you could and ended up fine, to some extent or another i'm going to say that was most of us.
 
Sure. If I can force them to wear a specific shirt, pants, or shoes...can I force them to wear none at all? After all, they could be hiding something. We could even have daily cavity searches. Naked, molested kids FTW, and if you disagree, then you're not deserving of a reply. ;)
I was mocking since you are clearly arguing for the sake of arguing, completely divorced from common sense. Your argument is that because the kids do not have the expectation of rights as an adult, the school can also have beheadings. Common sense dictates that they have basic human rights, so buttsex is out of the question. Being tracked while on school grounds is not violating a basic human right.
 
What? Parents teaching? Preposterous. Children must only be taught in state institutions by unionized political activists who will walk out of work the minute their bargaining rights are touched.

Thats quite a bullshit generalization you put out there.
 
the sub adults thing bothers me. I get where your general mindset is, but that concept of adult and sub-adult is what causes a lot of problems.

Yep. Courts have long determined that the Constitution applies equally to children with regards to protected rights as an American citizen.

There are some people who call themselves "libertarian" primarily because they believe themselves to be better than others, and so they feel that their rights are supreme. It's hard to assert that attitude from any other ideological viewpoint without sounding like a douche, so they go with libertarianism on the basis that people will confuse "liberty" with "I can do whatever I want and you can't stop me ha ha ha".

These are also people who are highly unlikely to ever have children, because children would take time away from being the awesomest person the the world.
 
New? o_O

Ever hear of this thing called 'The Pledge of Alliegence'

"Swearing of the Pledge is accompanied by a salute. An early version of the salute, adopted in 1892, was known as the Bellamy salute. It started with the hand outstretched toward the flag, palm down, and ended with the palm up. Because of the similarity between the Bellamy salute and the Nazi salute, developed later, United States Congress instituted the hand-over-the-heart gesture as the salute to be rendered by civilians during the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem in the United States, instead of the Bellamy salute. Removal of the Bellamy salute occurred on December 22, 1942, when Congress amended the Flag Code language first passed into law on June 22, 1942"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance

OOoopsies!


last time I checked you were not forced to recite the pledge and get suspended if you refused
 
Makes you wonder how people ever coped before there were public scools doesn't it?
The result was that many received minimal schooling and just helped out their father at work, often just driving a tractor and the like instead of learning about physics, chemistry, and calculus. Look at how high illteracy was in the past, and its not a great argument.

This puts such children at an even greater disadvantage compared to others, and so really public school is of greatest benefit to them as it gives them a somewhat equal opportunity to succeed. Although I do believe that it is unfair to tax the parents for public schooling that their children are not using if they opt for private or home-schooling, and they should receive a voucher for that (just common sense) as long as the alternative schooling meets or exceeds the levels set by public schools.
 
I was mocking since you are clearly arguing for the sake of arguing, completely divorced from common sense.

Asking how electronic tracking devices and dress codes were comparable is being completely divorced from common sense?

Amazing how some people will react when you challenge their worldview. How about you step down from the cardboard pedestal, on which you wrote "There is no god but me", and debate with a little more civility?
 
Your argument is that because the kids do not have the expectation of rights as an adult,

Kids do have the expectation of rights as an adult, including in schools. For a libertarian, you know shit-all about liberty.

the school can also have beheadings.

Complete straw man, and you completely missed the point. I didn't mention violence. I used an argument that claims public benefit as a result. Is it not true that if a group of people were not allowed to wear clothes, and would be subject to cavity searches, that they could not bring anything harmful or illicit to school? Of course, but it would be a gross violation of their rights. I'm pointing out that a line has to be drawn somewhere, because the "it's for the children" bullshit has been misused for decades by politicians with an agenda.

The reasoning behind the RFID tags in this school is to cut down on truancy. If that's the problem, then why not simply put guards at every exit to prevent kids from leaving without permission? A kid would have more trouble talking his way past a guard than he would chucking a badge into the trash. And a badge certainly isn't going to force them to go to school. If they aren't in class or homeroom at the beginning of the day, attendance will show that and, if the school is worth a shit, the parents will be contacted. But then...if you were a libertarian(and you clearly aren't, despite your uninformed claims to the contrary), you'd be concerned about the potential for harassment that the students could endure at the hands of the guards, or the potential hazards that could be created with large volumes of students trying to enter or exit.

So, you see...your simplistic, arrogant, and snide attitude towards those who disagree about the use of RFID tags indicates both your misunderstanding of libertarian ideology, and your intense narcissism. It's okay, though. More common than you think.
 
kids are people too, yes they don't have life experience, but that doesn't entitle them to any less life liberty or pursuit of happiness.
That's the root of where we differ then, because IMO that does restrict their liberty and pursuit of happiness. This is also a social norm, adopted for centuries successfully.

You liberty restrictions as a minor across the board, and for the most part the children aren't even considered citizens with more than basic human rights until they reach the age of maturity, currently set somewhere between 16-21 years of age (regarding right to apply for driver's license to right to consent to sex to drinking age, etc).

Before that age of maturity, they are essentially property of their parents that make decisions on behalf of their children, and children by and large are also not responsible for their actions like an adult either, so it goes both ways.

Cliffs Notes: Do kids have the rights of adults? Nope, and that's a good thing!
 
last time I checked you were not forced to recite the pledge and get suspended if you refused

Actual Ruling: https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/01-08-2013_Hernandez_Ruling.pdf

1) Student was offered a badge without RFID (note, no requirement to "support" the RFID policy was made)
2) Father claimed that the badge without RFID was still a mark of the devil and refused to have a badge.

They had an option to not use it but they refused that as well; only then were they suspended.

The issue of RFID usage does need to be addressed, but all this talk about the student being forced is totally inaccurate. The suspension was due to a students refusal to accept a student ID, even one without a RFID chip in it.
 
Actual Ruling: https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/01-08-2013_Hernandez_Ruling.pdf

1) Student was offered a badge without RFID (note, no requirement to "support" the RFID policy was made)
2) Father claimed that the badge without RFID was still a mark of the devil and refused to have a badge.

They had an option to not use it but they refused that as well; only then were they suspended.

The issue of RFID usage does need to be addressed, but all this talk about the student being forced is totally inaccurate. The suspension was due to a students refusal to accept a student ID, even one without a RFID chip in it.

Looks like there is more to the story than reported.
 
No. I'm also definitely not anti-homeschool. Public schooling simply offers more range in social interaction. I'm not saying public school is in any way better for academics (or overall), but you definitely need to make extra effort as a parent who homeschools, like nutzo is doing, to equal the social integration kids get on their own from public schooling.

Well, the reality is that people make a huge deal out of the social integration aspect of homeschooling, but it is not a serious issue. I am telling you it is a bullshit argument.

You want to "equal the social integration kids get on their own from public schooling"? send them to a fucking prison or mental institution 'cause that is the only place where people act like these medicated psychobrats.
 
Well, the reality is that people make a huge deal out of the social integration aspect of homeschooling, but it is not a serious issue. I am telling you it is a bullshit argument.

You want to "equal the social integration kids get on their own from public schooling"? send them to a fucking prison or mental institution 'cause that is the only place where people act like these medicated psychobrats.

Would you consider yourself anti-social?
 
That's the root of where we differ then, because IMO that does restrict their liberty and pursuit of happiness. This is also a social norm, adopted for centuries successfully.

You liberty restrictions as a minor across the board, and for the most part the children aren't even considered citizens with more than basic human rights until they reach the age of maturity, currently set somewhere between 16-21 years of age (regarding right to apply for driver's license to right to consent to sex to drinking age, etc).

Before that age of maturity, they are essentially property of their parents that make decisions on behalf of their children, and children by and large are also not responsible for their actions like an adult either, so it goes both ways.

Cliffs Notes: Do kids have the rights of adults? Nope, and that's a good thing!

That's not the restriction of rights focused on kids, that's a requirement of privledges that has a minimum age, among other requirements. For example, for a driver's license, you need to pass a test and meet minimum physical and mental requirements. If you have eyesight issues, you would be required to wear glasses while driving, or if you are considered legally blind, you will not be able to drive at all.

Technically, you have the right to APPLY for a driver's license, you don't have the right to drive. The rights aren't therefore bestowed upon you the second you reach a certain age, you simply become eligible to take the test.
 
The rights aren't therefore bestowed upon you the second you reach a certain age, you simply become eligible to take the test.
You know exactly what I mean though, and I included other examples like alcohol.

If you need more examples of how children are not afforded the rights of adults, you have a constitutionally protected right to bare arms, but most twelve year olds have a very tough time purchasing or carrying firearms.
 
If you need more examples of how children are not afforded the rights of adults, you have a constitutionally protected right to bare arms, but most twelve year olds have a very tough time purchasing or carrying firearms.

Tell that to the legions of children who grew up with a Daisy .22 rifle. The inability of people under 18 to buy firearms is largely due to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, which is less than 20 years old. It also passed right about the same time as the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, and how did that one turn out?
 
Entirely irrelevent, since it just one of numerous examples from how minors are treated by the law, and the fact that it has held up despite a constitutional right demonstrates without question that children are not afforded the rights of adults, and that the courts and society by and large are just fine with that.
 
Entirely irrelevent, since it just one of numerous examples from how minors are treated by the law, and the fact that it has held up despite a constitutional right demonstrates without question that children are not afforded the rights of adults, and that the courts and society by and large are just fine with that.

Wrong.
 
1) There are even greater security concerns at schools now, following the shootings we've had these past years, and while not foolproof its certainly a layer of security.
2) There is a long-time problem especially in ghetto schools of simple attendance, and this is much faster and more reliable than a roll call at the start of every class.
3) And its not about using the bathroom, its about busting kids for sneaking out when they get a chance and buying/selling/smoking weed behind the school somewhere.

RFID tracking just makes sense.

Totally agree. Plus just think of all the stupid bomb threats that get written on bathroom walls. Well now when someone reports seeing it at 10am but not at 9am they will know who was in that bathroom between that time frame.

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to start implementing some sort of tracking system in schools.
 
Totally agree. Plus just think of all the stupid bomb threats that get written on bathroom walls. Well now when someone reports seeing it at 10am but not at 9am they will know who was in that bathroom between that time frame.

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to start implementing some sort of tracking system in schools.

And when some law enforcement figure suggests the same thing for driver's licenses, or even a national identification card, they'll cite the exact same scenario. Others will then say "I wore one in high school, it was no big deal". Some politician will say "If it's good enough for our children, shouldn't it be good enough for us?"
 
I'm sorry, but as public schools are tax funded along with many of them having a separate county/city school district tax instituted upon the public residents, where the hell were the public resident polls/votes regarding this prior to this judge making that ruling? This should have been determined by public majority vote, IMO.
 
It depends on the parents and the children. Some parents aren't good at teaching, and some kids can't learn in a home schooling environment. It could be the parents might not know enough of a subject, or the child has special needs not being met. There's also an issue if the child doesn't respect their parent as a teacher.

Still, I bet there's a lot of children that would benefit greatly from homeschooling. Although I will admit my impression of US schools are skewed since I grew up in Canada.

Which really shows the underlying problem, i think; there is no "one size fits all" approach to properly educating a child. And the same is true for the parents. not every parent is a competent educator (possibly due to their own upbringing, possibly just their strengths and weaknesses).

As it stand for Miss "I don't wear an RFID", i agree with the poster who said children do not have the same rights as adults. They don't, and they shouldn't. i'm not saying they shouldn't enjoy basic human rights and freedoms, but this society cannot be an "everyone do as ya please" arrangement, and most children do not have the smarts enough to fully comprehend the consequences of their choices. The school has a responsibility to her parents and the community to do everything that is reasonable to try and assure her safety and education. Her parents have the right to pull her out and make other arrangements for her education, however inconvenient it may be.

There is no clear one size fits all everybody happy answer here, but to me it seems fair and reasonable that she not be allowed at school without meeting requirements. Being an idealist is rarely the easy road..
 
I'm sorry, but as public schools are tax funded along with many of them having a separate county/city school district tax instituted upon the public residents, where the hell were the public resident polls/votes regarding this prior to this judge making that ruling? This should have been determined by public majority vote, IMO.

It might have been if the parent was suing based on invasion of privacy ... however, they sued as religious descrimination ... the parent and child consider the badge to be the "mark of the beast" from Revelations ... that is why the child refused to wear the badge (even without the RFID chip in it) and took the case to court as religious descrimination ;)
 
It might have been if the parent was suing based on invasion of privacy ... however, they sued as religious descrimination ... the parent and child consider the badge to be the "mark of the beast" from Revelations ... that is why the child refused to wear the badge (even without the RFID chip in it) and took the case to court as religious descrimination ;)
Which in legal terms is called "going full retard".
 
Actual Ruling: https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/01-08-2013_Hernandez_Ruling.pdf

1) Student was offered a badge without RFID (note, no requirement to "support" the RFID policy was made)

2) Father claimed that the badge without RFID was still a mark of the devil and refused to have a badge.

They had an option to not use it but they refused that as well; only then were they suspended.


The issue of RFID usage does need to be addressed, but all this talk about the student being forced is totally inaccurate. The suspension was due to a students refusal to accept a student ID, even one without a RFID chip in it.

Normal incremental implementation procedure. It would be absolutely stupid to make it mandatory from the start knowing the backlash it would receive just being optional. However after some years of it being optional, where do you think it goes next? The human senses are proven to respond much more to fast movements than to slow movements (over time). Normalization. Think about it. I see its advantages and its disadvantages. So it's just another step to somewhere...lol.

That said, I take George Carlin's stance on this kind of shit now.
 
It might have been if the parent was suing based on invasion of privacy ... however, they sued as religious descrimination ... the parent and child consider the badge to be the "mark of the beast" from Revelations ... that is why the child refused to wear the badge (even without the RFID chip in it) and took the case to court as religious descrimination ;)

True, which I agree was not a good argument path to walk on their part, since religion and religious organizations are tax-exempt thus are susceptible to having zero legal representation as an entity of existance due to separation of church and state. At that point, the court simply has to say "if you feel it's religious discrimination, then feel free to fill out the forms for public school exemption and home/private school your kids.

Would have been a much better choice to use the public tax <-> representation argument.
 
I'm sorry, but as public schools are tax funded along with many of them having a separate county/city school district tax instituted upon the public residents, where the hell were the public resident polls/votes regarding this prior to this judge making that ruling? This should have been determined by public majority vote, IMO.


That would assume we really have an absolute say in the matter...lol. Sure you can complain then get back in line with the rest. :D
 
That would assume we really have an absolute say in the matter...lol. Sure you can complain, put on the armband you are given, then get back in line with the rest, or face criminal charges. :D

Fixed that for ya. ;)
 
It really seems like a lot of people blow this up to be some big deal. The chips only track movement ONTO and OFF OF the campus or access to specific areas (someone mentioned a computer lab earlier). What people neglect to worry about is the fact that there are motion cameras all over these building literally tracking your actual movement - but those are completely fine. And considering RFID is pretty standard for building/room access in the working work why can't it propagate down to the school level?

Is it perfect? No. But nothing is. At least with RFID if a student can't be found the district can at least provide when their ID was last at a school or district building which is a hell of a lot more information than "they were present for 6th period... that's all we know".
 
Back
Top