DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Texas Students required to wear RFID Name Tags in two San Antonio Schools

**nerohedfrs** · 09-02-2012, 08:35 PM

It still has a range then. This can be 6 foot or 200 foot. I didn't see anyone specify. The reporter was saying that as far as the college are concerned, they don't care where students are once they're off school property. How can he be speaking for all school staff? Like red_dog007 said, a school in Philly gave students laptops what actually took photos of the kids every few minutes so they could see what they were doing at home (ie potentially getting changed for bed umongst other things). There's enough control freaks and perverts around for me to not want to give up any more privacy than is absolutely essential.

They did specify, when you leave the building, however large an area that may be, they can't give completely accurate numbers since the building is not uniform in size, it may be 1000ft wide by 500ft in length. As DM eluded to, they'll probably place multiple units around the school to cover a specific area. The example of the laptops is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with this technology and how it's used.

Also, you have an obvious distrust of the media, so it shouldn't be hard for you to accept that they are trying to build this into something it's not, all they had was one family to interview, which is why they say in the report, "at least one family," because they are the only ones to have complained, otherwise you can be sure they would have had statements and interviews from other parents or students.

You're taking that one small video as all source of information. I think there's more to the complaints than one kid saying "it's too big and like a dog collar".

I'm taking what information is available right now and basing my opinion on that. I'm not adding "ifs" and "maybes" to support my case, i'm using the facts that are there right now.

At face value, they don't care about the kids safety, it's all about receiving more money.

I'm not saying you're wrong as such, and I agree that teachers knowing when a student gets to school and what classroom they are in is nothing sinister and it may even save them time. But it's the abuse it's open to and where this need for control leads to thats the issue.

How can this be about receiving more money? It's no doubt going to cost a considerable sum to set up and maintain this system, so where does the profit making come into it exactly? This helps them save money they already have, which in the long term would pay for this system and then go on to free up funds for more important, educational, things, but it does not create extra income.

The system may be open to abuse, but everything is open to abuse; let's ban camera/phone use in public, as that can be abused, lets ban Youtube, that can be abused, lets ban TV, that can be abused, the computer you're using right now, we could go on forever. It's a win/win situation, it helps keep students safe in times of need and it helps save the schools money. I see no reason to think otherwise.

09-02-2012, 08:35 PM	#49
nerohedfrs Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 563 Senior Member	It still has a range then. This can be 6 foot or 200 foot. I didn't see anyone specify. The reporter was saying that as far as the college are concerned, they don't care where students are once they're off school property. How can he be speaking for all school staff? Like red_dog007 said, a school in Philly gave students laptops what actually took photos of the kids every few minutes so they could see what they were doing at home (ie potentially getting changed for bed umongst other things). There's enough control freaks and perverts around for me to not want to give up any more privacy than is absolutely essential. They did specify, when you leave the building, however large an area that may be, they can't give completely accurate numbers since the building is not uniform in size, it may be 1000ft wide by 500ft in length. As DM eluded to, they'll probably place multiple units around the school to cover a specific area. The example of the laptops is irrelevant, it has nothing to do with this technology and how it's used. Also, you have an obvious distrust of the media, so it shouldn't be hard for you to accept that they are trying to build this into something it's not, all they had was one family to interview, which is why they say in the report, "at least one family," because they are the only ones to have complained, otherwise you can be sure they would have had statements and interviews from other parents or students. You're taking that one small video as all source of information. I think there's more to the complaints than one kid saying "it's too big and like a dog collar". I'm taking what information is available right now and basing my opinion on that. I'm not adding "ifs" and "maybes" to support my case, i'm using the facts that are there right now. At face value, they don't care about the kids safety, it's all about receiving more money. I'm not saying you're wrong as such, and I agree that teachers knowing when a student gets to school and what classroom they are in is nothing sinister and it may even save them time. But it's the abuse it's open to and where this need for control leads to thats the issue. How can this be about receiving more money? It's no doubt going to cost a considerable sum to set up and maintain this system, so where does the profit making come into it exactly? This helps them save money they already have, which in the long term would pay for this system and then go on to free up funds for more important, educational, things, but it does not create extra income. The system may be open to abuse, but everything is open to abuse; let's ban camera/phone use in public, as that can be abused, lets ban Youtube, that can be abused, lets ban TV, that can be abused, the computer you're using right now, we could go on forever. It's a win/win situation, it helps keep students safe in times of need and it helps save the schools money. I see no reason to think otherwise.
	Quote