This seems a little extreme...!

Post Reply New Topic

For known gang members in a public school, it might be a good idea.

Easiest way in the world to defeat the system: Remove all chip infested clothes ... great, now all the kids will be running around naked. <_< As if having their pants hang low on their bums reveling their under pants wasn't bad enough.

Kids will always find their way around the rules...

to find the kids if they aren't in class.

Most children who are kidnapped by strangers are picked up at or near school. While that isn't too likely to happen to any one particular child most parents like the added piece of mind of being able to find their child if it does happen.


Last I heard though the tracking device was only in the jackets. It would send a signal to the parents whenever the jacket wasn't on school property during school hours. It would also be used to deter theft of jackets.

Schools with high vandalism could use it to cut down on crime because then the child would have to a) be not seen and b) remove their clothing before they anonymously vandalize school property (or attack other students in between classes). I can definately think of one school I taught in where such things would be a good idea. I dont go back to that school now as I don't think its safe for me to teach there.


I'm undecided as to how I feel about the issue in general

I would mail my "chipped" shirt to Iraq, that would really freak them out.

I can sort of understand wanting to do this to problem-students, like the ones that skip class, but it wont be very effective unless the inplants where put on the uniform without the student knowing.

I don't like it. I really don't think it will keep my kids safe, should they choose to do something like this. I do think it is an invasion of privacy. Schools don't need that much control. They have too much already.

Thats an extreme breach of privacy.

I still think it's an excuse for some larger, sinister plan.

Is it just me, or do rules NEED to get broken from time to time? Is it healthy to go through childhood without ever breaking a rule? Is it sane? Last time I checked, the ostensible purpose of schools was education, not imprisonment (incidentally, it seems the UK has the most lenient criminal system anywhere, to the point that convicted serial pedophiles can still avoid prison - and at this rate, prison inmates will soon have more personal freedom and privacy than schoolchildren).
By any measure I was a pretty well-behaved kid and I graduated from high school at the top of my class, but I sometimes covered up minor pranks for friends, I refused to ever attend sports day (Saturday detention seemed the lesser evil), ate my lunch in places where it was forbidden to eat, that sort of thing. It never did me any harm (or anyone else). This ridiculously over-protective attitude is raising teens that will have the maturity and sense of responsibility of toddlers but demand the rights of adults; that so many parents abdicate all responsibility to the school system compounds the problem. This is bad for society and it's bad for the kids, the argument that it's for their protection is just refusing to look at the other side of the ledger. Life's a risk (it's also a sexually transmitted illness with 100% mortality rate). When you have schools that ban hugs (even completely non-sexual ones among friends), it makes you wonder if society really, really hates kids. I'm no fan of teens, and I have no clue how to talk to children, but I'm even less of a fan of people that have forgotten what being a kid is like. If you don't like kids, don't have any (I know, this concept seems beyond lots of people's comprehension).
Let's face it, schoolchildren are forced into a place where for the most part they're not doing anything useful or meaningful most of the time and they're obeying somebody else's rules (often arbitrarily or inconsistently enforced) - is there any harm in letting them blow steam by breaking a few rules from time to time (i'm not talking about letting them bully others, or vandalise things, just break minor rules in ways that don't really interfere with their education)? Or is it sane to introduce maximum-security prison-type surveillance? Oh, and what about double standards: doing that in schools for 'safety' but not having the same surveillance on Parliaments and Congresses, corporate boardrooms, etc (hey, they can also break rules, you know, usually with greater consequences than schoolchildren can).
Incidentally, in a study, the UK was where children were the most unhappy of all nations surveyed (all developed or semi-developed countries).

I can understand the logic behind this, but this is a bit extreme.

What's more, kids can easily find a way around it. When I was in school, we had truancy officers patrolling the yards- but I don't remember anyone ever stopping me whenever I got bored and walked home early. Why? Because I walked out the service exit!

This is pointless nonsense.