[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Radio frequency ID chip case ruling favors Texas school district here

[frlwinslow]

If the individuals are not up to any wrongdoing or entering into subversive "clubs" what can be a legitimate concern? No one is spying upon them visually. No one is inhibiting them from moving about the campus.

These students have to realize what a privilege they have in receiving an education on property that is not their own and where rules and regulations are those of the owners of that property. Further, as a Priest, I cannot see what religious violation there is in such a requirement. In this I am assuming these badges are not intended to be worn off campus.

[TsarNikky]

Correct decision. After all "safety first" should be the guiding principle.

There is nothing wrong with having to require students and staff to wear RFID badges, say on a belt clip or around the neck on a lanyard. Most companies require employees to wear badges, so why not students and staff in school?

[wallydog2]

Quote

If the individuals are not up to any wrongdoing or entering into subversive "clubs" what can be a legitimate concern? No one is spying upon them visually. No one is inhibiting them from moving about the campus. These students have to realize what a privilege they have in receiving an education on property that is not their own and where rules and regulations are those of the owners of that property. Further, as a Priest, I cannot see what religious violation there is in such a requirement. In this I am assuming these badges are not intended to be worn off campus.

1 As taxpayers children yes the property is theirs .
2 This will be abused by the schools to receive more money .
3 This will be one more thing that the children will have to rebel against.

[Johngpov]

Quote

If the individuals are not up to any wrongdoing or entering into subversive "clubs" what can be a legitimate concern? No one is spying upon them visually. No one is inhibiting them from moving about the campus. These students have to realize what a privilege they have in receiving an education on property that is not their own and where rules and regulations are those of the owners of that property. Further, as a Priest, I cannot see what religious violation there is in such a requirement. In this I am assuming these badges are not intended to be worn off campus.

1)Teacher uses system to find when a kid is most vulnerable and then rapes them! 2) Shooting takes place and the shooter gets a hold of system!

[Johngpov]

Quote

Correct decision. After all "safety first" should be the guiding principle. There is nothing wrong with having to require students and staff to wear RFID badges, say on a belt clip or around the neck on a lanyard. Most companies require employees to wear badges, so why not students and staff in school?

Next they will require all citizens to where these. You know ....for our "safety"!

[Biteme46]

I agree with Wallydog2 and Johngpov. These were the first thoughts I had. Also, reading the first two comments made me realize my worst fear has already happened " This could usher in a society that accepts this kind of treatment as routine rather than an encroachment of privacy and civil liberties,”. As for the badges that Corporations require, (I work for one of the biggest in the world) most of them use the card reader activated ones which cannot be tracked otherwise. There would be HUGE liability suites if someone was targeted for a crime because someone hacked the system and tracked down their victims.

[Fromagio]

I can see at least one way to bypass the whole sentiment. A group of kids sends they're buddie to school with their badges while they go party, for instance. Or the battery keeps getting broken. Stuff happens you know. While I think a mountain is being made, I also think it's a silly idea.

[Yahad]

Quote

1 As taxpayers children yes the property is theirs . 2 This will be abused by the schools to receive more money . 3 This will be one more thing that the children will have to rebel against.

1) As taxpayers, the White House is ours. Entry and monitoring of where you go and what you do is mandatory, and wise.
2) Schools claiming someone is present when they are not present to get more money is where the possible abuse lies. This method keeps both schools and students honest about who is there and who is not.
3) Nobody "has" to rebel against anything. It is up to the parents to parent them. Teach them to be logical and reasonable and not to be led around by their emotions and knee-jerk reactions to supposed "violations of rights" when no such violations exist.

[Wright]

Quote

Correct decision. After all "safety first" should be the guiding principle. There is nothing wrong with having to require students and staff to wear RFID badges, say on a belt clip or around the neck on a lanyard. Most companies require employees to wear badges, so why not students and staff in school?

Until someone with a brain goes and buys a reader off the internet and uses the tags to track and kidnap one of these children either on campus or off. Then their defense will be that it isn't their fault. This technology can be miss used to easily and most people do not understand how easily RFID technology can be read. Yes all the card has on it is a serial number, however that number is in a database at the school that can be and will be easily hacked putting ALL these kids at risk. I have no doubt the judge in the case is well meaning, I also have no doubt the judge as very little knowledge about the technology he is ruling on. As far as the question "if you aren't doing something wrong" that holds no water.

[blottobot]

As it is, it is a stupid, wasteful idea, regardless of one's political or idealogical stance. It is worn around the neck. That is part of where the abuse comes in. You can never be certain that the person the thing is supposed to be attched to is where they appear to be, unless you are in their line of sight, which makes these useless. The only way for this kind of thing to be effective is to implant such a chip in the person. Now THAT is why this is such a bad idea. As others have mentioned, that is one step beyond where we are now. We are effectively one generation away from the 1984 that I so often mockingly dismiss if this continues. Once these kids who grow up in this hyper-monitored society are of age and in the political system, they will not see the harm in going full-bore and we will actually have the likely 1984 that so many irrationally fear. Armed militia on every corner, checkpoints, curfews. All because one thing happens where it usually doesn't. I am seeing far too much over-reaction in the entirely wrong direction to things like these school shootings (the latest of which is simply a case of a psycho with a gun which should only result in examining mental health and how easily psychos can get guns-- see where that's gone). People need to use their heads and stop being so speculative in finding answers and solutions, or blame as it all too often seems to be. Deductive reasoning does not explain the response governments and citizenry have to these types of issues of safety and in this case, nothing more than truancy. Remember that is all this is supposed to be about. A necklace isn't going to prove anything, people. Once in the school, the necklace can stay while the student can leave. Useless, wasteful idea. And if any of you don't see the big deal about chips implanted, what's to stop the school or school board (or government even) monitoring them once they leave school? Or hackers (with any number of reasons) monitoring them? I would say safety is something in danger with this type of thing, not the opposite. The religious concern is that the chip is like the "number of the beast" described in the Revelation, which I find asinine but can see how the argument lead to the offer to have her wear a chipless version.

[oldschoolh4ck3r]

Wait... This won't work! Students can remove these or exchange them with others. That defeats the purpose. What is needed is implantable tracker chips. YES, that will solve the problem of being able to intrude... er, ahem, I mean, PROTECT, the children.

When government acts like they care about you, LOOK OUT.

[oldschoolh4ck3r]

How about teachers doing their JOB and watching the kids? No, no, no, they're too busy having SEX with them.

[SirTekaLotw6xs]

Requiring the child to use a passive scan badge is just as accurate. Child has to scan into each class they attend; teacher verifies the count and attendance. No tracking other than what is done already when the teacher does roll call. Active tracking is intrusive and is abuse of power.

[DrSpanky]

Why do the students need active RFID badges? Where I work, we have a passive RFID system. This means you need to swipe your badge to enter a room. Since a handful of us require a second passive card, we need to separate the cards to activate the reader Nd open a door. If students has these kinds of cards, they would need to scan them for each class as they enter the room. If a single student has multiple cards, they would cancel each other out and prevent someone from carrying a bunch for his/her friends. This system also prevents someone from seeing your exact whereabouts at all times. If students needed these cards to enter the building, and "check-in" for class, it could save the teachers from having to take attendance and waste a few minutes at the beginning of each period.
I personally don't want to see my tax dollars go into these programs because I know how costly they can become. The card printing machines are expensive, and a single replacement card is $14, at least ours are. If all the students decided they wanted to protest and "lose" their cards, it would cost the tax payers a small fortune to replace them all. This whole system wreaks of big brother as well. 1984 is here, and we're all equal, but, as you know, some are more equal than others.

[dkiehl777]

I can see it now … let’s not limit these RFIDs to just the names and GPS locations of those carrying them, let’s add SSN, driver’s license, and credit card info. That way, the holder will also be able to apply for college, a new job, state / federal assistance, and make purchases at the student store. Let’s give them to everybody … no need for cash or credit/debit cards. But wait, think of the costs to replace all the lost, stolen, and misplaced IDs. Easily solveable … just place the RFID just beneath the skin of a person’s right hand, or even their forehead. Revelation 13: 16 – 17. Scoff and deny at your own eternal risk.

[DrSpanky]

Quote

Requiring the child to use a passive scan badge is just as accurate. Child has to scan into each class they attend; teacher verifies the count and attendance. No tracking other than what is done already when the teacher does roll call. Active tracking is intrusive and is abuse of power.

With a little creativity, the passive system could match the active system in intrusiveness. Why not put readers on the lockers? Now we can monitor how often the kids go into their lockers, you know, for safety and security purposes. Put those one way gates on the bathrooms, so students can only enter one at a time, and we know when and how often they go to the bathroom (blah, blah, blah security and safety). We can have the kids use their cards to scan which lunch option they choose. If we know who's eating right, we can identify "miscreants" and "anarchists" because they'll be eating junk food or brining lunch from home. We can put readers in the locker rooms to activate the showers too. This way, we know who is hygienic and how many children are in there at once (insert propaganda for safety and security here).
The bottom line is, the technology can only go as far as we allow it. If you feel your child's rights are being violated, you need to get involved and stand up for them. Oh wait, that would require real parenting. Never mind.

[DrSpanky]

Quote

Revelation 13: 16 – 17. Scoff and deny at your own eternal risk.

AMEN!

[olddave208]

Quote

If the individuals are not up to any wrongdoing or entering into subversive "clubs" what can be a legitimate concern? No one is spying upon them visually. No one is inhibiting them from moving about the campus. These students have to realize what a privilege they have in receiving an education on property that is not their own and where rules and regulations are those of the owners of that property. Further, as a Priest, I cannot see what religious violation there is in such a requirement. In this I am assuming these badges are not intended to be worn off campus.

[olddave208]

Spoken like a true democrate sheep.