It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Virginia Attorney General Says Teachers Can Take Students' Cell Phones, Read Texts

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Electronics should not be allowed in classroooms unless they specifically pertain to the subject matter.
Phones should be locked away as well as laptops, games, pagers,Ipods, mp3s and anything else not directly being used to teach the class.

The US spends more money per student on education than any other in the world and has a poorer result than any other developed nation.

When a student walks into a classroom he or she should be learning everything possible, not texting friends. The US education system has dumbed things down so much that an American student with straight A's isn't as intelligent as a b or c student from most other developed nations but the kids seem to revel in the stupidity of it all.

Americans and their kids should be outraged that we are saddled with such a travesty of a system. Instead the parents are expecting the schools to raise their kids and everybody is defending the rights of the kids to be game playing miscreants instead of intelligent students.

Better yet,
Ban all electronics and make them learn to read, write and do a little math. At least if they can read and make change they won't be forced to work at a place where the cash register buttons all have pictures on them.




posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   





Students are not protected by the 4th amendment. Nor should they be.


Of course they should be protected by the 4th Amendment.

A teacher is not a LEO, nor do they have training under due process of probable cause.

Say a student has a naked pic of themselves on their phone. Why should the teacher be allowed to see it?

If for no other reason, students should learn to stand up against government, and not simply bend over for them.
edit on 26-11-2010 by BigTimeCheater because: (no reason given)




Actually, the Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that students' 4th Amendment rights are curtailed in the interests of the education process; first because they are minors, the educators are acting in loco parentis, and secondly because the public interest is better served by the school having authority to maintain and limit students' social interactions.

The SC has applied this both to searches of student property as well as the opinion pages of school newspapers. So the prior poster was correct: students are not robustly protected by the 4th amendment.

No, I am not a teacher.

Are you a student?
edit on 26-11-2010 by dr_strangecraft because: brevity is the soul of wit



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by dr_strangecraft
 


I wasn't aware saying that students SHOULD be protected by the 4th amendment is the same as saying students ARE protected by the 4th amendment.

But hey, I guess because a law exists, it's okay right? Just like the patriot act, drug laws, all those executive orders that give the president power whenever he wishes...

This is all okay. Don't question it. Because the court or some authority figure say so and made it so, it is so and can not nor should not be changed. Right?

By the way, whats your beef with our schools anyways? Apparently, by your example, they do a great job!

I mean, they're an institutionalized set of prisons meant to curtail thought into little designed, easily controlled pens, following the authority figures from within. It's perfect for our authority!

And also take a look at how you suck at reading! I mean, it's a perfect win-win; subject kids to thoughtless societal development in the guise of learning while actually not learning a god damn thing!



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I have to say that I do not agree with kids bringing their cell phones to school, call me old fashioned but thats just how I feel. My 11 year old daughter wants one sooooooo badly but I wont get her one, she has no need for one because she is either at school or at home and if she happens to be somewhere else, there is always a parent around. It boggles my mind to see all these little kids using their cells, I dont understand it.
I an however aginst teachers being able to snoop in a childs phone. I witnessed a teacher at the school I work at find a purse that a girl had left in the cafeteria and look completly trough it. He was sifting and sorting through everything including notebooks and little address looking books. I was apalled.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpectreDC
reply to post by dr_strangecraft
 


I wasn't aware saying that students SHOULD be protected by the 4th amendment is the same as saying students ARE protected by the 4th amendment.

But hey, I guess because a law exists, it's okay right? Just like the patriot act, drug laws, all those executive orders that give the president power whenever he wishes...

This is all okay. Don't question it. Because the court or some authority figure say so and made it so, it is so and can not nor should not be changed. Right?


I was replying to "danbones," who said that students are protected by the 4th amendment. I observed that they are not, to a great extant. It looks like I inadvertently cut off the top of his quote, which may have been from you. Nothing more.



By the way, whats your beef with our schools anyways? Apparently, by your example, they do a great job!

I mean, they're an institutionalized set of prisons meant to curtail thought into little designed, easily controlled pens, following the authority figures from within. It's perfect for our authority!

And also take a look at how you suck at reading! I mean, it's a perfect win-win; subject kids to thoughtless societal development in the guise of learning while actually not learning a god damn thing!


I am no fan of public schools. I don't send my kids there; they cannot even enforce basic physical security. I greatly resent paying taxes for them when they do such an abysmal job. That said, I don't believe that further undercutting of teachers' authority is any way to make American SAT scores soar.

But hey, look at how you suck at jumping to conclusions.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
So, let's take away even more of our schools' power to enforce necessary rules, established to better the quality of education for all students. Why? Because a few students and parents don't want to abide by the rules, which prohibit cell phones in class. They shouldn't even have them on school property. Period.

Not only should the phones be confiscated, if possessed in prohibited areas, but more than one violation should result in having their little butts busted.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


Sorry but this one I agree with..
Schools are for learning, not chatting with mates on facebook or twitter..
Simple answer is, turn off your phone in class and learn instead..


I think they should install cellphone signal blockers throughout every grade school nationwide, and install payphones in the halls, like I had in high school. It would alleviate all this nonsense.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover
Not only should the phones be confiscated, if possessed in prohibited areas, but more than one violation should result in having their little butts busted.



That's why so many people are flocking to private schools. People value what they pay for, and despise what is free. On the flip side, they also hold private institutions accountable, due to a lack of unions, etc.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


First and foremost.. Students are not adults. They are children. And they are bound by the rules of the school system, they enter that place not as equals to teachers but as students, their purpose is to be taught.

If a student has information on a phone they don't want read, don't bring it to school. The school should have every right to search a students bag if suspicious, or phone if it's being used.. I went to a Catholic school, if you had a cell phone they wouldn't even give it back, it was tossed in the garbage. Same with game consoles. Though, when I was in school, cell phones were far less prevalent and didn't have cameras.

Of course if a student had nude pictures on a phone, technically.. that's child porn, if they don't want those charges brought against them, best not to take nude pictures on a cell phone. Which is incredibly stupid to do anyways.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   

I was replying to "danbones," who said that students are protected by the 4th amendment.

Dr Strangecraft
where did I say that, doc?
read much?

BTL made the comment you attribute to me...thats a fail
In light of your somewhat snide remarks...thats a quite an indication of your level of ability




edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Who really knows if what the students are learning on Facebook isn't going to be more applicable to their futures than some dried up ol' gerunds?

I am just glad that I homeschool.

I have yet to get a satisfactory answer to the most basic question of "What is education?" out of the public system.

Now when I was in school, I had a gifted teacher, who I spent the 7th and 8th grade with, and she let us do whatever it was we wanted to do. Then I went to highschool and the lesson was shut up, sit down, take notes, pass tests.

I know who taught me the most, and it was the one teacher that gave me the most freedom. She would have insisted on using good manners in social interactions, and pointed out that using Facebook was not nice if someone was talking to you, BUT, she would have also said it was disrespectful for a teacher to take someone's personal property or to read their private communications.

I think, in light of everything, that today's education is mostly about being submissive. It has been that way for years and that is probably why EVERYONE is not protesting the naked body scanners and freedom pats.

Isn't that what is being taught here? You WILL be respectful of authority or you WILL pay the price?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
I agree with Badgerprints
*4U
I had to totally ignore my teachers to graduate high school as an honor student 35 years ago, and recently, when I wrote the entrance tests to qualify to pick up some new technical skills at college, I was exempted from all of the related acedemics.
Because I focused on learning exactly what PB has pointed out are the nesessary things a student must master to be a real human being in this day and age, the first time. I didn't even have to prepare.


Mastering the three Rs opens up all the doors for an inquiring mind, and there is nothing you can not learn if you learn those things first.
edit on 26-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I have 2 boys, 13 and 10. The 13 year old has a phone and brings it to school. He's also an A/B student. He uses it at lunch, recess, etc, which is allowed at his school. Even if it wasn't, my wife and I would still want him to have it with him at all times, for emergencies, etc.. Not that I'm advocation ignoring the rules, but kids in schools with more stringent rules can simply put a password on their phone...teacher can't see anything on it then.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

Originally posted by Danbones

lets teach the children to be good little slaves
anyone who trusts teachers "if you can't do teach"
aught to consider who taught the sheeple we have today to be sheeple...
the sheeple.


aught Noun: The digit 0; zero.

ought /ôt/Verb 1. Used to indicate duty or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions: "they ought to respect the law".

There are some things that even spell check cannot teach


sheeple indeed.
edit on 26-11-2010 by dr_strangecraft because: emphasis was needed


Your post is a perfect indicator of why your Karma rating is so low. I wonder how many of your other posts are as useless and demeaning as this one.

On Topic: It seems some believe that because an individual is not of a certain age, they aren't afforded the same fundamental right to privacy as those of an age they deem it so.

While I believe texting, etc, is a distraction and should be avoided, there are always circumstances where it may be necessary and most certainly should not be something an instructor can take upon themselves to investigate when doing so is a blatant violation of privacy.

Why not have the kids demand to read an instructor's texts should they send one while the students are taking a test?

There are some who want to be left alone and others who refuse to leave them alone. Which one are you?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
No one has brought up that the children can use this medium to cheat at their school work; for that reason alone, I condone this. That is providing there is any actual testing of skills in todays schools- which it seems unapparent.

When I was a kid- we didn't really have rights till we were 18 (other than to not be abused). If i tried to play the "MY RIGHTS!!!" card, I was laughed at! This, when I was grounded for being an idiot for some reason or another (which I suppose is probably 'abuse' now).

Phones should be out of sight when you're in class, in my opinion.
edit on 26-11-2010 by MzMorbid because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by bozzchem

On Topic: It seems some believe that because an individual is not of a certain age, they aren't afforded the same fundamental right to privacy as those of an age they deem it so.



It is not purely a question of the students' status as minors; it is more that the school has authority "in the place of the parent" that mitigates the students' rights.

Didn't even know I had a "karma rating." Do you lose karma points for being a conservative? Because my applause seems a lot higher than my karma......

Do you get better karma if you talk about how other posters "suck"? Or talk about your own dislexia, while accusing others of not being able to "read much."

Its a topsy turvy world, alright.





edit on 26-11-2010 by dr_strangecraft because: I didn't know I had a karma rating.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Where I graduated from, if they found you with a phone, they would actually keep it. Sometimes they would sell it back to you for fifty or even a hundred, but they just kept them. Also kept most everything they took up. Parents flipped out.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
When i was at school in 1992, they used electroinc mind control on me to totally humilate me behind my back. I had total invasion of privacy.

Things are laot worse than people know.


Could you expand on this a little please.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
I dont see why the teachers feel the need to pry on students lives, they are TEACHERS not PARENTS.
I fully agree with taking the mobile phone or whatever it is but they have no reason to go through messages unless there is absolute proof of something that could cause serious harm.
Me being still being at school, as much of a pain in the ass it is having my phone conviscated i still understand the reasoning. lol

but if i were to have my messages read it would severly irritate me, why should they be able to?
Teachers are not our parents. Teachers are there to teach and thats all, not invade on our private lives.
Im so sick of how much schools like to invade on private lives. The vice principal made a fake facebook account and added all the girls and their boyfriends ect and deleted it when the students caught on. they said it was a fake and contacted the police but this is obviously a lie because otherwise we all would have been interviewed on some level.
Look, i agree with rules if they have some sort of logic behind them but there is none here. Just gross invasion of privacy.
Its not even that much of a big deal anyway, the students that dont want to learn will just find another distraction.
edit on 26-11-2010 by littlecloud because: typos



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
After reviewing some of the responses on this topic, there are those who claim that the 4th Amendment does not apply to students? Where does the 4th Amendment clearly state that the rights of a student are abolished? Wouldn't that also suggest College " students " as well, since they too have that label?

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

source: www.usconstitution.net...

No where in the above does the 4th specifically identify a students rights may be infringed. This is yet another blatant attempt to violate a student's rights, and limit the possibility of outside influence. Is it possible this is an attempt of the USG, to not only " control " our students ( or people in general ), but to impose " laws/rules " to once again suggest an " order ", governed by the upper echelons of power only to demoralize the people in a whole? Where better to start than our schools? We've already seen a decrease in social, and intellectual skills within our educational system anyhow~



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join