[Scrapped]

[Sibirsky]

My school already has surveillance cameras. They didn't stop me from getting a black eye before Christmas in '09.

Not surprised.

[Conserative Morality]

But did it help provide proof such that the person who did it would get punished? If so, then this would at least deter said person from "giving a black eye" to other students.

No, actually, the camera was not examined at all.

[Hayteria]

But did it help provide proof such that the person who did it would get punished? If so, then this would at least deter said person from "giving a black eye" to other students.

No, actually, the camera was not examined at all.

... that's ridiculous, if they had reason to have video evidence they should have at the very least taken a look at it. The problem with that isn't with the video surveillance system, but with it not being used right.

[Conserative Morality]

... that's ridiculous, if they had reason to have video evidence they should have at the very least taken a look at it. The problem with that isn't with the video surveillance system, but with it not being used right.

Actually, it's just another cost that adds absolutely nothing. We had two bomb threats that year, and we caught one of them because the student in question had yakked about it beforehand. Big help those surveillance cameras were.

Although the incident did lead to quite a few '*school name* is the BOMB!" jokes, which I found funny for a bit.

[Hayteria]

... that's ridiculous, if they had reason to have video evidence they should have at the very least taken a look at it. The problem with that isn't with the video surveillance system, but with it not being used right.

Actually, it's just another cost that adds absolutely nothing. We had two bomb threats that year, and we caught one of them because the student in question had yakked about it beforehand. Big help those surveillance cameras were.

Although the incident did lead to quite a few '*school name* is the BOMB!" jokes, which I found funny for a bit.

We can't always rely on criminals to be so stupid though.

Also, just because certain people were apprehended without the help of surveillance cameras doesn't make them "just another cost that adds absolutely nothing." This doesn't take into account what people might have done if not for the risk that their actions might be recorded. o.o

[Conserative Morality]

We can't always rely on criminals to be so stupid though.

Also, just because certain people were apprehended without the help of surveillance cameras doesn't make them "just another cost that adds absolutely nothing." This doesn't take into account what people might have done if not for the threat of their actions being recorded. o.o

Yes, and you could bring back hall monitors, or have an authority figure in every hallway while you're at it.

I don't accept 'Well, it MIGHT discourage them' without strong data from instances in which the mechanism in question did not exist at all.

[Katganistan]

My school already has surveillance cameras.

Sad.

[Katganistan]

Not far enough. We need surveillance cameras that fire lasers at unruly pupils.

Could just wire up the seats and have a keypad that lets you give a mild shock to.....

OH FER CHRISSAKES, IT'S A JOKE!!!!

[Hayteria]

Yes, and you could bring back hall monitors, or have an authority figure in every hallway while you're at it.

Would that be more practical or less practical? Frankly, I'd go with cameras, if only because they provide actual proof.

I don't accept 'Well, it MIGHT discourage them'

That's not my argument. My argument is that you aren't taking into account that many people who would have done this stuff would obviously be deterred by the fact that their actions might be recorded. You never know how many that might be, but just looking at the stuff that DID occur is at the very least insufficient to assess the benefit.

without strong data from instances in which the mechanism in question did not exist at all.

What do you mean? Comparing between different schools, some with surveillance and some without? How would you go about that? Would you compare before and after having it? Compare schools with it to schools without? Hard to imagine a means of evaluating that which wouldn't introduce considerable sources of error. I'd rather just think about the logic of it, and go where that leads.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

Better idea...

Let's pub surveillance cameras in homes, so police know exactly when and where to respond to home invasions! Just because that cop can see you masturbating doesn't mean anything at all, nor does it matter what kind of pornography he can see when you're SAFE AND PROTECTED by the government.

[Katganistan]

Yes, we have too many rights. Yesterday I got away with wearing bright colored clothes!

We already have cameras in the hallways and lunchroom, I think that's good enough.

My school doesn't, and I'm glad for it. How abysmally like a prison that would be.

[Hayteria]

Better idea...

Let's pub surveillance cameras in homes, so police know exactly when and where to respond to home invasions! Just because that cop can see you masturbating doesn't mean anything at all, nor does it matter what kind of pornography he can see when you're SAFE AND PROTECTED by the government.

False equivalence. The school is a public place, the home is not. You don't exactly have much privacy in schools anyway, when other students can just use cellphones to take pictures of you without their permission.

And by the way, "when and where to respond to home invasions" tend to be specified in 911 calls.

[Hayteria]

Yes, we have too many rights. Yesterday I got away with wearing bright colored clothes!

We already have cameras in the hallways and lunchroom, I think that's good enough.

My school doesn't, and I'm glad for it. How abysmally like a prison that would be.

As if being picked on and nothing being done about it is NOT prison-like?

[Seperate Vermont]

Just because it simply could impose more cases of rule-breakrers to be caught, and derives support from victims, does not justify it nor does it mean it should be what is relied upon to fix problems. Just punishing-as-happens is a horrible way of helping to end bullying, and starting another "war on X" is a bad idea.

If you really want to implement change, you help both sides of the aisle, ignoring popular preference.

[Katganistan]

There already are surveillance cameras in public schools. There are cameras at my school in every hall I walk into and frankly I think it is an invasion of privacy. You wouldn't need the cameras if teachers would do their job. Actually, there wouldn't be a huge hype of "anti-bullying" going on right now if the teachers were doing their job right and actually teaching and educating kids with neccesary cirriculum. I hate how most people think cracking down on the students is going to prevent bullying. Newsflash people, teachers can be bullies too. Calling out and humiliating students for not doing homework, screaming at kids for talking, giving out detentions for stupid reasons. It affects kids pyschologically and negatively, shouldn't it be considered bullying? When a kid kills himself they blame it on the class bully, but I'm sure in many cases it is his fear of failure to suceed because of the pressure that is put on him by his teachers.

So let me get this straight:
Teachers shouldn't remind students that not doing their homework affects their grades.
Teachers should never get upset the four thousandth time they tell the same student to stop interrupting the lesson with their incessant nattering on about girls, boys, parties, phones, clothes, who's gay, who's a retard, who they'd bang, et cetera.
Teachers should not give out detentions for being rude, disruptive, abusive....


Yeah. It's clearly the teacher's fault.

[Hayteria]

Just because it simply could impose more cases of rule-breakrers to be caught, and derives support from victims, does not justify it nor does it mean it should be what is relied upon to fix problems. Just punishing-as-happens is a horrible way of helping to end bullying, and starting another "war on X" is a bad idea.

... why?

EDIT: And what would you suggest as an alternative.

[The Soviet Technocracy]

Better idea...

Let's pub surveillance cameras in homes, so police know exactly when and where to respond to home invasions! Just because that cop can see you masturbating doesn't mean anything at all, nor does it matter what kind of pornography he can see when you're SAFE AND PROTECTED by the government.

False equivalence. The school is a public place, the home is not. You don't exactly have much privacy in schools anyway, when other students can just use cellphones to take pictures of you without their permission.

And by the way, "when and where to respond to home invasions" tend to be specified in 911 calls.

1. Hard to respond to a home invasion when there isn't anyone home...

2. It's illegal to film someone without consent where I live.

[Seperate Vermont]

Just because it simply could impose more cases of rule-breakrers to be caught, and derives support from victims, does not justify it nor does it mean it should be what is relied upon to fix problems. Just punishing-as-happens is a horrible way of helping to end bullying, and starting another "war on X" is a bad idea.

... why?

It only starts an us vs. them scenario and does nothing to nip a problem as it begins. I'm saying that alone is a horrible ally to curb bullying or rule-breaking anywhere.

[Conserative Morality]

Would that be more practical or less practical? Frankly, I'd go with cameras, if only because they provide actual proof.

Except, you know, most times the cameras aren't checked, and don't provide much in the way of proof. You can see who threw the first punch, if you're lucky and the angle is just right.

That's not my argument. My argument is that you aren't taking into account that many people who would have done this stuff would obviously be deterred by the fact that their actions might be recorded. You never know how many that might be, but just looking at the stuff that DID occur is at the very least insufficient to assess the benefit.

You know, you're right. The fact that crime happens in Baltimore is obviously a good reason to keep arresting people for no reason and releasing them to up the arrest rates and make it appear that crime is under control.

Because while there is no solid evidence supporting it, it MIGHT discourage SOMEONE!

What do you mean? Comparing between different schools, some with surveillance and some without? How would you go about that? Would you compare before and after having it? Compare schools with it to schools without? Hard to imagine a means of evaluating that which wouldn't introduce considerable sources of error.

Right. It's like comparing the mass of different planets, calculating for volume, composition, etc. Look how many variables there are! How hard! We should just, you know, not look at celestial bodies.

I'd rather just think about the logic of it, and go where that leads.

Where does it lead, exactly? Time travel? Set back the clock twenty-seven years?

[Katganistan]

My school doesn't, and I'm glad for it. How abysmally like a prison that would be.

As if being picked on and nothing being done about it is NOT prison-like?

Who says nothing is done about it? In my school, it's grounds for suspension.

[Bear Connors Paradiso]

I wouldn't want it. More restrictions are just going to make people want to break the rules more. Like I'm not allowed to bring food to my work, but if they implemented cameras at my work, I'd still bring food, I'd just hide it in the desk.

[Zetion]

Guys I have an idea.

Lets not.

[Hayteria]

False equivalence. The school is a public place, the home is not. You don't exactly have much privacy in schools anyway, when other students can just use cellphones to take pictures of you without their permission.

And by the way, "when and where to respond to home invasions" tend to be specified in 911 calls.

1. Hard to respond to a home invasion when there isn't anyone home...

2. It's illegal to film someone without consent where I live.

1. True, but that's just one kind of home invasion, and even then investigation of what happened is probably much more practical than having surveillance cameras in every home. (How exactly would that work anyway, a camera at every window to catch whoever breaks in?)

2. Even if it is, that doesn't mean we can rely on actual enforcement of such laws. And under present circumstances, a kid who has reason to believe the authorities aren't on his/her side might not exactly trust them to stop it.

[Hayteria]

As if being picked on and nothing being done about it is NOT prison-like?

Who says nothing is done about it? In my school, it's grounds for suspension.

Right, but in practice, one can't really know who did what, as I explained earlier.

[Clagen]

For my 1700th post, I figured I'd talk about something that I feel would help facilitate a better sense of justice in public schools; surveillance cameras.

Put them in the classrooms, the hallways, the playgrounds, etc... that way, people will be better able to know what is REALLY going on, rather than relying on student hearsay, which has too much potential to cause people to get in trouble for what they didn't do, or get them out of trouble for things they DID do.

Yes... lets condition kids to being watched everywhere they go for their own safety. That way when they grow up they'll be fine with having cameras in their houses to settle domestic disputes instead of relying on heresay.