Bit pissed off at uk school system...

[Gibbo3771]

@KevinWorkman

@Drenius

To be totally honest, I am not following the conversation.
Your points just seemed not to fit onto the post they were directed at to me, so I’m glad this caused you to do some clarification.

And I’m glad this caused you to actually read the conversation? Not quite sure how to reply to “I didn’t read this but I disagree with you”, haha.

I think he meant he was not following your argument and how it fits into the conversation :p.

Also when is this being put in? By whom? Where is the source? It is probably just another “anti-muslim” politician who generalises them as “terrorists”, since these sort of things tend to creep up shortly after stories of young kids going to fight for ISIS and the like.

But that is just my assumption, since every politician is jumping on the “get rid of the foreign people” bandwagon as the election in may gets closer.

[HeroesGraveDev]

The problem I see here is whether the trust should be placed in teachers or students.

If teachers are allowed to search students then you are trusting they will only do it when they feel it is neccessary and not use it as an excuse to invade the students privacy or discriminate.

If they aren’t then you are trusting the students not to have their hands on anything dangerous, illegal, or maybe just against school rules.

The problem is that neither side can really be trusted (there are countless stories of both sides abusing the trust given to them), therefore the authority is given to the group that is (supposedly) most trustworthy of the two.

Then it comes down to the main issue of any sort of surveillance: Who’s watching whoever is watching us?

There needs to be stricter guidelines in place and teachers should be held accountable for any abuse of trust.

[JESTERRRRRR]

I hate the “if you have nothing to hide” argument, but when it comes to school and minors I’m all for it, seeing as you LITERALLY only carry very specific items, and what with certain knife based events I honestly don’t see the problem.

@Gibbo3771

@lcass

this is not a prison its an area for teaching them.

The UK education system is a joke anyway, soon as you grind through and get secondary school qualifications you go to a “real school” called a university, a place where tutors are paid money and not crack cocaine and what they teach you is current and relevent to the actual course.

Well I’m guessing that’s based from experience but my experience of university was the complete opposite - a complete f**king joke. School was far better and I actually learned more - much more. As for current and relevant to the course, that’s the entire point of school, to teach you key skills required for all areas and a good all-round education.

EDIT: I missed the bit about actually looking through someones phone - the data. Is that actually allowed? How can they possibly enforce that if the phone is password protected? Someone please clarify, because if that’s the case then I’d change my tune.

[nerb]

I can understand people not liking the idea of being searched, but as a parent I would be quite supportive of the idea if it created a safer environment for my children. Would you really want to send your children to a school where someone else’s little dirtbags are lugging a knife around?

I am also a firm believer that if you voluntarily enter someone else’s property (such as a house, business, or institution of any kind) then you also subject yourself to any rules that they impose as a condition of entering the property. Simple examples include removing your shoes before entering a person’s house (if customary), or subjecting to a bag search upon exiting a shop. If you disagree with these rules, then you shouldn’t enter the property.

[Sickan]

@nerb

I am also a firm believer that if you voluntarily enter someone else’s property (such as a house, business, or institution of any kind) then you also subject yourself to any rules that they impose as a condition of entering the property. Simple examples include removing your shoes before entering a person’s house (if customary), or subjecting to a bag search upon exiting a shop. If you disagree with these rules, then you shouldn’t enter the property.

Yeah right, because all children voluntarily go to school every day.

[princec]

Relatedly: they’re not actually allowed phones in most schools here either. Phones currently being a major source of bullying and theft/mugging/robbery at school. Not to mention WTF ARE YOU DOING ON YOUR PHONE INSTEAD OF LISTENING TO THE TEACHER!?

Cas

[nerb]

@Sickan

@nerb

I am also a firm believer that if you voluntarily enter someone else’s property (such as a house, business, or institution of any kind) then you also subject yourself to any rules that they impose as a condition of entering the property. Simple examples include removing your shoes before entering a person’s house (if customary), or subjecting to a bag search upon exiting a shop. If you disagree with these rules, then you shouldn’t enter the property.

Yeah right, because all children voluntarily go to school every day.

No, their parents make that choice for them. But it will be parents who get on their high-horse and start complaining that “you can’t search my little Jimmy because he is too precious, and you are infringing on his rights, even if he did take a knife to school”. My point is they can take little Jimmy and piss off then. They can go find another choice of school if they object so heavily.

[princec]

It’s not so easy to go changing schools.
Also, it is the legal responsibility (and requirement) that kids go to school here in the UK. If the child doesn’t attend school, the parents can face prosecution.

Cas

[Cero]

disclaimer: This is german and US law.

By law no one is required to even answer to the police… Police can detain and/or arrest you if they have grounds, but furthermore: no one has to talk to police / answer to them.
Random searches ? by law you have no obligation to do as they say. Yes they may arrest you being annoying or whatever but couldnt charge you unless they make something up. Only a court summoning (in the US subpoena) is something you have to comply.

How is this relevant ? Well by law minors dont have less rights than adults. I’m pretty sure that there is no single law even talking about the relationship and duties of students vs teachers, correct me if I am wrong, but indeed that would be strange anyway.
If a student would have to comply as a teacher says…
First those terms are super vague. Whats a student, whats a teacher ? If you teach me something is that enough ? If a child gets coaching / private lessons and that teacher orders the child to do X, would it have to comply ?

Forbidding phones is pretty ridiculous to me seeing how they are a ubiquitous part of modern life. However that would fall under property law or similar, meaning, they own the school and they can say that all “guests” cannot have cellphones. Or at least not display them. Technically this would apply to parents as well and all that AND its a public building so… but now it gets complicated.

I just like to point out that minor mostly do not have less right than adults.
Everyone likes to think so, but its actually not true, by law.
Are you allowed to assault your child ? (hitting it) No, by law absolutely not. Of course kinda hard to sue someone if they dont go overboard.
If you child is like 10, has a diary, you find that diary and post stories on the internet, is that illegal ? Absolutely.
If you actually look at the laws you will find that the vast majority of laws pertaining minors are actually obligations that adults have to protect them, not laws that reduces their personal rights. With the exception of “capacity” telling how legally a person has to be X years old to be legally allowed to purchase things (which is some cases make some on those candy purchases unlawful, just saying :3)

[KevinWorkman]

@Cero

If you child is like 10, has a diary, you find that diary and post stories on the internet, is that illegal ? Absolutely.

[citation needed]

I don’t think it’s as simple as you’re making it out to be. For example, parents are entitled to 100% of any revenue that a child makes until he or she turns 18. Not exactly equal rights.

[princec]

Children here in the UK have greatly reduced rights. Many fundamental rights remain (eg. an expectation of physical respect) but many societal rights do not (eg. an expectation of privacy).

Cas

[Cero]

@KevinWorkman

@Cero

If you child is like 10, has a diary, you find that diary and post stories on the internet, is that illegal ? Absolutely.

[citation needed]

I don’t think it’s as simple as you’re making it out to be. For example, parents are entitled to 100% of any revenue that a child makes until he or she turns 18. Not exactly equal rights.

Anything involving money are, like I mentioned, capacity laws. Simply said depending on country a minor may not make any money or make any purchases. As they get older until they are adults there are some degrees of jobs and purchases a minor can make. Obviously this is simply to protect minors from labor and such things.
So yes a 15 year old making money from youtube video for example, that revenue goes to the parents. But again, thats capacity, like I mentioned.

Yes I can’t cite anything right now, this is an old example I picked up in law class once. Not sure you can cite a specific law anyway but rather the non existence of any law reducing the privacy rights for minors, even when talking about parents’ actions.
Of course in court when parent would act “in the childs interest” if there is a “potential danger” it would be tolerated but technically same rights.