Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 560 posts

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#441

Post by shadowgovt »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #430
shadowgovt wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a fantasy Americans seem to uniquely believe in that arming the populace is a good deterrent against bad government policy. If it actually worked, one would expect the US to be two separate nations now. After all, what was the Civil War if not a mass of Americans deciding extra-legally that the laws should not apply to them and taking up arms to break free of government oppression and form a government more incl…

It's not perfect. But what it means is that if you're going to impose a policy that unpopular on half the population, you may have to go as far as the Civil War did, including accepting that many of your own people dying. That's... somewhat daunting. And a tyrant, while perfectly willing to bring their own guns to turn on citizens, would have a military that might not be willing, especially if they didn't agree with…

It's far from perfect. It demands a tax in blood during peacetime as a faulty guard against tyranny in time of civil war (to say nothing of the fact that---as the Civil War indicates---there's no particular guarantee that the armed civilians will be defending particularly virtuous rights against government interference; it was, after all, the state's rights to nullify laws curtailing slavery that was the crux of the conflict).

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#442

Post by kickopotomus »

jriot wrote: post #439
kickopotomus wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite honestly, the amendment should have been worded differently and I believe that is part of the reason we are in the mess we have found ourselves in today. For some reason, many Americans only ever seem to quote the final clause of the amendment: ..., the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. However, the meaning of the final clause is modified by what comes before it: A well regulate…

Outside of discussing 18th-century language, do you really believe Americans are going to turn over their guns because a politician comes along and says we have been misinterpreting it thus we must all turn in our guns?

Alone, most likely not. However, the second amendment has never been formally challenged in such a way and there is little legal precedent formalizing the right for Americans to individually own weapons.

It would be naive to think that any change to US law with regards to guns will change anything overnight but we have to start somewhere and allow for the culture around gun ownership to change over time.

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#443

Post by dcbadacd »

carapace wrote: post #350

From my POV this is the natural continuation of an already-fucked-up situation. The rights of children have historically been neglected, and so we inflict on them what we dare not inflict on ourselves. I realized as a child that my parents were sending me to a fucked up place. They did it because they were out to lunch and not paying attention. I've never understood why most people, who sincerely love their children,…

I don't think it's the ratios like 1/20 to 1/40 that are the cause, it's children in those classes. There was a HN thread about magnet/gifted schools and how they made a night-and-day difference in terms of quality of education and wellbeing for quite a few kids, just because there weren't disruptive/mean people there. That's what I've personally witnessed as well. I don't think homeschooling has any hope of beating a well-educated teacher in a good learning environment, that's what we should strive for really.

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#444

Post by ddingus »

hindsightbias wrote: post #421
ddingus wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. Quite a few of us are raising kids free range. Ideally, we can also pass along what life can be like.

What free range options exist for urban techs? I do find it reassuring to see more Jr High aged kids on Muni recently.

You gotta go take trips. Find some outdoors place and visit it often.

What about friends? If enough of you agree, the range is more free for the kids.

Finally, in your home, you can be permissive.

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#445

Post by ta0987 »

rtkwe wrote: post #342
ta0987 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not Draconian, they are in the ballpark of a blue state in the US. If the progressives were willing to accept the Swiss laws in the US under the stipulation that they would never again be made more strict, the US gun owners should be thrilled. Part of the problem is that US gun laws are often motivated by misunderstanding or spite rather than reason or compromise.

They would be called draconian by Republicans and the NRA, look how they react to any increase in gun laws today. Of course blue states get closer to the Swiss laws but IIRC no state has any kind of background check on ammunition [0] or universal gun registries both of which are part of the Swiss system. [0] It would be practically impossible to enforce because states can't put up barriers from things coming into the…

They would be called draconian by Republicans and the NRA, look how they react to any increase in gun laws today.

That's because those increases are never compromises or exchanges. They are simply demands. Republicans and the NRA look at what the gun laws in DC and Chicago were before the Supreme Court cases and think: "That's their end game. Zero guns. Because look: when they had the political power to take them away, they did." They have no rational reason to support increases in gun control that come in exchange for nothing.

If the Democrats offered a compromise, in the form of a constitutional amendment, not repealing the 2nd amendment but detailing it out, we could probably see real talk and progress. If it's not an amendment then it's simply "pray I don't alter it any further".

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#446

Post by jriot »

kickopotomus wrote: post #442
jriot wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outside of discussing 18th-century language, do you really believe Americans are going to turn over their guns because a politician comes along and says we have been misinterpreting it thus we must all turn in our guns?

Alone, most likely not. However, the second amendment has never been formally challenged in such a way and there is little legal precedent formalizing the right for Americans to individually own weapons. It would be naive to think that any change to US law with regards to guns will change anything overnight but we have to start somewhere and allow for the culture around gun ownership to change over time.

> there is little legal precedent formalizing the right for Americans to individually own weapons.

As an American I don't need a legal precedent to say I can own certain property, a legal precedent needs to be set to say I can't own certain property.

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#448

Post by CompanionCuuube »

kickopotomus wrote: post #431
jriot wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean unconstitutional opinion.

Quite honestly, the amendment should have been worded differently and I believe that is part of the reason we are in the mess we have found ourselves in today. For some reason, many Americans only ever seem to quote the final clause of the amendment: ..., the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. However, the meaning of the final clause is modified by what comes before it: A well regulate…

In that case, the 4th amendment is also a right afforded not to individuals because it uses the same wording that the 2nd does regarding "right of the people".

If you want to argue that the "persons" part means the individual, then that would require that you ignore the first part. This contradicts what you said earlier about "being modified by what comes before it".

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#449

Post by DoubleGlazing »

The UK's "Prevent" scheme is a good example of why school surveillance is a bad thing. It was setup to try and prevent religious radicalization, specifically Islamic. All it did was make Muslim student feel constantly spied upon and afraid to express opinions, lest they and their families find themselves under investigation... But then it spread beyond religion to includes political issues, for example stopping a 14 year old boy from helping out at anti-fracking protests. Truly Orwellian stuff.

As an aside my brother-in-law has been battling his childrens school for several years because he refuses to allow their school issued laptops to connect to his home network. The laptops use a proprietary WiFi setup dialog that states the network password will be saved to the cloud with no option to opt out. The school doesn't understand why he would be concerned with that.

Re: Clear backpacks, monitored emails: U.S. students under constant surveillance

#450

Post by hcurtiss »

shadowgovt wrote: post #289
hcurtiss wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't necessarily disagree, but neither would I call it "historical fiction." Armed populaces have fought back against their governments repeatedly throughout history. In any event, I'm one of the guys who would rather go down shooting than in a gas chamber. And, yes, that kind of liberty comes at a price.

... but it's a price generally paid by people other than the person who is armed in peacetime.

I disagree. Fortunately for me, I have the benefit of the Second Amendment, which shifts the burden squarely to those who would deny the right, presumably by further constitutional amendment.
Post reply on HN