News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
is this going to be another one of those 'schools think they can parent outside of school hours' overreach?
Sounds like it and the other is something that I thought schools have been doing since cell phones have been a thing...
Edit: >from using cellphones and social media platforms during the school day.
Oh nope, just in school which is fine ig
The only concern I have is that, unfortunately, we live in a country with a lot of school shootings and phones have given kids a link to the outside when that is happening.
It sounds like it's a ban on using the phone during school, not on simply having a phone with you.
Which honestly sounds like a rule every school has pretty much had for like 20+ years.
Pouches? Maybe if there's some quick release that teachers are given. Lockers? That does nothing about the school shooter issue. They might as well be at home. The "technological means" sounds a bit Orwellian.
I lol'd at the "technological means" what are they gonna do, put up jammers? The FCC would be on their ass in no time. Metal detectors? Don't they already have that? Bluetooth detection? The kids will just turn off Bluetooth widespread.
hahah these are already in place and in use. they already have cell blockers in many places. this is not new and the fcc knows all about it.
the 'new' hotness is a pico cell that allows for voice/sms but no data
Yea, no. The FCC is quite explicit on this, read for yourself:
cool, every school in my district has zero cell signal the moment you walk in the building. it sure as hell aint the architecture
im going to investigate.. they are using something
Please do and then report their asses
i just asked my kids, they confirmed that the schools actually 'turned it on and off for specific areas of the building as needed'
Sounds like illegal jamming to me, def collect some evidence if you can and please report them. I bet they have them mounted on/near the ceiling. Maybe a phone with a good zoom could capture some good evidence pics
i hate this place. i walked into the front office once and they took my picture as part of some security nonsense, so i took my phone out and took their picture. they got super-pissed at their sudden lack of privacy
If it is in fact the moment you walk in the door, then it absolutely is the architecture. If the architecture didn't have any effect on it, whatever's disrupting the signal would also interfere with the signal outside.
Damn near every school building I've ever been in is a behemoth of brick, concrete, and cinder blocks. Cellular and other radio signals have a hard time penetrating that.
Same for a lot of hospitals, big retail stores, and other similar places.
I work in 911 dispatch, we have caution notes attached to the addresses of a lot of schools, hospitals, various office buildings, etc. in our area that there's poor cell reception or that our responders can't get radio reception inside the buildings, so we know how we can or can't communicate with our units when they're responding to an emergency there. I can guarantee you those places aren't purposely jamming police radios.
I lose my cell signal in parts of several of my local grocery stores, big box retailers, etc. that's just part of being inside of a big concrete and metal box. Why would they even want to interfere with my ability to use my phone?
A lot of these buildings were built before cell phones were even a thing, so reception was not a concern in their design. Even in newer buildings, it's often not a major consideration.
And as others said, jamming a cell signal is a huge no-no from the FCC. If anything, and I doubt they're even doing this much, they have picocells (basically tiny cell towers) in the building that they're turning off at certain times. If they didn't have them, there would still be no signal in those parts of the building.
I'm worried it will be something like "you must install this app while on campus and you must sign this waiver to allow us to monitor your phone via the app and we will confiscate your phone if you're caught without the app."
parents wont go for that. as you pointed out, parents want to be able to access their kids. they are the biggest roadblocks to 'no phones in schools'. im one of them.
Will I sound like an “I grow up without seatbelts …“ guy if I mention we were OK only having our parents able to call the school? I guess school shootings etc. are more prevalent nowadays.
Wonder how much bulk dumbphones would cost with a year of service… QVC/HSN sell smart Tracfones for $45 so perhaps that line of thinking is worth including in the debate. Of course any vendor willing to lock down phones to only be able to contact preapproved (parents’) numbers would wet their beak handsomely.
I feel like school shooters are rare enough that a policy about cell phones wouldn't need to factor them in.
There have already been 107 incidents of gunfire on school grounds since the beginning of the year, including one in Los Angeles.
29 dead, 61 injured.
https://everytownresearch.org/maps/gunfire-on-school-grounds/
There are 115,000 schools in the united states. 107 incidents halfway through the year, so 214 approximately by the end of the year, comes out to .19 percent chance of this happening at your school, but that's only if you assume that it's evenly distributed, which it certainly is not. I'd guess that if you are in an inner city school with the associated higher crime rates, then your risk is much higher.
But also if you look at numbers of deaths, school shootings isn't even on the charts. Homicide deaths in general are in second place (but close to suicide deaths) at 10 out of 100,000 kids, and school shootings are a tiny fraction of that. There are 43 million adolescents (10-19) in the united states, so 29 deaths are about .7 percent of the total homicide deaths. Or put another way, your kid is 150 TIMES more likely to die from a regular homicide than from a school shooting.
But still, there is some small risk of a shooting happening and you wanting to know if your kid is safe. So I guess the question is if the tradeoff is worth it. Seems to me like that would not be a good reason not to ban cell phones. Like there might be reasons a cell phone ban is a bad idea, but that isn't really one of them.
Thank God for all the good people with guns to provide safety, am I right?
And heroic cops, like the ones at Uvalde.
Good people dont usually take their guns into a school since they're gun free zones, I dont know who you expect to respond.
It's more the whole 'having guns for safety' idea is a bit absurd.
Right, I have mine take them to school just to help quell that ever present voice in the back of my mind
but youre not wrong. both of these issues have already been resolved by many schools by just having kids bucket their phones on the way in...
Not even buckets, when I was in school many years ago, I have very distinct memories of texting through my hoodie on a flip phone T9 to hide it from the teachers because we were under a constant "if I see it I'm taking it" threat lmao
Literally, the first sentence. So, no. Not even the first school to ban cell phone use during the school day.
When I was in middle school I remember the campus security (I don’t think we called them “security”) had some sort of lecture on the dangers of social media (this was circa 2004). I don’t recall details but they basically said the person in charge of security was supposedly lurking on MySpace to see what we were doing. Pretty lame and did nothing for seemingly nothing reasons.