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.
LAUSD cited possible tactics like locked pouches, cellphone lockers or technological means and promised the policies would be “informed by best practices and by input from experts in the field, labor partners, staff, students, and parents.”
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.
The use of a phone jammer, GPS blocker, or other signal jamming device designed to intentionally block, jam, or interfere with authorized radio communications is a violation of federal law. There are no exemptions for use within a business, classroom, residence, or vehicle. Local law enforcement agencies do not have independent authority to use jamming equipment; in certain limited exceptions use by Federal law enforcement agencies is authorized in accordance with applicable statutes.
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.
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.
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
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
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