School security system to give police access to camera feeds
DAYTON, Ohio (AP) - An Ohio K-12 school scheduled to open in the fall will include a security system that would allow police to tap into school cameras.
[...]The school in suburban Dayton would have blue pull-alarms throughout the building, similar to red fire alarms, which teachers or students could pull in an emergency. If an alarm is pulled, the system would alert first responders to the location and nature of the emergency via pendants worn by staff.
The system’s software also would also allow the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office access to the school’s video-camera feed so authorities can view the area.
[...]Ohio Federation of Teachers President Melissa Cropper said that group’s members want an increased focus on addressing student behavioral issues, not on fortifying schools.
Does this sound like good idea?
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @10:14PM (3 children)
Before they turn into gangstas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @10:21PM (1 child)
A nip-slip can happen at any age.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:39AM
Important to have cameras everywhere
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Tuesday March 26 2019, @04:14AM
You mean, before they turn into politicians.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 1, Troll) by krishnoid on Monday March 25 2019, @10:21PM (5 children)
As soon as I see the following headline: Police security system to give aspiring student youtubers live access to body camera feeds.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday March 25 2019, @10:34PM (4 children)
See, I figured the purpose of this was to get the kids (and their parents) used to being on the receiving end of an authoritarian state now, so they won't complain when it's imposed on everybody else.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 5, Informative) by Bot on Monday March 25 2019, @11:30PM
Bingo.
Schoolkids used to being watched will be adults used to being watched.
I wouldn't even object to total surveillance, but it implies a clean slate approach and is difficult to keep, as it implies surveillance of the guys doing the surveillance and of everybody who counts and of every transaction and of every property, everywhere. So, you got surveillance, the powerful enough get privacy, 1984 meet Animal Farm.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:46AM (1 child)
And there I thought that Zero Tolerance policies, armed guards and drills, ROTC, and Pledging Alegiance to the Flag every morning (while learning jack shit about a dangerous outside world shrunk by misleading maps) were already doing that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:23AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLqC3FNNOaI [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @08:20PM
I'm against this idea, but I can see the value of the camera access, but only in the event that the blue alarms are triggered so officers have a way to get better information about the position of active shooters in a school shooting situation. It would probably save lives to know what any active threats look like and what they've got in their arsenal as well as their position.
That being said... I don't imagine that emergency-only access is what they're implementing, and I don't think the system that gets implemented will be secure enough to prevent abuse of the system.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday March 25 2019, @10:56PM (2 children)
Increased focus of addressing student behavioral issues instead of fortification? Yeah, doesn't sound too bad.
The implied tracking of the workforce in having them wear pendants that can report their location to.... anyone with the correct passkeys? Not so much.
The ability, if a citizen alarm is raised, that gives the police direct access to the security system? Better than having to wait outside until SWAT manages the tap-in themselves, or for SWAT to get to the office where the monitors are anyway, I suppose.
The ability for the police to look anywhere they want, anywhen they want, by CCTV? Not so much.
TFA doesn't make it clear AFAICT if it's the first or the second case on surveillance.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Tuesday March 26 2019, @10:29AM (1 child)
Had to check for a minute that that was describing the situation in the US and not a school in Homs, or Mosul.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:21PM
Schools in Homs or Mosul wouldn't be able to afford LifeAlert pendants for all the staff. (I presume that's what these are if they can alert to "the location and nature of the emergency.")
But, staff location tracking aside, it sounds very similar to these [rathsecurity.com], only indoors. The blue emergency phones are already ubiquitous on college campuses, rest areas, and other locations throughout the United States.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @11:06PM (2 children)
Especially if there are cameras in the bathrooms.
That way, the pedophiles, hebephiles [wikipedia.org] *and* ephebophiles [wikipedia.org] will all get to watch the objects of their desires.
"This will be a great new dating app! But wait, there's more! This new system is Roy Moore Approved™! Unsurprisingly, we're expecting a big uptick in job applications here."
--Richard Biehl, Chief of Police
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @11:21PM (1 child)
Who watches the watchmen (as they jerk off uncontrollably)?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @11:29PM
The voyeurs, of course...But then, there won't be anyone to watch them masturbate.
Hmm...I guess they could video themselves masturbating, which could then be used for SexEd classes -- and the circle is complete!
Hooray for technology!!!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 25 2019, @11:42PM (2 children)
Do they come with built-in ink vials to identify who pulled the alarm? Or is that left as an educational opportunity for the students interested in identifying the narcs in their midst?
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Thursday March 28 2019, @01:15PM
One suspects the act of pulling the alarm should be caught on camera...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 29 2019, @08:30PM
Per Snopes [snopes.com]:
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @12:10AM
Let me know when the advertisers get uncomfortable and demonetize the feed.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DrkShadow on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:43AM (3 children)
Seems like all these systems are _re_active in nature. Don't _stop_ travesties from occuring, don't work to better society and make it so these things don't happen. Instead, _when_ these things happen, and they're now part of the plan, make real good sure you can catch the fell'er who done did it!
That's been possible from day one, without all this. The people who commit massacres or large-scale crimes (Oklahoma city bombing, Littleton high school shooting) don't go free and unknown. These things do nothing to prevent bringing to bear the committer of any serious crime, and the powers probably don't even care about any non-serious crime. This is completely reactive, as a sort assuring society, 'If someone kills you, we'll be sure to bring 'em to "justice"!'
That strikes me as the real problem with the growth of the police state. It doesn't actually help anyone. Not the victims, not the perpetrators, there's no attempt at prevention. It's just authoritarianism.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:19AM
In a free society the job of the police is to make the lives of the citizens easier.
In an authoritarian society the job of the citizens is to make the lives of the police easier.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:32PM (1 child)
Well said. Yet it has seemed like for a long time the concept that "you won't get away with it, we will catch you and you'll be in for a nice long stay with Bubba," has had deterrent effects. "Go ahead, but think and don't do the crime if you don't want to do the time." But from 9/11 to Brenton Tarrant we are seeing persons who either don't care about the penalty or are willing to pay it.
And how do you proactively prevent crime while still ensuring civil liberties? Some of these reactive measures are intended to be proactive so that the ability to have something similar happen is lowered, yet forces an even heavier police state. I'm not arguing that prevention isn't a good idea - just the contrary. But preventive measures, when exercised by the state, also need to respect concepts like innocent until proven guilty and limiting investigation until clearly warranted.
If one could take away all the guns (that's a big if and I doubt it would happen in the United States) then one wouldn't be able to use guns in a crime. That would be preventive. But not ethicallly correct IMVHO.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @06:05PM
I'm in the camp that the purpose of police is to stop and punish crimes. Prevention should be left to those that understand that aspect (community leaders, NGOs, educators).
The police have too much power to be granted that kind of access.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26 2019, @01:25PM
Just tap your heels twice and all your trouble are gone.
(Score: 2) by Entropy on Tuesday March 26 2019, @02:05PM (1 child)
It doesn't mean that we need to do something to attempt to avoid that same event in the future. Sometimes bad things happen and no set of reasonable preparations would have avoided them. An example is school shootings(or knife attacks, or bomb attacks) a reasonable sounding response might be give police access to school video. Would that prevent whatever attack we're talking about? No--But the false desire to "do something" even if it wouldn't have helped is rampant.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday March 26 2019, @08:03PM
Unfortunately politicians thrive on this sort of thing. Thus we get a slew of band-aid laws and policies that don't do anything except interfere with the daily activities of people trying to go on with their lives. Being seen as "doing something" to punish wrongdoers gets far more attention than searching for the root cause of issues in order to prevent them from causing problems. One could argue this pervades even foreign policy, why else for instance has the US been in Afghanistan nearly two decades?
(Score: 2) by DutchUncle on Tuesday March 26 2019, @03:25PM
Agree with everyone saying that prevention would be better. Given current society, it makes sense: After an event, one would want police able to review the cameras, so giving them live access to the cameras IN EMERGENCY is comparable to setting off the fire alarm or the sprinklers IN EMERGENCY. So it's not quite about constant surveillance, more about constant awareness that you *might* be reviewed. But how secure is it? How easy for someone to get in and watch, or worse, like the problems with home security systems? Yes, of course it will have passwords and codes; what are the odds that they mostly get set to default, or 123456, or some other easily-guessable value - if not some deliberately standardized value "for consistency across law enforcement" that then becomes known to everybody?
Won't somebody actually "think of the children", instead of band-aid patches?