California Senate attempts to ban RFID tracking of students

It looks like the backlash from one California school's attempt at mandatory RFID tracking of students could end up prompting a statewide ban of the practice, if the state Senate has its way. In that first instance, Brittan Elementary School in Sutter, California attempted to require all students to carry RFID-equipped ID cards that would allow them to be tracked throughout the school, supposedly to simplify attendance-taking and reduce vandalism. That plan quickly backfired, however, and the school put the kibosh on the program. Under this new law, all schools would be prohibited from requiring students to carry RFID cards (or, presumably, be implanted with 'em) until 2011, when the practice would be reconsidered, according to The Register. Democrat Joe Simitian (who introduced the legislation) doesn't seem to be stopping there though, also proposing bills that would place a temporary ban on RFIDs in driver's licenses, add additional privacy safeguards to RFID-enabled government IDs and, of course, restrict forced RFID implants in people.

[arfoo @ Apr 18th 2007 1:38PM]

Interesting.
Now what is that photo from?

[siblog @ Apr 18th 2007 1:56PM]

Pink Floyd - The Wall (movie)

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 2:05PM]

Yeah there's a real smart idea.. ban keeping better track of students..because you know they won't shoot up a school or anything like that one chinaman did when he turned Virginia Tech into swiss cheese the other day. /sarcasm

For the love of god, hopefully these idiots get a clue - if anything we need MORE tracking and nothing BUT tracking of students, and uh yeah maybe also get a big red alarm light and sound at gunshops so that students that walk in won't be able to carry the implements of death out of there like what's-his-name Virginia Tech guy.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 2:26PM]

Sorry, but that's ridiculous. Track all you want, but you can't prevent random acts of violence. If someone wants to massacre innocent people, we simply cannot stop them. Gun control will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns -- that's why they're criminals. Likewise, tracking people will not prevent criminals from harming others. The solution to problems like these is teaching people that they are responsible for their actions and by allowing law abiding citizens to carry firearms. If each professor and various students at Virginia Tech had guns with them that day, blood would have still been shed, but the outcome would have been dramatically different. The shooter might have pulled off a few rounds, but he would have quickly been taken down by the other law-abiding students.

Politicizing this tragedy is irresponsible. RFID tracking is an invasion of privacy, a lessening of freedom, and as much as I'd like for it to, it will do nothing to help the situation.

[tippy @ Apr 20th 2007 8:29AM]

Dustin Frazier your blindness is truly frightening

[Socrates @ Jan 25th 2008 9:54PM]

I cant even believe that a conversation was even developed on this topic. Tracking devices for humans? EVERYONE needs to stop and take that in for a minute..........OK now that you thought about it, doesn't it sound absurd? How can the government even legitimize something like that, we are not cattle, we are not exotic sea creatures, and I dont know about anyone else out there but I for one do not even posses a criminal record. So enlighten me as to why or how it is even acceptable to be tracked and monitored by the government...or anyone for that matter, as I go about my everyday law-abiding life? There is a need for me to be watched as I prepare dinner for my family? Or while Im at my desk at work, or on vacation? Honestly, let's cut the bullshit, the politicians making and passing these laws are the ones who need the devices. We know absolutely nothing about the leaders of our "great" nation other than what they deem acceptable for us to know.

[JoshLowry @ Apr 18th 2007 2:07PM]

I thought it was Republicans who were for smaller government. /sarcasm

It makes me happy to see Senator Simitian is making a stand for this. As tinfoil as it sounds I believe RFID chips implanted everywhere would be a large intrusion into our private lives. Our actions and locations would be that more easy to record and track.


- Josh

http://www.StateOfBrain.com

[Adam @ Apr 18th 2007 2:26PM]

Students in k-12 do not have rights like normal citizens. They are the responsibility of the school during school hours. This would be a great idea and help limit vandalism. The school already has the rights to open backpacks, purses, lockers, etc at their discretion. Whats the difference?

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 2:14PM]

@JoshLowry,

Good points, except for the fact that if I was one of those 31 people in virginia laying with toe-tags right now in the coroner's meatlocker (plus many more people still in the hospital) I'd KINDA be thinking maybe just a LITTLE more RFID action might've been nice.. for one it would've kept psycho Collegebine kids like that chow-young-phat Virginia tech shooter out of the buildings he didn't belong in.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 2:28PM]

How do you know which buildings he did or did not belong in? Besides, refusing a students access to one particular building on campus would have accomplished nothing. He would have simply continued his rampage on buildings to which he did have access. Not to mention the fact that there is no reason to prevent a *student* from accessing another building on his *campus*.

[zoara @ Apr 18th 2007 5:48PM]

SumYungGal (sic), what's with the unnecessary racism?

[sentient.exe @ Apr 18th 2007 2:18PM]

There is hardly even a Grocery Store out there in Sutter; WTH are they doing with RFID?

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 2:35PM]

@Richard Sportwood,

That may be true that you can't stop random acts of violence, but that's not the point. Glass cases also don't keep 100% of criminals from breaking the glass and stealing things out of them, but they sure do cut down on anyone just being able to walk by and taking things were a glass case not there - and THATS the point.

No one's suggesting limiting firearms but you bring up a good point about armed students in class, as it relates to post-9/11 strategy of putting plain-clothed air marshalls on flights: Let's put a Class-Marshall into classrooms, or at the LEAST get the teachers some firearms training and bulletproof vests, and let them wear concealed weapons once certified.

[DorianGray @ Apr 18th 2007 3:53PM]

@Richard Sportwood

I agree with most of what you're saying. However, what you're proposing implies a significant shift in our society as a whole.

Virginia is a state that allows gun purchases. Additionally, Viriginia allows registered and licensed individuals (normal citizens) to carry concealed weapons.

However, carrying a concealed firearm in VA is sorta counter-culture.

It'd be flat awesome if all US citizens were issued a firearm, taught gun safety and rules and laws for when it's appropriate to use this weapon. There'd be an adjustment period (!!!) in which pre-Darwinites, adrenalin-junkies, testosterone-retards and petty criminals pretty much policed themselves out of the general populace (as well as a fair number of innocent bystanders and genuine do-gooders -- but hey, we're changing the face of a society here, right?).

All 'citizens' (adults 18 & over) would be strapped. We'd teach weapon use safety in the high schools. Civil Air Patrol would have a local neighborhood equivalent (perhaps made up of senior Boy Scouts & Eagle Scouts).

We'd have a society and population of the politest, most level-headed people imaginable (think about it for a sec...). We'd have *zero* threat of foreign invasion or pretty much solve border-jumping (who seriously wants to invade a country where *every* adult is packin' heat?).

So. We have a current population of 300-odd million. A year after the Citizen Empowerment Act of 2007, a population of like 200 million. But all good citizens, minimal crime.

I'ma run this by my Congressman. Who's with me?

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 3:05PM]

No, it wouldn't. The students would simply take off their RFID badge to avoid being detected while they were down another hallway or in another class vandalizing and wreaking havoc. RFID tracking will only be able to accurately track law-abiding students -- therefore it is useless.

[n.p. @ Apr 18th 2007 2:29PM]

k-12 do have rights like everyone else, dammit. you're getting bad information, whoever said they don't.

[n.p. @ Apr 18th 2007 2:29PM]

he was korean. not chinese. get it right, retard.

as for how this even remotely applies to what happened in virgina is confounding to say the least. the pretense for this is childhood safety but it's more of an invasion of privacy. the incident in virginia could not have been stopped -- since the culprit was unknown at the time and thought to have fled instead of staying around.

[Dustin Frazier @ Apr 18th 2007 2:42PM]

@ Richard Sportwood

The police weren't even sure who the gunman was. They were cuffing and detaining everyone in the effected area. You think the situation would have benefited from another thousand or so gun brandishing college students?! You're right, the outcome would have been drastically different. Instead of one gunman and 32 students dead you would see many more deaths and mass confusion. Students would have been shooting other students and police would have no choice but to kill more than the real gunman. No offense or anything but I hope you aren't more than 20 years old. Any older and your blindness would be truly scary.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 3:00PM]

You raise some interesting questions, Dustin, but I respectfully disagree with you. It could possibly be argued that too many students would weapons could cause more hysteria, but you couldn't argue that professors and staff with weapons would have done the same. But still, as for the students, if the gunfire started in one classroom, it would have ended in one classroom. There simply wouldn't be enough armed people in one classroom to cause so much confusion that a mass gunfight would erupt throughout the campus.

"and police would have no choice but to kill more than the real gunman."
The police didn't respond for so long that the gunman committed suicide before they got to him. Assuming all things remained the same, the police killing people wouldn't have happened (since it didn't).

@SumYungGai
But knowing where the students are has nothing to do with security. They wouldn't be able to tell anything from watching a computer screen that told where each student was because no one would be able to tell which student on the screen was the criminal. Not very useful at all. Besides, if they required students to have RFID tags, the criminal would simply ignore the rules and take his off (and be impossible to track), just like he ignored the rules against murder. It's simply not a solution.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 2:54PM]

Don't see the problem. You want to be on their campus, they have a right to know where you are. It's not like they must go to the school.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 2:56PM]

Actually the rights of minors are severely curtailed. you don't, for example, have free speech rights on a school campus when you're a student. No warrant is needed to search your belongings for contraband either.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 2:59PM]

BTW, this has NOTHING to do with VT. What the hell people, Sutter wanted to do this back in 2005 - http://www.eff.org/Privacy/RFID/schools/

VT is totally unrelated to this. Current sensation events aren't always connected to other news stories.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 3:04PM]

Richard - "It's simply not a solution." **********

And it was never meant to be. This is from 2005, people. Che ca legislature finally passed a bill related to the school's RFID mandate from 2005.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 3:08PM]

You're right, it wasn't meant to be a solution; that was my rebuttal to the other commenters who implied that it was.

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 3:17PM]

You guys all make great points and its refreshing to see there are lots of other non-kneejerkers like myself actually thinking what the best solution is without the 'privacy paranoia' attitude. "A$$holes and armpits" I say - in with them RFID tags.. they can't come soon enough. Let's start lining 'em up and bending 'em over like a prison cavity search line.

[russdogg @ Apr 18th 2007 3:21PM]

It also could potentially be too easy to abuse by all sides. Someone swipes your card and gets you in trouble for what they did, kids bringing their friend's card to check them in when they are ditching, or simply covering it with foil when you want to break a rule... Just like that mosquito noise teen repellent that kids re-purposed into a ringtone. All I'm saying is we shouldn't underestimate the ingenuity of youth.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 3:26PM]

Very good points, russdogg.

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 5:57PM]

Who the hell is talking about cards or wristbands, russdogg? There's no point in even bothering then unless it can be made permanent and non-transferable.. hence my vote for the a$$holes-and-armpits implant method. If we'd had some INSTALLED RFID in that college campus shooter maybe a few more lives would've been saved.

It's either that or we should in the meantime report any suspicious or annoying classmates to the police and school administrators, and from the looks of it at Virginia Tech the guy had a track record but no one wanted to be bothered doing anything about the kung-fu koksucker before he started blasting away.

4-16-07 - never forget. Semper Fi virgia tech! semper fi.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 4:02PM]

Dorian wrote "t'd be flat awesome if all US citizens were issued a firearm, taught gun safety and rules and laws for when it's appropriate to use this weapon. "

We can't even trust people to check their tire pressure (hence those idiot TPM systems congress mandated on cars for 07 and beyond). You want to hand people who can't figure out tire pressure, handguns?!

"We'd have a society and population of the politest, most level-headed people imaginable (think about it for a sec...). "

Many polite, level-headed people grab their guns and kill when they catch their wives with a best buddy. Most murders are among people who know each other. Most murders are heat of the moment. VT is an anomaly that will barely create a blip on the overall percentage of murders by randoms v. people known to the victim (especially family or household members).

"So. We have a current population of 300-odd million. A year after the Citizen Empowerment Act of 2007, a population of like 200 million. But all good citizens, minimal crime."

That's amusing. i hope I don't get hit in the crossfire.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 6:01PM]

I don't know how much of your reply is serious and how much is not -- mostly the beginning, where you say you agree with most of what I say. I accept your criticism and your hyperbole, but you're putting far too many words in my mouth.

I realize what I'm proposing, and I realize that it would never happen. However, I never proposed mandatory guns being issued to students; I proposed the gun-control regulations on campuses be lifted. Believe it or not, most citizens are capable of policing themselves in most situations, such as this one in Virginia. As it stands, any idiot is capable of purchasing a gun already (assuming he passes the background check), so the idea that morons would begin killing everyone off if most people carried guns is unrealistic, at best. Not to mention the fact that, as you pointed out, no one would want to harm someone else when they knew that it was probable that the would-be victim was also carrying a weapon himself.

We can't expect the government, police department, doctors, or politicians to protect us from these types of individuals. The citizens are fully capable of being the first line of defense.

[DorianGray @ Apr 18th 2007 4:32PM]

@bgdc

Whew. Good thing I read your reply thru the last line. For a sec there I was seriously worried that your folks never bought you any common sense as a child.

Because anyone who took that seriously -- really, dude, needs to get a grip on reality.

I guess I should have added the tag:
/sarcasm ends here

Almost had to flame your ass...

[S11D336B @ Apr 18th 2007 4:03PM]

RFID technology is great. I agree that in some instances it could be used to infringe on the rights of some people. As far as schools are concerned, I believe the article was referring to a university not K-12. But in anycase, RFID technology would be a useful tool for taking attendance. You walk in and automatically are marked present on the rolls that day. As long as schools aren't scanning scanning RFID cards anywhere else, I'm ok with it.

On ths issue of gun control. You simply can't trust the average person with the responsiblity of a gun. In the heat of rage someone is more likely to use their gun in the heat of the moment than they are to go buy one and then shoot the person.

I don't think we should have guns on campus. Do you really want your professors carrying guns? Think of the authority they would hold over you. Additinally, are you really that scared on your campus that you would want this?

[macona @ Apr 18th 2007 4:33PM]

"On ths issue of gun control. You simply can't trust the average person with the responsiblity of a gun. In the heat of rage someone is more likely to use their gun in the heat of the moment than they are to go buy one and then shoot the person."

Well, then you are going to have to control more than guns. How many people have been ran over in cars or stuck with a knife in a fit of rage. It happens. At that rate we'll be like England where just about everything is illegal now. Cant even carry a pocket knife.

Of course more people die there from soccer matches than anything!

[Nick @ Apr 18th 2007 5:20PM]

I can't believe some of you think RFID is a great idea. If you apply it to K-12, all it does is take more responsibility and accountability away from the people that are supposed to watch our children. That's just what we need, a bunch of kids getting used to the idea of having every movement they make tracked.

This is how the government will try to get the country on board. Promises of more safety for the children. First, they chip your school ID for attendance. Then that chip is used to track/control/limit/restrict people. Eventually, more promises will come and the next thing you know, you and I will all have a chip in our bodies, and the government will be our shadow every waking minute of our lives, monitoring everything we do. Some of you probably think that is a good idea. It's already started with people chipping up there dogs. Why? So they can find them when the owner loses them. Oh gee, it's so convenient when I lose sparky. If he runs away again, I can just punch him up on the computer and there he is. It can work for us humans too.

And I'm still laughing at SumYoungGai's comments. Chip up students so we can limit what buildings they can go into? Federal Marshals in every classroom? Yeah, you paint a real rosey picture of society. Trying to tie this into the VT massacre is simply insulting. Bad things happen, and sometimes, there is nothing you can do about it. Implementing radical ideas like this does nothing but strip away more and more of your freedoms. People/society needs to stop looking for easy answers to complex problems, and start taking more accountability and being more responsible for the people in their lives and their actions.

Sorry for the rant. I'm obviously very much against anything and everything that has to do with RFID, in any capacity.

[SumYungGai @ Apr 18th 2007 6:05PM]

Tru dat, Richard Sportingwood (is that like a Native American Indian name).

I do know one thing that comes out of all of this sudden need for keeping better tabs on students and more significantly the Virginia Tech shooting: People are going to be REALLY nice to us asian dudes on that Virginia Tech campus, and campuses around the nation, if only at least for a little while -- never know when another one of us is going to go off the deep end because we got a bad grade or a girl turned us down for a date! ;)

[DorianGray @ Apr 19th 2007 2:59PM]

@Richard Sportwood

Hmm. I really should have made it more clear where I was serious and where I was gushing satire. I appreciate your comments in this thread: they're well thought out & intelligent. I sincerely didn't mean to put words in your mouth.

There's a part of me that wishes the US had not given up the 'one man, one gun' mentality of the frontier. I do think our society would be much... cleaner. Much of the petty crime we see would be gone. Gangs of hoodlums could not compete with society as a whole. Even rudeness would evaporate -- polite manners become essential when a perceived slight could result in a showdown.

But, it's not going to happen -- and it's something no sane person would ever really wish *to happen*; at least to the extent of having society suffer through the pogrom of fools to get there.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 7:14PM]

Wow, nice slippery slope argument, Nick. Having kids carry RFID equipped IDs isn't nearly akin to having adults do this for government supervision.

1. Kid walks on campus (or card does in someone's pack) - they must pass through a door. At that moment a simple security camera taking pics every 1 second would capture the entry. Should the child not really be in school it'll be easy to figure out who his accomplice is.

2. Kid walks out of door. Again, RFID gets logged and image is captured. Maybe there's an adult with him - it's his dad who is embroiled in a custody battle, or the janitor, or the PE coach taking the kid to a game - no matter what, there's an historical record of that ID passing through that doorway, with an easy to find timestamp and correspondent picture.

Either case, it becomes exceedingly easy to track the movements and whereabouts for kids. Whether it's to catch them breaking a rule - truancy - or maybe to help solve a crime before the crime becomes serious (kidnapping, murder, rape), the system would protect the children.

Right now Verizon sells phones that are Chaperone capable. That means a pattern can activate Chaperone and see vis GPS exactly where Tommy is. Why would a parent want that? Well, my freak sister worries when her daughter is off with grandma - now she can see exactly where the phone (and supposedly) her daughter and grandmother are.

RFID should give parents peace of mind. There's a record of where your kid was supposed to be. They send Bobby to school and a digital record will exist of his entry and exits at school. The people charged with safeguarding the kids have one more tool to ensure they don't fail.

FWIW, I'm shocked that a school like VT doesn't have security cameras by elevators and doors. They should have had a clear image of the killer, exact timeline, etc. They should have known exactly what time he left the first building and where he went from there. Shocking that this simple technology is not in place...

[Nick @ Apr 18th 2007 8:15PM]

Yes, I made a very slippery slope type argument. I can't help it when it comes to issues like these. I'm the paranoid conspiracy nut job people will make fun of. I'm fine with that.

Yes, there is a big difference between chipping an ID card to monitor a child in school, and having adults physically chipped so the goverment can monitor you, but the point I was making is that it has to start somewhere. No one is going to just up and say "yeah sure, put a chip in me". The general public first needs to be convinced that it is of there benefit to do so, and that the process can be trusted. Promising things like being able to better monitor your child in school, or helping you find your lost puppy are ways to go about starting that process.

I don't see why all of your suggestions can't be done without the use of RFID or a tracking device. Can't you just have a video camera running at all times throughout the school's property, and at every entry/exit? You don't need a tracking device on you to monitor where you are.

Also, I don't really have a problem with Verizon and there Chaperone service because that is a choice that is made by the parent or individual. If a parent chooses to do that, then so be it. It's when schools start requiring that kids be chipped in order to be accepted...that's where I have a problem with this. To me, that's the same thing as the government requiring me to give up a piece of my freedom.

[Richard Sportwood @ Apr 18th 2007 8:20PM]

Once again, you can setup cameras and RFID tags and GPS devices (which don't work very well in buildings, mind you) all you want. The criminal will wear a mask or disguise to foil the cameras and leave his RFID tag and GPS tracker at home. If you want to try the argument of "But the security guards will stop him!", that's bunk as well; he will simply shoot them before they have the chance.

[tekdroid @ Apr 18th 2007 7:57PM]

I would sooner not go to school than go to a school like that. Frightening how the world bows to the almighty dollar and tries to promote some clean image to potential customers (in this case, the parents, students).

It's all about:
1) money (saving it, getting more of it)
2) control over any undesirables affecting accumulation of 1

Your basic privacy be damned. New pets are required to be microchipped in many places and I don't doubt the practice will be made law in many countries for people, at a time when they are sufficiently weakened by propaganda and the need for it that they will blindingly accept the invasion of the very basics of their freedoms. All in the name of control and ... money.

[bgdc @ Apr 18th 2007 8:05PM]

tek,

They're kids, not adults. They're not entitled to privacy.

What if you office mandated an ID to enter building? That's logged! It's a fact of life and in this instance, for monetary and safety reasons, there's nothing rational about saying no to kids using RFID IDs while at school.

[ns @ Apr 18th 2007 9:02PM]

The slippery-slope argument applies here...If you tag people while they are young they will get used to it and once they become adults they won't see any issue with being tracked 24/7.

[Andy @ Apr 18th 2007 9:36PM]

Pefect picture for this story.

[Johnny @ Apr 19th 2007 12:35AM]

It would be nice if you could come up with ONE person who has EVER siggested forced implants. Going from RFID tags to "presumably be implanted with 'em" is just ridiculous journalism, and why you are writing blogs on the internet instead of having real jobs where integrity and professionalism is necessary.

[Yakov @ Apr 19th 2007 1:00AM]

@Dustin Frazier

Yes lets talk about being blind. You actually think just because students have guns a little chaos will bring out a maniacal murderer in them all. I can't comprehend anybody wanting more control on there lives. Freedom at every level should be the goal of a society. I would take anarchy over big brother any day. Or as ben franklin put it. "anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security". Eliminating all school shenanigans would make just one more thing a little more boring. and as has already been pointed out. these steps toward privacy infringment have absolutely no effect on determined criminals.

[hagure @ Apr 19th 2007 8:17AM]

I still don't understand why students/children do not deserve the rights and freedoms of speech and privacy that adults do.

And all this talk about how tagging the students will make schools safe... what?! Like the others said, "slippery slope".

Why don't we _tag the guns_ instead?

And to say that carrying concealed weapons is against Virginia's culture, well, then it depends on what culture you're talking about..

[Stan McDonald @ Apr 19th 2007 12:34PM]

I think there is and urgent need to keep track of guns wit RFID. Its is very easy rub off serials number. For that matter I think every car should have it too. In this case its not an invasion of privacy its just trying keep track of stolen property.

[Toni @ Apr 19th 2007 12:59PM]

I really can't understand why there isn't a reasoning for people to be able to carry "stun" guns with them. I believe it would solve so many problems as opposed to an actual with-intent-to-kill gun. If you're at home and have a stun gun and a burglar comes in, you use your stun gun on the attacker and then detain them before the cops arrive. And then when you realize you've stunned the neighbors teenage son (who's plan was to lift that xbox of yours) you won't be in the category of murderer and he'd still be alive but can go to court for his actions. If it was a real burglar and the assailant was able to get that gun away from you and stun you then the worst that would happen is you're incapacitated momentarily and NOT shot dead or have now given the perpetrator a deadly weapon to use around the house to take care of the rest of your family. If you have to carry a gun make it a stun gun. Why not that? I can't see the feasibility of giving everyone an actual gun because think of all the students that get into tussles and their adrenaline is pulsating through their body and they "may" fear for their life by not thinking clearly and would pull out that gun to defend themselves. Instant murder case. If they had a stun gun however the outcome would be much less tragic. Obviously if a criminal wants to get a real gun they would find a way. But if people were to carry stun guns with them they not only protect themselves from being killed, they also protect themselves from being a killer. If people with real guns thought they had less of a chance of getting away with easily killing someone perhaps they'd be less likely to carry out the crime. I practice aikido and I'm all for defending oneself but our main purpose in this martial art is to protect yourself without hurting yourself or killing your attacker in the process.

[Leopold Porkstacker @ Apr 30th 2007 1:14PM]

Mother did it need to be so high?

-he who stacks pork