They didn't do it because it's reasonable. They did it to send a message. Ain't no different than the health inspector or building commissioner acting way too big for their britches knowing full well there will be no consequences.
Look at public schools as just another municipal enforcement department tasked with making sure the kids all meet state standards and it makes sense (or at least to the same extent that all the other indefensible shit done in the name of government makes sense).
This will condition children to think this sort of surveillance is normal, and when they’re adults the ones who think it kept them safe from mass shootings will try and advocate using our existing mass-surveillance powers to proactively monitor everyone like this. Please, we need to stop terrifying children with this lazy oppression, this is not worth the damage to society we’re causing by conditioning kids this way.
I don’t like this article. It mixes two things together:
1. Schools running and monitoring their own communication platforms. This seems fine.
2. The US government monitoring private communication platforms like Snapchat and arresting kids on school grounds. This seems bad.
The way it’s written though mixes these together and makes it look like schools are monitoring the private communication of students. I think it’s fine for schools to monitor there own platforms but weird for the government to monitor all platforms haphazardly.
I live in and my wife works for the school district mentioned here.
I think most of us can agree that if kids are using Chromebooks or something provided by the school district they should be held accountable (similar to how if I say something awful in a work chat or email I'll be held accountable.
It is the overreach like you said that is the problem. People thinking that we "must protect the children" at all costs is the problem.
The specific district here has a "no bullying" agenda which, as a father formerly with kids in the district, is not a thing. But they promote it and they are the top performing schools in the state so whatever they can do to pander to parents is what they will do.
There's also a large Protestant population here with mega maga churches, and moms against liberty (real name: Moms for Liberty, but I like to call a spade a spade) is heavily enmeshed in the school system. Whatever the parents say goes, and this is just another example.
I always told my kids: I don't care who is asking - a teacher or the police. The answer to "show us your phone" is always "you need to call my parents". I am so glad my kids are no longer in the school system here.
Many of my friends are teachers, lots in this district, and I have to say the state of education has really gone backwards in general and specifically here
Even ignoring the whole idea being awful, their response to someone who they think might want to enact a school shooting is to strip search and imprison them. What effect do they think that is going to have?
This is utterly dystopian. We say some stupid things as kids, because they're just words and we're missing greater context at that age.
Immediately and automatically engaging law enforcement, and even the FBI, is horrific. Kids have always had greatly restricted freedoms in schools, but transcending the classroom and monitoring their digital lives is just training them to accept the surveillance state.
The problem are the lazy idiots using the software. This is the reason we need capable humans in the loop for anything important.
Here we have a bad joke. The system flags it. The school sends it to the police. The police detain and interrogate the kid. Everyone is treating the determination of a complex automated system as their own determination. We also have every actor treating this as a credible threat. For this to be credible, you have to have the means to accomplish it. They gave a timeline. You know you have time to investigate before making an arrest. Problem is, nobody cares.
School officials make the dubious claim that "the technology has detected dozens of imminent threats of suicide or violence."
Oh, really? Do they have data that shows a significant reduction in violence since surveillance started, or is this just reframing false positives (that can result in arrest, eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school) as a net benefit. My money is on the latter.
What the article seems to have glossed over is this:
>>> A court ordered eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school for the girl.
If one assumes that the court did take into consideration context and age, it appears to largely validate the follow up decision once flagged. (I don't agree with lack of parental contact, to be clear.)
> When a friend asked what she was planning for Thursday, she wrote: “on Thursday we kill all the Mexico’s.”
> Taken to jail, the teen was interrogated and strip-searched, and her parents weren’t allowed to talk to her until the next day,
> She didn’t know why her parents weren’t there.
> A court ordered eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school for the girl.
Wow, 2025 is wild. Police and court should have psychological evaluation instead and maybe some time off without pay to cool off. Protecting children, no matter how many of them they have to traumatize and incarcerate.
Not that surprising that things have gotten to this point, just a few days ago schools in Florida were testing a new drone defense system against shootings. Between see-through backpacks, armed teachers, metal detectors, and other things you’d think it would be more easier to severely restrict firearm access to under 21 year olds and make the parents criminally liable if they are found to have facilitated access in any way in the wake of a shooting. But yeah i guess dipping into online conversations and immediately notifying both school officials and law enforcement is a good solution (/j)
This article really makes you think about how far is too far with school surveillance. It's scary to imagine kids getting in trouble just for being kids. The balance between safety and freedom is tricky, but arresting students seems extreme. Thanks for shedding light on this important issue.
> Among them is Tennessee, which passed a 2023 zero-tolerance law requiring any threat of mass violence against a school to be reported immediately to law enforcement.
> ...
> Gaggle’s CEO, Jeff Patterson, said in an interview that the school system did not use Gaggle the way it is intended. The purpose is to find early warning signs and intervene before problems escalate to law enforcement, he said.
> “I wish that was treated as a teachable moment, not a law enforcement moment,” said Patterson.
Of course they didn't do things as the Gaggle CEO describes. They were legally compelled not to.
I love a good complaint about corporate meddling as much as anyone, but sometimes it really is the government to blame.
God this horrifying, i'm really glad i did not grow up in this type of environment. Why people involve police in this is beyond me. Also how is that even a legal arrest? What crazy judge would write an arrest warrant for that? IANAL but sounds like an illegal warrantless arrest.
An important, if unfortunate, lesson to learn: you are being spied on, by people who demand your trust and give you none in return
Back when I was in school the web filtering got so draconian those of us in the know started keeping Tor browser on a thumb drive, and carrying it to whatever computer we were using. Some went as far as to reboot from a Linux image on said thumb drive. That was nearly 20 years ago, can't imagine it's any better now
21 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 37.6 ms ] threadLook at public schools as just another municipal enforcement department tasked with making sure the kids all meet state standards and it makes sense (or at least to the same extent that all the other indefensible shit done in the name of government makes sense).
1. Schools running and monitoring their own communication platforms. This seems fine.
2. The US government monitoring private communication platforms like Snapchat and arresting kids on school grounds. This seems bad.
The way it’s written though mixes these together and makes it look like schools are monitoring the private communication of students. I think it’s fine for schools to monitor there own platforms but weird for the government to monitor all platforms haphazardly.
I think most of us can agree that if kids are using Chromebooks or something provided by the school district they should be held accountable (similar to how if I say something awful in a work chat or email I'll be held accountable.
It is the overreach like you said that is the problem. People thinking that we "must protect the children" at all costs is the problem.
The specific district here has a "no bullying" agenda which, as a father formerly with kids in the district, is not a thing. But they promote it and they are the top performing schools in the state so whatever they can do to pander to parents is what they will do.
There's also a large Protestant population here with mega maga churches, and moms against liberty (real name: Moms for Liberty, but I like to call a spade a spade) is heavily enmeshed in the school system. Whatever the parents say goes, and this is just another example.
I always told my kids: I don't care who is asking - a teacher or the police. The answer to "show us your phone" is always "you need to call my parents". I am so glad my kids are no longer in the school system here.
Many of my friends are teachers, lots in this district, and I have to say the state of education has really gone backwards in general and specifically here
Not the sharpest bullets in the barrel...
Immediately and automatically engaging law enforcement, and even the FBI, is horrific. Kids have always had greatly restricted freedoms in schools, but transcending the classroom and monitoring their digital lives is just training them to accept the surveillance state.
Here we have a bad joke. The system flags it. The school sends it to the police. The police detain and interrogate the kid. Everyone is treating the determination of a complex automated system as their own determination. We also have every actor treating this as a credible threat. For this to be credible, you have to have the means to accomplish it. They gave a timeline. You know you have time to investigate before making an arrest. Problem is, nobody cares.
Oh, really? Do they have data that shows a significant reduction in violence since surveillance started, or is this just reframing false positives (that can result in arrest, eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school) as a net benefit. My money is on the latter.
>>> A court ordered eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school for the girl.
If one assumes that the court did take into consideration context and age, it appears to largely validate the follow up decision once flagged. (I don't agree with lack of parental contact, to be clear.)
> When a friend asked what she was planning for Thursday, she wrote: “on Thursday we kill all the Mexico’s.”
> Taken to jail, the teen was interrogated and strip-searched, and her parents weren’t allowed to talk to her until the next day,
> She didn’t know why her parents weren’t there.
> A court ordered eight weeks of house arrest, a psychological evaluation and 20 days at an alternative school for the girl.
Wow, 2025 is wild. Police and court should have psychological evaluation instead and maybe some time off without pay to cool off. Protecting children, no matter how many of them they have to traumatize and incarcerate.
> ...
> Gaggle’s CEO, Jeff Patterson, said in an interview that the school system did not use Gaggle the way it is intended. The purpose is to find early warning signs and intervene before problems escalate to law enforcement, he said.
> “I wish that was treated as a teachable moment, not a law enforcement moment,” said Patterson.
Of course they didn't do things as the Gaggle CEO describes. They were legally compelled not to.
I love a good complaint about corporate meddling as much as anyone, but sometimes it really is the government to blame.
Back when I was in school the web filtering got so draconian those of us in the know started keeping Tor browser on a thumb drive, and carrying it to whatever computer we were using. Some went as far as to reboot from a Linux image on said thumb drive. That was nearly 20 years ago, can't imagine it's any better now