1984 may be coming to Manchester School District busses

[Rosie the Riveter]

Public to have say on school bus cameras
By MARK HAYWARD
Union Leader Staff
14 hours, 46 minutes ago


Manchester ? The public will have its say next month on whether nearly all school buses should be equipped with a set of digital cameras.

A committee of the Manchester school board last night sent a camera policy to the full board and scheduled a public hearing for Nov. 13, the date of the next school board meeting. School administrators and the Manchester Transit Authority want to outfit nearly every school bus with cameras.

"I don't think there's anything more powerful as a deterrent," said Ward 5 school board member Katherine Labanaris, a member of the Coordination Committee.

But the chairman of the committee, Ward 1 school board member Leslee Stewart, said she wants a sense of how often behavioral problems take place on Manchester buses. Stewart said she also wants to know if cameras have improved rider behavior in other districts where they have been installed.

"It's important to know, when we're making the kind of investment we're talking about, we need to look at -- are we having a problem?" said Stewart, who voted to send the policy to the full board.

The Manchester Transit Authority wants to put a set of three-to-four digital cameras on each bus at a cost of $2,200 per bus. Executive Director David Smith said the MTA would be willing to contribute toward the camera costs.

Six new MTA buses on city routes already use the cameras, given homeland security concerns, he said.

The set involves three to four cameras: one at the front of the bus pointed toward the rear; another camera at the rear pointing toward the front. A third camera would film door of the bus. A final camera would be pointed out the windshield.

The MTA currently has six video cameras that it moves from bus to bus whenever problems arise, he said. But the cameras are only put on a bus after an incident is reported, Smith said.

Last year, a bus full of unruly elementary school students calmed down after a camera was placed on their bus, he said.

The policy was unanimously backed last night by the Coordination Committee. State law requires a district to adopt a policy if it is going to make audio recordings alongside video. Under state law, the school board must adopt the policy, parents need to be made aware of it, a public hearing must be held, and a notice must be posted on the bus that a recording is being made.

The policy said recordings will be erased or taped over after 10 days, unless needed by school officials or a court to address disciplinary problems.

Recordings can only be seen by school administrators, bus company officials and parents or legal guardians of the child.

Print Article | Email a Friend | Submit Feedback

[Dave Ridley]

and we have a winner...

silent demonstrator inbound

just need a little time and a good spot to land, where is the best place to do this?

[CNHT]

and we have a winner...

silent demonstrator inbound

just need a little time and a good spot to land, where is the best place to do this?

I can't see what problem you'd have with this. Since the driver is not allowed to carry a gun, which would be what I'd like to see, at least they can see what is going on.

There is nothing a rider on the bus would be doing that would be considered 'private' so I can't see where it's an intrusion.
And it is very easy for a hijacker to hold a bunch of kids and driver hostage once he has them in that confined situation.


Very bad move to protest this, indeed.

[MaineShark]

and we have a winner...

silent demonstrator inbound

just need a little time and a good spot to land, where is the best place to do this?

I can't see what problem you'd have with this. Since the driver is not allowed to carry a gun, which would be what I'd like to see, at least they can see what is going on.

There is nothing a rider on the bus would be doing that would be considered 'private' so I can't see where it's an intrusion.
And it is very easy for a hijacker to hold a bunch of kids and driver hostage once he has them in that confined situation.


Very bad move to protest this, indeed.

A) The driver can't see the video while driving; it's recorded and viewed afterwards.

B) I sure wouldn't want to ride, or have my child ride on a bus where the driver was staring at a video screen with the output of three cameras on it.  Ye gods, aren't cell phones bad enough?

C) How, precisely, would this deter a hijacker?

Joe

[CNHT]

A) The driver can't see the video while driving; it's recorded and viewed afterwards.

B) I sure wouldn't want to ride, or have my child ride on a bus where the driver was staring at a video screen with the output of three cameras on it.  Ye gods, aren't cell phones bad enough?

C) How, precisely, would this deter a hijacker?

Joe

If you've ever worked with this amount of kids you know they can overcome you. I think it's more of a deterrent to mischevievous/dangerous behavior from them more than anything. We had a situation where the kids rocked the bus until it almost tipped over. The terrified driver called the police. What was she supposed to do?

Bottom line is, why would you put your kid on the gov't bus anyway? Find your own ride to school. Or don't send to public schools if the rest of the clientele is dangerous.

There are so many bigger things that are truly unjust going on, this is minor.

Again, I'm having a tough time thinking of something that a student or I might want to do on a short bus ride of which a camera on the bus would curtail the freedom?
It's a pretty enclosed finite area..and if kids thought someone could ID them later, they may decide to behave. Sad but true situation.

[Rosie the Riveter]

A) The driver can't see the video while driving; it's recorded and viewed afterwards.

B) I sure wouldn't want to ride, or have my child ride on a bus where the driver was staring at a video screen with the output of three cameras on it.  Ye gods, aren't cell phones bad enough?

C) How, precisely, would this deter a hijacker?

Joe

If you've ever worked with this amount of kids you know they can overcome you. I think it's more of a deterrent to mischevievous/dangerous behavior from them more than anything. We had a situation where the kids rocked the bus until it almost tipped over. The terrified driver called the police. What was she supposed to do?

Bottom line is, why would you put your kid on the gov't bus anyway? Find your own ride to school. Or don't send to public schools if the rest of the clientele is dangerous.

There are so many bigger things that are truly unjust going on, this is minor.

Again, I'm having a tough time thinking of something that a student or I might want to do on a short bus ride of which a camera on the bus would curtail the freedom?
It's a pretty enclosed finite area..and if kids thought someone could ID them later, they may decide to behave. Sad but true situation.

Kids need people not cameras.  How about spending the money on teachers and books or a human bus monitor. 

[Rosie the Riveter]

and we have a winner...

silent demonstrator inbound

just need a little time and a good spot to land, where is the best place to do this?

I think City Hall http://www.manchesternh.gov/sitewide/directionsCityHall.html and/or the School District Central Office http://www.mansd.org/. 

Sign ideas "Kids need people not cameras"  or "Teachers & Books not Cameras" 

[CNHT]

Kids need people not cameras.  How about spending the money on teachers and books or a human bus monitor. 

Money on teachers and books? Surely you jest. I wish they spent NO money on this stuff, at least not my money since it's unconstitutional.

If you hire a bus monitor (person) but you don't give them a gun, they are still  going to be outnumbered.
A camera is cheaper too.
The public schools already take too much of our money.

[Fluff and Stuff]

Sign ideas "Kids need people not cameras"  or "Teachers & Books not Cameras" 

These cameras are expensive enough.  They are not needed.  However, I think the government would understand signs like that to mean spend even more money.

A solution that doesn't cost a ton of money would be to do nothing.  Maybe even better, get the parents involved.  On the real bad buses, have parents take turn riding on the bus in the afternoon, 1 parents per afternoon.  Another option is to ban the kid from the school bus for the a week (or month) if he does something wrong.  You could even have parents sign papers and such before their child is allowed to ride the school bus saying they will pay for damage caused by their child.  These are the kind of things I would push if I was on a school board.

Of course, the problem is likely that the kids are not being raised correctly.  Kids should not go crazy on school buses.  Kids should not need someone watching them on a school bus.  Better parenting and all of this goes away.

[Rosie the Riveter]

Kids need people not cameras.  How about spending the money on teachers and books or a human bus monitor. 

Money on teachers and books? Surely you jest. I wish they spent NO money on this stuff, at least not my money since it's unconstitutional.

If you hire a bus monitor (person) but you don't give them a gun, they are still  going to be outnumbered.
A camera is cheaper too.
The public schools already take too much of our money.

Of course I understand and I agree philosophically, but today the way our system exists -- I don't want bureaucrats with cameras whether they be government bureaucrats or school district bureaucrats.

Children that grow up with cameras watching them may get used to it and believe in the long run that it is OK.  It is NOT OK for government to watch us with cameras.

[CNHT]

Kids need people not cameras.  How about spending the money on teachers and books or a human bus monitor. 

Money on teachers and books? Surely you jest. I wish they spent NO money on this stuff, at least not my money since it's unconstitutional.

If you hire a bus monitor (person) but you don't give them a gun, they are still  going to be outnumbered.
A camera is cheaper too.
The public schools already take too much of our money.

Of course I understand and I agree philosophically, but today the way our system exists -- I don't want bureaucrats with cameras whether they be government bureaucrats or school district bureaucrats.

Children that grow up with cameras watching them may get used to it and believe in the long run that it is OK.  It is NOT OK for government to watch us with cameras.

Well I agree with that too philosophically, but if someone stabbed your kid, wouldn't you want to know who did it? I mean it's ONLY on the bus in a confined place.
It's not like the ones we arlready have at the intersections of streets....

[Rosie the Riveter]

Sign ideas "Kids need people not cameras"  or "Teachers & Books not Cameras" 

These cameras are expensive enough.  They are not needed.  However, I think the government would understand signs like that to mean spend even more money.

A solution that doesn't cost a ton of money would be to do nothing.  Maybe even better, get the parents involved.  On the real bad buses, have parents take turn riding on the bus in the afternoon, 1 parents per afternoon.  Another option is to ban the kid from the school bus for the a week (or month) if he does something wrong.  You could even have parents sign papers and such before their child is allowed to ride the school bus saying they will pay for damage caused by their child.  These are the kind of things I would push if I was on a school board.

Of course, the problem is likely that the kids are not being raised correctly.  Kids should not go crazy on school buses.  Kids should not need someone watching them on a school bus.  Better parenting and all of this goes away.

Alright so... "Parents not Cameras"

[MaineShark]

If you've ever worked with this amount of kids you know they can overcome you.

I co-taught shop in the local middle school, while I was in high school.  Kids on a bus are nothing.  A bunch of immature, invincible 7th graders with all manner of power tools, spread out over a room the size of a small gymnasium, with only two people supervising... that's fun.

Bottom line is, why would you put your kid on the gov't bus anyway? Find your own ride to school. Or don't send to public schools if the rest of the clientele is dangerous.

We're homeschooling.  Not everyone has that option.  And those that do choose to send their children to public schools (which they did, after all, pay for) shouldn't have to get a note saying, "sorry, your child is dead because the bus driver was looking at a video screen instead of the road and ran a red light."

There are so many bigger things that are truly unjust going on, this is minor.

Again, I'm having a tough time thinking of something that a student or I might want to do on a short bus ride of which a camera on the bus would curtail the freedom?
It's a pretty enclosed finite area..and if kids thought someone could ID them later, they may decide to behave. Sad but true situation.

Yeah, like when they added a one-time transfer tax for machineguns.  That was minor.  I mean, so many other injustices were going on at the time.

And look where we are today.

This is not about safety.  This is about training children from an early age to expect and accept electronic surveilance.

If you want the bus monitored, you can darn well volunteer to ride along and monitor it, yourself.

Joe

[error]

Alright so... "Parents not Cameras"

You beat me to it! Karma to you... Kids absolutely need parents, not the state.

[FTL_Ian]

Well I agree with that too philosophically, but if someone stabbed your kid, wouldn't you want to know who did it?

  Have there been any stabbings on a school bus in NH?  Please.

I mean it's ONLY on the bus in a confined place.

A bus full of witnesses!