9 ms·

In one of the largest high schools in Texas, we weren't allowed to leave campus, we couldn't even take our lunch out of the double doors and eat our sandwich ou

In one of the largest high schools in Texas, we weren't allowed to leave campus, we couldn't even take our lunch out of the double doors and eat our sandwich outside. It's something I absolutely despise about our contemporary culture. I live in Latin America now and envy the kids for getting 45 minutes free at lunch time to hang out outside, socialize, buy from the street vendors that will gather at that time, maybe run a quick errand. My parents point out that they had a high school experience in the US more like the Latin American one. Something is changing about the US, and it's rotten. There's a book that presents a good overview of some of these changes: "The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure" (by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt).

pavel_lishin 6y ago
Our principal refused to let students leave campus, as a student had gotten in a car wreck over lunch and died at a previous school. So, there's some logic there. They are nominally responsible for you during school hours.
- kristopolous 6y ago
  I call this "outlier driven policy"; one single instance of some thing happening some where at some time within the past 100 years means that everyone for perpetuity has to follow some new rule because the lim(x -> 0) risk is simply too much. For instance, there was one person, 2 decades ago, flying out of france, who hid a bomb in his shoes so today we are all still taking off our shoes, all of us, each time, on every flight. Splendid. It's a completely reactionary narrative driven policy that really illustrates the probabilistic illiteracy, cost/benefit illiteracy, lack of critical thinking ... it's like we've taken the structure of folksy tales like "one child did that and they poked their eye out" and are all like "ok, let's make official policy around this" This is how all the fun park equipment has been dismantled and replaced with things no child past the age of 4 or so would ever find appealing because the existence of a non-zero risk, regardless of how small that is, are all treated equivalently with their volumes cranked to 11.
  - jonathankoren 6y ago
    > For instance, there was one person, 2 decades ago, flying out of france, who hid a bomb in his shoes so today we are all still taking off our shoes, all of us, each time, on every flight. Splendid. I'm still disappointed Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's attempted bombing didn't lead to a similar policy. > it's like we've taken the structure of folksy tales like "one child did that and they poked their eye out" and are all like "ok, let's make official policy around this" Growing up, my mom was repeatedly told not to play with a button on a string because, "some kid put his eye out". Being a kid my mom always thought that was just a stupid story. She played withing a button on a string, and didn't know anyone that happened to. Decades later, as an adult she was telling the story about this weird and admonition to a distant cousin (2nd?) of hers, and her cousin got real quiet, and simply stated, "That was my brother," and then told the story about how it happened, and that he did lose sight in one of his eyes he struck it with a button tied to a string.
  - ip26 6y ago
    I mean, speaking of the shoes, yes it was one time. But once it was shown to work, there would probably have been many copycats without a countermeasure.
    - stephen_g 6y ago
      Few other countries make people take off their shoes through airport security... we haven’t had any copycat attacks.
      - dannyw 6y ago
        The US does a lot of very, very bad things _around the world_. Possibly more than any other country, depending on your viewpoints.
    - kristopolous 6y ago
      In the EU they use none of that security theater and it hasn't happened. You're doing the thing I just talked about
  - 6y ago
- grecy 6y ago
  > Our principal refused to let students leave campus, as a student had gotten in a car wreck over lunch and died at a previous school. So, there's some logic there By that logic, we should never let students leave at all, because certainly some have been killed in car wrecks on the way home. There is NO logic in preventing people doing that which they will do later anyway.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    No -- common law ascribes different responsibilities to a school during the school day, in comparison to before arriving or after leaving for the day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis The logic isn't "kids might die in a crash", it is that "schools are responsible for what happens to kids during the school day". The school administration isn't trying to be altruistic, they're trying to avoid liability for a death.
    - grecy 6y ago
      ah, America. Right.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        > derived from English common law
- in_cahoots 6y ago
  That seems reasonable to me. Lunch breaks are typically ~20 minutes long in high school. It’s easy to think, “I can go pick up food 10 minutes away” without considering the line to exit the parking lot, walking to the car, etc. A bunch of teenagers speeding to beat the bell is a terrible idea, and can definitely lead to tickets or deaths.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    I have always heard of lunch being about an hour long…
nkrisc 6y ago
Anecdotally, I've heard of that more at suburban schools where you pretty much have to access and leave the campus via car. At my high school in Chicago (2003-2007, ~2,000 students) we were free to leave the campus at any time and often spent lunch at a nearby hot dog stand or sitting in the park and hanging out. The only restriction was that you had to re-enter through specific entries so they could check school IDs. I think it's because the school is in the middle of the city and very pedestrian friendly. One kid I knew even lived across the street from the school and would go home to make himself some lunch. I know from friends and family that suburban high schools in the Chicagoland area were more strict with their off-campus policies as there wasn't any pedestrian access to the schools. I just think suburban schools don't want traffic jams in the parking lot during every lunch period.
- djur 6y ago
  Yes, same here at a high school in a medium-sized city at around the same time. Although there wasn't any restriction on where you could return, either, but I think that's more of a smaller vs. bigger city thing. I do remember that some kids got their privilege to leave campus rescinded because they got caught extremely, obviously high after going to do bong rips at someone's house near the school. In elementary and middle school, we weren't technically supposed to leave the schoolyard but the monitoring was lax enough that older kids frequently got away with it.
- selectodude 6y ago
  you a whitney younger?
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  I meant to say "we weren't allowed to leave the building" rather than "campus". Though I don't think a parking lot traffic jam is a sufficient reason either. There are already repercussions for arriving to school late which is what prevents the morning traffic jam from being a problem. Someone shouldn't be allowed to leave at all just because they would be late if they don't come back in time to park. I don't even understand how that could sound convincing to you. That's just the type of thinking that gives us zero tolerance policies.
- 6y ago
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

pavel_lishin 6y ago

Our principal refused to let students leave campus, as a student had gotten in a car wreck over lunch and died at a previous school. So, there's some logic there. They are nominally responsible for you during school hours.

kristopolous 6y ago
I call this "outlier driven policy"; one single instance of some thing happening some where at some time within the past 100 years means that everyone for perpetuity has to follow some new rule because the lim(x -> 0) risk is simply too much. For instance, there was one person, 2 decades ago, flying out of france, who hid a bomb in his shoes so today we are all still taking off our shoes, all of us, each time, on every flight. Splendid. It's a completely reactionary narrative driven policy that really illustrates the probabilistic illiteracy, cost/benefit illiteracy, lack of critical thinking ... it's like we've taken the structure of folksy tales like "one child did that and they poked their eye out" and are all like "ok, let's make official policy around this" This is how all the fun park equipment has been dismantled and replaced with things no child past the age of 4 or so would ever find appealing because the existence of a non-zero risk, regardless of how small that is, are all treated equivalently with their volumes cranked to 11.
- jonathankoren 6y ago
  > For instance, there was one person, 2 decades ago, flying out of france, who hid a bomb in his shoes so today we are all still taking off our shoes, all of us, each time, on every flight. Splendid. I'm still disappointed Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's attempted bombing didn't lead to a similar policy. > it's like we've taken the structure of folksy tales like "one child did that and they poked their eye out" and are all like "ok, let's make official policy around this" Growing up, my mom was repeatedly told not to play with a button on a string because, "some kid put his eye out". Being a kid my mom always thought that was just a stupid story. She played withing a button on a string, and didn't know anyone that happened to. Decades later, as an adult she was telling the story about this weird and admonition to a distant cousin (2nd?) of hers, and her cousin got real quiet, and simply stated, "That was my brother," and then told the story about how it happened, and that he did lose sight in one of his eyes he struck it with a button tied to a string.
- ip26 6y ago
  I mean, speaking of the shoes, yes it was one time. But once it was shown to work, there would probably have been many copycats without a countermeasure.
  - stephen_g 6y ago
    Few other countries make people take off their shoes through airport security... we haven’t had any copycat attacks.
    - dannyw 6y ago
      The US does a lot of very, very bad things _around the world_. Possibly more than any other country, depending on your viewpoints.
  - kristopolous 6y ago
    In the EU they use none of that security theater and it hasn't happened. You're doing the thing I just talked about
- 6y ago
grecy 6y ago
> Our principal refused to let students leave campus, as a student had gotten in a car wreck over lunch and died at a previous school. So, there's some logic there By that logic, we should never let students leave at all, because certainly some have been killed in car wrecks on the way home. There is NO logic in preventing people doing that which they will do later anyway.
- kube-system 6y ago
  No -- common law ascribes different responsibilities to a school during the school day, in comparison to before arriving or after leaving for the day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis The logic isn't "kids might die in a crash", it is that "schools are responsible for what happens to kids during the school day". The school administration isn't trying to be altruistic, they're trying to avoid liability for a death.
  - grecy 6y ago
    ah, America. Right.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      > derived from English common law
in_cahoots 6y ago
That seems reasonable to me. Lunch breaks are typically ~20 minutes long in high school. It’s easy to think, “I can go pick up food 10 minutes away” without considering the line to exit the parking lot, walking to the car, etc. A bunch of teenagers speeding to beat the bell is a terrible idea, and can definitely lead to tickets or deaths.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  I have always heard of lunch being about an hour long…

nkrisc 6y ago

Anecdotally, I've heard of that more at suburban schools where you pretty much have to access and leave the campus via car. At my high school in Chicago (2003-2007, ~2,000 students) we were free to leave the campus at any time and often spent lunch at a nearby hot dog stand or sitting in the park and hanging out. The only restriction was that you had to re-enter through specific entries so they could check school IDs. I think it's because the school is in the middle of the city and very pedestrian friendly. One kid I knew even lived across the street from the school and would go home to make himself some lunch. I know from friends and family that suburban high schools in the Chicagoland area were more strict with their off-campus policies as there wasn't any pedestrian access to the schools. I just think suburban schools don't want traffic jams in the parking lot during every lunch period.

djur 6y ago
Yes, same here at a high school in a medium-sized city at around the same time. Although there wasn't any restriction on where you could return, either, but I think that's more of a smaller vs. bigger city thing. I do remember that some kids got their privilege to leave campus rescinded because they got caught extremely, obviously high after going to do bong rips at someone's house near the school. In elementary and middle school, we weren't technically supposed to leave the schoolyard but the monitoring was lax enough that older kids frequently got away with it.
selectodude 6y ago
you a whitney younger?
hombre_fatal 6y ago
I meant to say "we weren't allowed to leave the building" rather than "campus". Though I don't think a parking lot traffic jam is a sufficient reason either. There are already repercussions for arriving to school late which is what prevents the morning traffic jam from being a problem. Someone shouldn't be allowed to leave at all just because they would be late if they don't come back in time to park. I don't even understand how that could sound convincing to you. That's just the type of thinking that gives us zero tolerance policies.
6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]