Monday, January 28, 2013
© Copyright 2013
Gwinnett Daily Post
BUFORD -- The board of education for Buford City Schools voted Monday to put surveillance cameras in the district's elementary school -- the only facility in the district that didn't have them.
Following the vote, Principal Melanie Reed said she was happy for the measure, which in light of the mass shooting Dec. 14 in Newton, Conn., in which 26 students and faculty members were killed, "provide(s) some relief and peace of mind for parents and community members."
During its regular board of education meeting Monday night, Superintendent Geye Hamby told the group of elected officials that the $14,900 surveillance system "doesn't prevent bad things from happening, but it makes parents and the community feel better, and in the event we ever had a situation that needs review, we can go back and run the tapes."
Added Hamby: "It's better for everyone."
Buford Elementary School has 621 students enrolled, according to a report by Reed on Monday night.
More like this story
- Buford school officials look at new year ( August 30, 2011 )
- Buford considers lacrosse, gymnastics for 2012-13 ( February 27, 2012 )
- Buford Board of Education approves 41/2 furlough days ( December 14, 2009 )
- Back to books for city of Buford students ( August 3, 2012 )
- Buford City Schools has successful start ( August 5, 2011 )
Comments
Award88 3 months, 3 weeks ago
"In light of the shooting in Newton, Conn"? Oh so now we can have a video taped historical record if a shooting ever happened. I totally understand putting surveillance cameras into the school, but don't use the Newton shooting as your excuse when cameras clearly would not have prevented the tragedy.
geestreamgeefive 3 months, 3 weeks ago
A not so publicized fact about Sandy Hook is that a new security system was installed a few days before the shooting, including video cameras. Much of the event was captured on video. Police don't prevent murders, they write reports about an event. It is up to us to protect ourselves......as has been said, a bad guy with a gun can only be stopped by a good guy with a gun. All the laws in the world WILL NOT do anything to prevent a nut or criminal from doing what they are going to do. Get a gun and get trained.
GeorgiaResident 3 months, 3 weeks ago
$15,000 for a surveillance system that "doesn't prevent bad things from happening, but it makes parents and the community feel better. " It won't do anything to help, but it sure makes people FEEL better! Better appropriate some funds for blankies and teddy bears to pass out in case there is a shooting. It won't prevent any children from being killed, but hey, it will sure make them feel better!
thurisaz 3 months, 3 weeks ago
I bet if some kid gets snatched from school the parents would be glad there's a surveillance system. I can think of quite a few reasons why a surveillance system in the school is a good thing, and "feeling better" isn't one of them.
R 3 months, 3 weeks ago
Since I don't know where they are placed internally, they could be a good tool for everyday asset protection as well as student movements.
Award88 3 months, 3 weeks ago
While both you and thurisaz have valid points, that was not the reason given by the school administrator. That is the argument most of us are making is to at least be honest with the reason for installation. Saying you are installing the cameras in the wake of Sandy Hook is absurd because it wouldn't have stopped the tragedy from happening.
thurisaz 3 months, 3 weeks ago
I won't disagree with you there, but depending on the system installed it might help should something similar occur. The more the first responders know the better, and with a surveillance system you can gain valuable information quickly: how many people there are, what they're holding, exactly where in the building they are...things like that could be critical when children's lives are on the line, so while it wouldn't prevent something like that from occuring, it might help resolve a situation more quickly, especially if the police themselves were somehow able to access the surveillance system. I'm not saying it's some shield of comfort that will solve anything, but even in that specific situation it isn't worthless.
R 3 months, 2 weeks ago
@Award That point I will concede, just like Federal Sandy aid of 50 Billion when the actual damages range in the 30 - 35 Billion range...
Just tell us the truth, it might even drop the legal / communications staff budget expenses
NewsReader 3 months, 3 weeks ago
When would be a good time to install the cameras? My thought is, and this has nothing to do with Sandy Hook and I certainly agree it wouldn't have done a thing to prevent the tragedy from happening, that cameras tell a story and there are always three sides to every story; your story, my story, and the real story. Your story is what you perceived happened, my story is what I perceived happened, and the real story is what actually happened. Now with cameras, the perception goes out the window as you are left with what actually happened and there is no deniability by anyone who can view the video. $15K is inconsequential from an asset and personal protection standpoint in my view. And if perpetrators know there are cameras, they are likely to seek their evil activities elsewhere besides your facility. Just MHO!
FordGalaxy 3 months, 3 weeks ago
The problem with most of these school shooters is that they are suicidal to begin with, so any repercussion from their action is inconsequential to them. They'll go in and shoot up a school, knowing that they won't be taken into custody, as they'll kill themselves as well as any victims they get.
I'm all for security, but at the same time, I'm strongly opposed to security at the expense of freedom. Right now it's cameras in schools, but what's next? Parks? Churches? Malls? Rural streets? Cars? Where does it end? How much freedom will we surrender in order to feel secure?
To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin: those who would sacrifice essential liberty to purchase a little temporary security deserve neither liberty no security.
thurisaz 3 months, 2 weeks ago
Other than in the restrooms, I wouldn't have any expectation of privacy in a public school, nor should I. Cameras in that setting do not remove something that was there to begin with.
MichelleCouch 3 months, 2 weeks ago
The article states that this school is "the only facility in the district that didn't have them."
A better public relations spin could have been "in light of the recent tragedies impacting our schools, all schools in the district are now fully standardized with surveillance systems."
As far as where will cameras be next: there are already everywhere my friend. Parks, malls, traffic lights. Big brother is watching and tracking more than any of us probably realize or wish to admit!
R 3 months, 2 weeks ago
SPIN - it all starts right here...
Delicate, Normal and finally “Take - off” from reality.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID