[mbrumlow]

If they asked them not to use cell phones and they did not follow the rules, what will happen when they are banned?

Simply put. They had rules in place but failed to enforce them.

Why will banning them make the enforcement problem solved?

[JumpCrisscross]

> Why will banning them make the enforcement problem solved?

Whether the phone was being used is debatable. Whether it exists is not. Banning makes communication and enforcement easier.

[mbrumlow]

We have videos of kids attacking teachers for taking away devices. These things, whether we like it are not, are ingrained in society. Taking a phone away can be akin to saying you are going to cut a part of my brain out.

Kids fe still going to bring them, and kids are going to still feel as it’s their right to have them. On top of that only a few people in the sv bubble would agree with taking phones away.

[asadotzler]

The rich SV bubble is actually the most restrictive because they build the dangr and understand it. The C-suite at FAANG and friends don't let their kids have nearly as much time on screens as Alabama trailer park families do.

[JumpCrisscross]

> We have videos of kids attacking teachers for taking away devices

I’ve seen kids screaming for iPads on flights, too. I don’t have high expectations for them in life.

Also, when did we normalise violent kids? If a kid attacks a teacher for any reason, they should be automatically suspended at a minimum.

> only a few people in the sv bubble would agree with taking phones away

I live in a rich town in the Rockies. Most parents don’t let their kids take phones to school. (None of the private ones permit them.)

There is an emerging class divide on phones is schools. When you meet them, you can clearly tell which kids need their phones to function and which do not. (Eye contact during conversation.)