School tightens headphone policy

Students+are+now+prohibited+from+having+headphones+within+a+three-foot+radius+of+their+body.+
Back to Article
Back to Article

School tightens headphone policy

Students are now prohibited from having headphones within a three-foot radius of their body.

Students are now prohibited from having headphones within a three-foot radius of their body.

Public Domain

Students are now prohibited from having headphones within a three-foot radius of their body.

Public Domain

Public Domain

Students are now prohibited from having headphones within a three-foot radius of their body.

Oliver Fox, Staff Writer

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






Following heated controversy about the high school’s long-debated headphone policy, the school has decided to completely overhaul the previous protocol in favor of a new and improved one.

The school decided on the change last week, bypassing legislature in order to expedite the process of “an extremely important change,” according to a source familiar with the bureaucratic nightmare that is the student legislature.

Rather than allowing students to wear headphones around their necks while walking around the school, this new policy does not permit students to have headphones within a three-foot radius of their body. The school was concerned that with the continued development of more advanced Bluetooth technology, there would soon be a way to beam music directly into the brain, making this preventative measure a necessary step.

“We can’t predict what’s coming in terms of technology, so there’s really nothing we can do but ban headphones altogether,” Headmaster Anthony Meyer said. “The next step, if this problem somehow continues, is the systematic burning of all music related devices and paraphernalia.”

Another provision of the new rule is the addition of “headphone checkpoints” throughout the hallways. These airport security-style terminals will be placed at 100-yard intervals throughout the three main floors of the high school and the basement, as well as at the entrance to each classroom.

Likely the most controversial part of this provision is that these terminals will be staffed by independent mercenaries, contracted by the school to enforce the policy “by any means necessary.”

“Although we had to lay off a few teachers and counselors to make room in the budget, this investment will make up the difference tenfold by eliminating distracting and destructive music from the high-school environment,” Meyer said. “Students should expect this melodic scourge on their productivity to be gone within the month.”

The new protocol also extends the enforcement of the rule from during school hours to 24 hours a day, seven days a week, including federal holidays and summer break. At night, armed watch crews equipped with handheld spotlights will patrol every inch of school grounds, including Cypress Field, Schluntz Gymnasium, the Unified Arts Building, and the sewers below Greenough Street. Headphone-detecting attack dogs will also be stationed periodically. These dogs have been specially trained to detect only headphones, bypassing all narcotics and other banned paraphernalia to increase the cost-effectiveness of the dogs.

Several minor changes, detailed in articles three through five of the official text, shift the penal code from the original policy, which, according to the school’s administration, failed to adequately discourage headphone related infractions.  As such, violators of the policy will now be prosecuted to “the fullest extent of the law” for infringing upon any part of the rule. The most serious offense, openly wearing headphones while anywhere in the school, will be punishable by “no less than 25 years and no more than 120 years in a maximum security prison”, and by a fine “no less than $40,000 and no more than $3.2 million.”

Proponents of the new rule claim that it is the only way to adequately combat the affliction that is “the greatest threat to our democracy to date,” according to a senior administration official.

Still, opposition to the bill exists, mainly on the grounds that the adjustments will be too abrupt a change from the previously lenient policies. However, others feel the adjustments fall short of a legitimately impactful change, saying that the removal of the death penalty will undercut the enforcement of the bill.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email