DOES YOUR SCHOOL DRUG TEST ?

[Buccaneer]

Sinton started this year. First day of football practice they tested ALL students who participated in an extracurricular activity(FFA,Band,all sports etc.) They tested for alcohol,marijuana,nicotine and cocaine.

[Bell_06]

Our school is still giving out beer mugs and wine glasses as prom night tokens.. heck no we don't drug test and won't until the laws demand it. We don't even post at our fields that there is to be no drinking, drugs, firearms etc

[exbccards76'smom]

Bridge City does random drug testing. Students must agree to it to even be able to drive a car to school. I think it is a good thing.

[jason]

forney does random tests of everybody, not just athletes...

[3afan2K3]

Forney test in Middle School

[20dawgz05]

i dont think Burnet does.....well at least ive never heard of 'em doin it..but that doesent mean much!!

[lobo12]

we have random drug tests of anyone in extra curricular activities. they are tested if there is reasonable suspicion or a parent can request one

[X21AAAPlayer]

exbccards76'smom:
Bridge City does random drug testing. Students must agree to it to even be able to drive a car to school. I think it is a good thing.I always thought it was funny how they claimed it to be random. The same "random" people are chosen to get tested about 4 or 5 times.

[kaorder1999]

X21AAAPlayer:

exbccards76'smom:
Bridge City does random drug testing. Students must agree to it to even be able to drive a car to school. I think it is a good thing.I always thought it was funny how they claimed it to be random. The same "random" people are chosen to get tested about 4 or 5 times.doesnt the word "random" refer to the "random time" of tests...leke anybody can tested ar "random" times...

[X21AAAPlayer]

kaorder1999:

X21AAAPlayer:

exbccards76'smom:
Bridge City does random drug testing. Students must agree to it to even be able to drive a car to school. I think it is a good thing.I always thought it was funny how they claimed it to be random. The same "random" people are chosen to get tested about 4 or 5 times.doesnt the word "random" refer to the "random time" of tests...leke anybody can tested ar "random" times...Lol Im not quite sure. I was just poking fun at the fact the school seemed to pick on the same people time in and time out. Well from what I saw anyway. Not sure if they actually caught anybody.

[Keith7]

Gainesville has drug dogs on gaurd everyday.. but no testing

[44INAROW]

Bell_06:
Our school is still giving out beer mugs and wine glasses as prom night tokens.. heck no we don't drug test and won't until the laws demand it. We don't even post at our fields that there is to be no drinking, drugs, firearms etchhhmm then I bet if an occasion arose, the AD or HC or any coach for that matter could drink during half-time @ a football game on school property without any consequences.

[kaorder1999]

hmmmmmmmmm

[jason]

we got wine glass lookin things at our prom...

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Our school doesn't drug test, but they have talked about it. I wouldn't really mind seeing drug test either, because it will separate the people who really care about football enough to not abuse their bodies and the people who don't care at all and do drugs and drink....just a thought though.

[Bell_06]

44INAROW:

Bell_06:
Our school is still giving out beer mugs and wine glasses as prom night tokens.. heck no we don't drug test and won't until the laws demand it. We don't even post at our fields that there is to be no drinking, drugs, firearms etchhhmm then I bet if an occasion arose, the AD or HC or any coach for that matter could drink during half-time @ a football game on school property without any consequences.BINGO

[Bell_06]

Being serious - Whether or not signs are posted it is still against the law to consume alcohol, drugs etc. Drug testing would be a great idea, if parents and students thought it was an invasion of their privacy, then like Bridge City, it can be a stipulation of parking a car in the students lot. Now the question would come up about adhering to any punishments set forth.. would the suspension/expulsion from a sport began after the "BIG" game? I'm curious as to how other schools have handled the discipline. Also shouldn't this random testing apply to the entire teaching staff?

[fb_gurl]

Caldwell doesn't drug test we just have random searches by an officer and a drug dog. Now they do check cars and people are called out if the dog goes off on any of them. I think that drug testing might not be a bad idea in some cases though.

[cubs]

<small>[ December 21, 2003, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: cubs ]</small>

[Pedestrian]

Drug testing should not be allowed in highschool. Surely alcohol should not be tested in highschool either. Searching a students body for anything should be illegal. Pretty soon they will have a sex test and any student having sex will be expelled. Why didn't they test all our parents back in the 60s and 70s when everybody smoked weed?

Ok heres my analogy to the drug testing situation. Everyone drives a car. Everyone should follow all road signs and laws. Correct? Say for instance you drive 80mph everywhere and run every stop sign and don't get caught. But the government comes up with an idea of a speed test or something like that and everyone who drives car will be randomly tested to see if they have sped or ran any redlights in the past. So everyone who tests positive one the Speed test will have their drivers lisense revolked.

This sounds crazy compared to a student who drives to school and is tested to see if they have done any drugs or alcohol. No one at the school has any business with what goes on during any students personal time.

[cant stop me]

yeah i agree with you....

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

You have the wrong idea Pedestrian. I think that it is a great idea to do drug testing because it separates the people who want to play and take care of themselves from the bad influences who don't. If you really want to be in top condition to play football or any other sport, you don't go out and smoke weed or drink and have a long weekend. It can also be a good thing because if the school has any kind of coaches, they will get that participant help. Your ideas about speeding and running stop signs are totally irrelevant to this topic. Drug tests should be done at school for students who participate in exta-curricular activites.

[Pedestrian]

Playing football is as hard on your body as anything. I have spent more nights with my back...knee..ankle...neck hurting from playing football. If you are looking to take care of your body...dont play football. How is my speeding analody irrelevant?

Everyone who heres "drug testing" looks at it from a drugs are bad point of view, no one looks at it from a Constitutional 4th amendment illegal search and seizure point of view. The school drug testing treats students as if they are guilty before proven innocent, instead of the innocent until proven guilty.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

The speeding analogy is irrelevant because they cannot tell in any way that you sped in the past. Yes, I do agree that they cannot do anything to you such as throwing you in jail, but they have every right not to let a player participate who they know for a fact does drugs. I think that having the bad influences out of the locker room would be great for a football team or any team because it allows them to come together in a stronger way and depend on each other more. That is the real reason why I think that drug tests should be administered in schools. I'm tired of having teammates who don't care about anybody but themselves and do their own thing. I would much rather have a drug free player on my team who is dedicated to the cause because they are more dependable. You don't have to worry about them getting caught with the possession of drugs or alcohol and losing them from your team. It all comes down to want to, and if a person is not willing to not do drugs period or to stop, then they should not be allowed to play sports. If a player doesn't do drugs, then what are they afraid of if the coach pulls them into the office one day for a random drug test? The only real way to pass one is to simply not do the drugs, and drug tests are an incentive for players not to do them. If they really loved the sport and wanted to win and continue playing, they would not do drugs just so they could pass the test. Just a thought though.

[Pedestrian]

BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END:
The speeding analogy is irrelevant because they cannot tell in any way that you sped in the past. Yes, I do agree that they cannot do anything to you such as throwing you in jail, but they have every right not to let a player participate who they know for a fact does drugs. I think that having the bad influences out of the locker room would be great for a football team or any team because it allows them to come together in a stronger way and depend on each other more. That is the real reason why I think that drug tests should be administered in schools. I'm tired of having teammates who don't care about anybody but themselves and do their own thing. I would much rather have a drug free player on my team who is dedicated to the cause because they are more dependable. You don't have to worry about them getting caught with the possession of drugs or alcohol and losing them from your team. It all comes down to want to, and if a person is not willing to not do drugs period or to stop, then they should not be allowed to play sports. If a player doesn't do drugs, then what are they afraid of if the coach pulls them into the office one day for a random drug test? The only real way to pass one is to simply not do the drugs, and drug tests are an incentive for players not to do them. If they really loved the sport and wanted to win and continue playing, they would not do drugs just so they could pass the test. Just a thought though.With the technology today with new vehicles with computers and with cameras above stoplights, they can tell if you committ a crime in a vehicle or it is possible.

First of all, if a player is worried about nothing but themselves, on drugs or not, they will be delt with by the rest of the team. You are correct, no one likes that kind of influence in the locker room. And YES if the school has PROBABLE CAUSE that a player is using drugs or alcohol before a game and it is affecting the team then something should be done about the situation. The key word is PROBABLE CAUSE. Without PROBABLE CAUSE it is illegal to proform any kind of search wether it be a drug bust, car search, house search, or drug test. But if you have one bad apple in the whole bunch then the whole team shouldn't have to be tested like criminals. If the coaches have PROBABLE CAUSE for one player, then there is no reason for the whole team to be tested. PROBABLE CAUSE for one person doing drugs does not justify randomly testing every athlete or person who drives. Look at it from the Constitutional point of view.

[Chief Woodman]

Pedestrian:
Playing football is as hard on your body as anything. I have spent more nights with my back...knee..ankle...neck hurting from playing football. If you are looking to take care of your body...dont play football. How is my speeding analody irrelevant?

Everyone who heres "drug testing" looks at it from a drugs are bad point of view, no one looks at it from a Constitutional 4th amendment illegal search and seizure point of view. The school drug testing treats students as if they are guilty before proven innocent, instead of the innocent until proven guilty.Some people have looked at the 4th amendment and ruled that these "Searches" do not violate that standard. The people who made this decision are called the supreme court of the United States. Thus, it is not illegal search and seizure.

[Pedestrian]

Chief Woodman:

Pedestrian:
Playing football is as hard on your body as anything. I have spent more nights with my back...knee..ankle...neck hurting from playing football. If you are looking to take care of your body...dont play football. How is my speeding analody irrelevant?

Everyone who heres "drug testing" looks at it from a drugs are bad point of view, no one looks at it from a Constitutional 4th amendment illegal search and seizure point of view. The school drug testing treats students as if they are guilty before proven innocent, instead of the innocent until proven guilty.Some people have looked at the 4th amendment and ruled that these "Searches" do not violate that standard. The people who made this decision are called the supreme court of the United States. Thus, it is not illegal search and seizure.The supreme court interprets the law by determining if the situations calls for needed searches. The people who you said made the decision(s), the supreme court are not the supreme law of the land. The supreme law of the land is the Constitution. Different kinds of searches have different kinds of outcomes, for instance you would be more likely to search an Arab at an airport than a teenager for drugs in the hallway.

[Owen B]

I agree with Pedestrian, although not necessarily with all his reasoning.

In 1995, the Supreme Court upheld an Oregon school district's policy regarding drug testing of athletes. In 2002, it upheld an Oklahoma school district's policy regarding drug testing of student's participating in extracurricular activities. There are plenty of legal scholars who disagree with both of those decisions, especially the second. I very much agree with the dissenting opinions in both cases.

There has been no Supreme Court decision upholding any policy of testing all students or testing students as a condition for parking permits. I think such policies would fail a legal challenge. At least, I would hope so.

I'm very much opposed to drug use, but I'm a strong proponent of important basic rights. I have grave concerns about so many people being willing to give up those rights, whether it be to combat drug use or to feel more secure from threats of terrorism. Some recent laws, and some recent court rulings, are very troubling.

I suppose I should answer the original question. Commerce doesn't drug-test.

<small>[ December 24, 2003, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: Owen B ]</small>

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

Yes, Pedestrian, I do agree that they should have a reason to test, but how is one bad apple going to spoil the whole bunch if they have to test everybody on the team in order to find it. It isn't that the test is painful, and if you don't do drugs, then you really have nothing to hide. That's why I really see that drug testing should be allowed in schools.

[Bell_06]

Simple fact... extracurricular activities are a privilege. In the Code of Conduct manuel it does state that drug and alcohol use is strictly prohibited, UIL rules state the same. A school does have the right to random drug test with prior notice. If a student does not want to participate then he/she can choose not to be involved in the activities that are being held to these standards. I would still like to see the faculty subjected to testing also. But before any of this could do anything positive towards correcting existing problems and prevent future ones a school district would have to have in place a Superintendent and school board that has the gonads to deal with the outcome.

[Pedestrian]

"If you give a mouse a cookie, he is going to want some milk.." That is what we are doing here. The government, state, school board, says we need drug testing. People today are giving their rights up to easy just so they can feel safe or whatever. If we let the schools search for drugs or alcohol, then pretty soon they are going to be testing kids to see if they are sexually active. The government is snipping away at our rights. And people are giving them up like they don't care or don't realize what they are doing. I'm telling you, pretty soon they are going to DNA test every student and know everything they eat, smell, or touch. It will get worse if we give up these rights.

[Bell_06]

Pedestrian:
"If you give a mouse a cookie, he is going to want some milk.." That is what we are doing here. The government, state, school board, says we need drug testing. People today are giving their rights up to easy just so they can feel safe or whatever. If we let the schools search for drugs or alcohol, then pretty soon they are going to be testing kids to see if they are sexually active. The government is snipping away at our rights. And people are giving them up like they don't care or don't realize what they are doing. I'm telling you, pretty soon they are going to DNA test every student and know everything they eat, smell, or touch. It will get worse if we give up these rights.You know I feel that some of my rights are being taken away. Last year I went to Denver thought it would be educational to see the Denver Mint, no that didn't happen, closed due to security concerns. My husband is drug tested on a regular basis, why? Because he works with large quanities of explosives, and for security purposes he is checked for drugs and gunpowders. I guess I could point my finger at Uncle Sam and say that our rights are being invaded, but I like to think that these precautions are in place to assure that 'pedestrain's' such as yourself are living in a safer world. Applied to our students at school... If drug testing prevents some from participating in events it may at the same time safeguard others. Schools are not drug testing/locker searching and everything else they have been forced to do, out of boredom it is simply to protect those who are doing it right.

[BHKrystal06]

Barbers Hill drug tests all students in extracurricular activities and then "randomly" throughout the rest of the year.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

It's high school sports. I see in no way are we giving up our rights by a simple drug test. You can interpret it as they are slowly snipping away our rights, but it has already began. I'm sure that somebody will stand up and draw the line before it comes to what you think Pedestrian, or at least I hope so. Even so, there is going to be nothing that will stop them. Drug testing is a minor thing compared to the things that have already been brought into play, and I think that I could live having drug tests in football, but that comes from a player's perspective, and others may not understand.

[BHSlover]

drug testing is not done at Burnet schools and i think it should. No one has anything to worry about unless they themselves have drugs, alchol, etc..their systems.

[Buccaneer]

Pedestrian:
"If you give a mouse a cookie, he is going to want some milk.." That is what we are doing here. The government, state, school board, says we need drug testing. People today are giving their rights up to easy just so they can feel safe or whatever. If we let the schools search for drugs or alcohol, then pretty soon they are going to be testing kids to see if they are sexually active. The government is snipping away at our rights. And people are giving them up like they don't care or don't realize what they are doing. I'm telling you, pretty soon they are going to DNA test every student and know everything they eat, smell, or touch. It will get worse if we give up these rights.What are you a Libertarian or do you think Slick Wille was the greatest President we ever had ? All seriousness aside as a parent I was not in favor of drug testing but I knew my son had nothing to worry about and if he DID I should know about it! They are really doing parents a service. I'm not sure about the number tested in Sinton probably about 350 to 400 just at the high school,FOUR failed.

[BurnetBacker]

Marble Falls High School tests all persons in extra curriciular activites. 1.6% of 1600 tested positive for a drug. Is it worth the money. Why dont UIL mandate Steriod testing. I think everyone would be suprised by what they find.

[Owen B]

“…if parents and students thought it [drug testing] was an invasion of their privacy, then like Bridge City, it can be a stipulation of parking a car in the students lot.”

If people thought that police searches, without probable cause, of homes, cars, and persons were invasions of their privacy, then agreeing to such searches could be made a stipulation of registering a car.

“I think that it is a great idea to do drug testing because it separates the people who want to play and take care of themselves from the bad influences who don't.”

I think that it is a great idea to do random searches of individuals, private homes, and vehicles for dangerous drugs because it separates the people who want to live clean and take care of themselves from the bad influences who don’t.

“If a player doesn't do drugs, then what are they afraid of if the coach pulls them into the office one day for a random drug test?”

If people don’t do drugs, possess stolen property, have illegal explosives for terrorism, etc. then what are they afraid of if the police pull them into the station one day for a personal search and interrogation, or require them to submit to random searches of homes or vehicles?

“It isn't that the test is painful, and if you don't do drugs, then you really have nothing to hide.”

It isn’t that a search of your home, car, and person is painful, and if you don’t do illegal things, then you really have nothing to hide.

“Simple fact... extracurricular activities are a privilege. In the Code of Conduct manuel it does state that drug and alcohol use is strictly prohibited, UIL rules state the same. A school does have the right to random drug test with prior notice. If a student does not want to participate then he/she can choose not to be involved in the activities that are being held to these standards.”

I contend that extracurricular activities are no more a privilege and no less a right than driving. So…

Driving is a privilege. Texas law does state that illegal drug use is strictly prohibited, as is driving under the influence of intoxicants. Transporting illegal drugs, stolen property, kidnap victims, nuclear bombs, and all sorts of other things in your vehicle is strictly prohibited also. Police should have the right to randomly test drivers for intoxicants and to randomly search vehicles for prohibited items (people in the case of kidnap victims). If a person does not want to submit to such tests and searches, then he/she can choose not to drive a vehicle.

“I would still like to see the faculty subjected to testing also. But before any of this could do anything positive towards correcting existing problems and prevent future ones a school district would have to have in place a Superintendent and school board that has the gonads to deal with the outcome.”

I would still like to see people other than drivers subjected to testing and searches also. But before any of this could do anything positive towards correcting existing problems and preventing future ones, a State would have to have in place a Governor and State Legislature that has the gonads to deal with the outcome.

“Schools are not drug testing/locker searching and everything else they have been forced to do, out of boredom it is simply to protect those who are doing it right.”

Police wouldn’t be doing random searches of homes, cars, and persons out of boredom. It would simply be to protect those who are doing right. Will you quietly submit to police searches, without warrants, of your home, car, and person to protect those of us who are doing right?

“…as a parent I was not in favor of drug testing but I knew my son had nothing to worry about and if he DID I should know about it! They are really doing parents a service.”

As a parent, I was not in favor of searches of persons, backpacks, or vehicles, required psychiatric evaluations, or police interrogations without cause, but I knew my daughter had nothing to worry about and if she DID, I should know about it! Those things would really be a service to parents.

[onfirebball05mustang]

i don't think that manor does, for anybody. We still have the wine glasses at prom, and extremely wild parties advertised at school, so i doubt we will test until it becomes a law in california j/k

[Bell_06]

Dear Owen.. that was quite a display of 'cut and paste' efforts, but you failed to really say anything in the end.... by the way...Merry Christmas everyone... please remember to turn on your christmas lights and decorations tonight :)

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

No, Owen brought a few ideas to my face that I had previously not seen. I have to admit that Pedestrian was correct, they are slowly chipping away at our rights, and drug testing shouldn't be allowed in school. I guess that it should all be left in the hands of people who want to step up and deal with the problems within the team.

[Bell_06]

BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END:
No, Owen brought a few ideas to my face that I had previously not seen. I have to admit that Pedestrian was correct, they are slowly chipping away at our rights, and drug testing shouldn't be allowed in school. I guess that it should all be left in the hands of people who want to step up and deal with the problems within the team.I see the presentation of illegal searches being compared to legal recourses. Can I ask which ideas convinced you to completely change your way of thinking?

[Owen B]

Bell_06:

I’m sorry you think I failed to really say anything. I’ll just have to try a different tack. This time, I’ll quote only one thing you said, address it more directly, and ask you some questions. First of all, I’ll point out that drug testing is a search.

You said, “…if parents and students thought it was an invasion of their privacy, then like Bridge City, it can be a stipulation of parking a car in the students lot.” That wouldn’t address the issue of invasion of privacy, which is really an issue of improper searches. It also wouldn’t address another issue, the targeting of certain groups for searches, based on arbitrary and improperly discriminatory criteria.

A few questions: If searches by drug test are proper, then why not target all students? Why is it proper to search some groups, but not others, based on criteria that seemingly has nothing to do with drug use? Are students who drive to school or who participate in extracurricular activities more likely to use drugs than those who don’t? If not, then we can add an improper discrimination issue to the discussion. Also, if personal searches via drug tests are proper, why not searches of clothing, purses, and backpacks? Why not vehicles? Why stop there? Why not students’ bedrooms?

Let’s make this question personal and confine it to drug testing: If it is appropriate to require my daughter to submit to a drug test in order to participate in extracurricular activities or drive a car to school, why is it not appropriate to require you to submit to a drug test in order to use a public park or drive a vehicle on a public road?

[Bell_06]

Good morning Owen... what not everyone is out at after holiday sales?? To your question Owen, you quoted a section that came from my posting, and yes I was using Bridge City as an example, not to target 'drivers' but to show that schools do have options before them. If a school were to choose to do any form of drug testing they can make it a stipulation of a school funded program. Currently quite a few schools do walk drug dogs through the hallways, I don't feel that this is just targeting teenagers either. My daughter was on a band trip, they had all their luggage assembled in the cafeteria and narcotics dogs were brought in. I did not feel that only band members were being prosecuted, instead I viewed it as the school was taking every effort to protect the safety of my kid along with each other attending this event. (Sorry was trying to figure out how to do paragraph spacing on this program and accidently hit send message) As a driver I have submitted to certain requirements, I must maintain insurance, a current license etc.. If pulled over for any reason I am to be able to produce these items.. I can be asked to give breath test etc.. now I'll grant you this, I can not just be pulled over for kicks and administered a breath test.. but I don't think that anyone who has agreed with the random drug testing is trying to target only teens... If you will note I'm a firm believer in the faculty and administration being a part of this process. I do think that our school owes us the reassurance that they are doing everything to keep our classrooms and school buses safe. And to answer your other question... If someone brought their 'bedroom' to school then yes that would be subjected to all the same rules and regulations.

<small>[ December 26, 2003, 10:28 AM: Message edited by: Bell_06 ]</small>

[sinfan75]

What difference is drug testin in school and the job? If you want to participate in any school activities,you'll be drug tested.When you leave school and get a job,you'll be required to take a drug test.No difference!!I have to have a TXDOT drug test annually.Plus a TXDOT physical bi-annually.I don't think my rights are bein snipped away at.

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

These two things that Owen said made me think. These are the way that she interpreted what I wrote:

“If a player doesn't do drugs, then what are they afraid of if the coach pulls them into the office one day for a random drug test?”

If people don’t do drugs, possess stolen property, have illegal explosives for terrorism, etc. then what are they afraid of if the police pull them into the station one day for a personal search and interrogation, or require them to submit to random searches of homes or vehicles?

“It isn't that the test is painful, and if you don't do drugs, then you really have nothing to hide.”

It isn’t that a search of your home, car, and person is painful, and if you don’t do illegal things, then you really have nothing to hide.

I would rather not have people come and search my home even though I have nothing to hide. It is an invasion of privacy for one thing, and I would rather not have the inconvenience to be pulled into a police station for questioning. I really don't know what to think anymore about drug testing in school, and people on this site have several different point of views on the subject that make it difficult to decide either way. I'm trying not to stand on both sides of the fence here, but I would rather not have questions arise later about whether or not it is right to test for drugs. There can be several different scenarios, like an athelete who drank alcohol with his parents consent and recieved it from them. What an individual does in his home is their own business. I also think that if a student tested positive for drugs, and this went on his/her record at school, it would severely hinder their chances of moving on to bigger and better things after high school, such as college. One thing I would like to see tested more than anything though is the use of steriods and other illegal supplements in high school sports. I simply just think that there are too many bad sides to this drug testing than there are good, so therefore, I have came to the final conclusion that drug testing should not be allowed in school. After all of this, just think to yourself what the school board meeting would be like if the Board of Trustees put as much thought into this as the people on this website do...lol.

[Bell_06]

BBDE- No one is trying to make you step firmly on one side versus the other. Of course no one wants to live in a society where an individual has no rights or worse yet where all civil rights are ignored. But as an individual we do have the right to be protected and if that means that my luggage will be double checked at the airport then so be it. If I have to walk through a metal detector to enter my childs place of education, then I shall. If it means that some of the risk that students face each day are reduced then it is well worth it. I don't think any person here is saying that we want our civil rights attacked, no one has agreed to cavity searches in the parking lot. But a mature and logical approach to school security would be beneficial. In the world beyond high school sports, athletes are subjected to drug testing this would and does include illegal use of steroids. It's a tough world out there, my child might as well learn that there will be a consequence for lack of good judgement.

[Owen B]

Bell_06,

Walking dogs through a hallway (or other areas) is a search of school property, which is an entirely different matter. Inspecting luggage before loading it onto a bus is an entirely different matter. Requiring drug testing as a condition for some jobs is a different matter also. Commerce does all those things (drug testing for bus drivers) and I’m fine with them. Driver’s licenses, vehicle registration, and insurance requirements are not searches.

You mentioned administering breath tests. That’s a great example. Randomly pulling drivers over and administering breath tests to them would identify many intoxicated drivers, allow us to intervene, and prevent much death, injury, and property damage. It would also serve as a deterrent to DWI. The effect would be immediate, significant, and easily quantifiable. So why not require random breath tests? Because they are constitutionally prohibited unreasonable searches. Randomly testing all students would identify many drug users, allow us to intervene, and could probably prevent much harm. It would also serve as a deterrent to student drug use. So why not require all students to submit to random drug tests? Same reason.

Making testing a condition of participation in some group doesn’t address the most important issue. It’s just a way to coerce some students, but not all, to submit to testing. But I suggest that it is unfair, misguided, and even counterproductive. Students who participate in extracurricular activities are less likely to have drug problems than those who don’t, but the school has something to coerce them with, so they are targeted, while students who are more likely to use drugs are ignored. Not only are they ignored, the testing actively discourages drug users among them from joining the targeted group. In other words, it discourages students who might most benefit from extracurricular activities from participating.

We’re not likely to agree on these things, and that’s fine. The courts don’t agree either. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals declared a program of drug testing participants in extracurricular activities to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, overturned that ruling. I agree with the four dissenting Justices, who joined in saying that the program “is not reasonable, it is capricious, even perverse: Petitioners’ policy targets for testing a student population least likely to be at risk from illicit drugs and their damaging effects.” (LINK) (http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-332.ZD1.html)

[Pedestrian]

I'm back.

Owen B. That was by far the best analogy for people to understand. If a person could read that and not get anything from it, then they must be ... well dumb or narrow minded. By the way, what do you do for a living Owen? Are you a lawyer or are you still in highschool like me?

[BIG BLUE DEFENSIVE END]

I agree

[Bell_06]

Great reading Owen, thanks for the link.. I found a few paragraphs of interest and I will post them here...

Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court

A student’s privacy interest is limited in a public school environment where the State is responsible for maintaining discipline, health, and safety. Schoolchildren are routinely required to submit to physical examinations and vaccinations against disease. See id., at 656. Securing order in the school environment sometimes requires that students be subjected to greater controls than those appropriate for adults. See T. L. O., supra, at 350 (Powell, J., concurring) (“Without first establishing discipline and maintaining order, teachers cannot begin to educate their students. And apart from education, the school has the obligation to protect pupils from mistreatment by other children, and also to protect teachers themselves from violence by the few students whose conduct in recent years has prompted national concern”).

Finally, we find that testing students who participate in extracurricular activities is a reasonably effective means of addressing the School District’s legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use

Then there was this by concurring Justice Breyer... I agree with the Court that Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995), governs this case and requires reversal of the Tenth Circuit’s decision. The school’s drug testing program addresses a serious national problem by focusing upon demand, avoiding the use of criminal or disciplinary sanctions, and relying upon professional counseling and treatment. See App. 201—202. In my view, this program does not violate the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

Today’s public expects its schools not simply to teach the fundamentals, but “to shoulder the burden of feeding students breakfast and lunch, offering before and after school child care services, and providing medical and psychological services,” all in a school environment that is safe and encourages learning.

I do not believe that it is the intention of anyone here to strip the rights of our students. Appears that the decision was based in great part on the fact that the results of testing would be used as a basis of aid, drug education and counciling and not as a justification of punishment. I did read a statement stating that past and current drug awareness programs are not as effective as once hoped. I still question whether or not our faculty is subjected to drug testing.

[Owen B]

Pedestrian, I wouldn't be quick to say that anyone is dumb or narrow-minded. Some very bright people disagree about the issues we've discussed here, including the Justices of the United States Supreme Court. Five of them think that drug testing of students participating in extracurricular activities is constitutional. Four think it is not. But the 5-4 ruling will stand, and will govern lower court rulings, unless and until the Supreme Court reverses itself.

The Supreme Court has not ruled on drug testing of all students. It has not ruled on the wisdom of any drug testing policy. All it has said is that drug testing of athletes and drug testing of participants in extracurricular activities is constitutional. Even though I disagree, I accept that.

Accepting that, if my community were to consider drug testing of one of the above groups, I would argue that doing so would be unfair, misguided, and possibly counterproductive, as I briefly argued earlier. If we were to consider drug testing of all students, I would bring in constitutionality.

As for what I do for a living, I’ll just say that I am not a lawyer. I am simply a concerned citizen and father.

[Owen B]

Bell_06,

I'm glad you found the link to be of interest. I see you made use of the other links at the top of that page. Apparently you took the time to read all the opinions, as I did. You seem to agree with the 5, while I agree with the 4.

I am curious about something. It is clear that you support drug testing of students involved in extracurricular activities. Would you support a policy of drug testing all students? If not, why the distinction? (I'd appreciate responses from others also.)

<small>[ December 27, 2003, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: Owen B ]</small>