Mandatory Drug Testing Argumentative Analysis

Leighann Lord quotes, “Did you know America ranks the lowest in education but highest in drug use? Its nice to be number one but we can fix that. All we need to do is start war on education.” What Leighann Lord doesn’t address is fixing the issue of drug use among adolescents is mandatory drug testing in schools. Meanwhile, in opposition Beverly Baharo and Finely is against the idea of hunting students to take the drug test. Both of their arguments prove to be effective. Finely and Newton happen to be more convincing. Micah Issitt, a supporter mandatory drug testing,effectively argues the benefits of mandatory drug testing through the use of rhetorical devices. Drug testing encourages and aids the parents to become involved into

By 2006 , seniors high school students were commonly using drugs(4). Drug testing assists teenagers to become over responsible and active in a rehabilitation program center if necessary. The main strength in the argument is the ample amount of statistics provided. The statistics are credible and recent.For example;’’ In 2006 by the center for alcohol and substance abuse CASA at Columbia University, over 51% of high school students attend school where drugs are readily available. (Issitt and Newton 51. The statics strengthens their argument because they are providing proof that is credible and timely she it was according to the center of alcohol and substance Absand was in 2006. Moreover authors provide an important point by introducing the basic rights of people,privacy he states ‘’ privacy is a freedom that is rightfully protected by our government but education is a privilege that is provided through freedom and state funding (Issitt and Newton 16). This statement explains that the protection of a student’s privacy is just a important therefore, drug tertry should be an option not a mandatory school procedure. Also, students should be able to go to school safely where drugs shouldn’t be available and a disturbance for other students from learning. Although this article provides a

The idea of having,all students drug testing might decrease peer pressure (8). To conclude , the price it takes to catch a couple students cost thousands (10). Ballorro and Finely provide expert testimony by using the American Academy of pediatricians as a source that is against drug testimony. The American Academy declared a concern for not providing a background research supporting the arguments effective for drug testing (Ballaro and Finely 13 ). This strengthens their argument it challenges the opposing stance by providing credible source to prove the author's perspective. Furthermore,Ballaro and Finely, provide and effective for such spending, by claiming that,’’one middle school,... spent 35,000 to catch three students (13) .This quote proves that it is completely unnecessary to waste thousands of dollars just to catch a few students rather than spending it ( in more useful circumstances. While the article implement several effective rhetorical strategies the use of fallacies are evident .” … these prospects are less likely to have the same effect on many teenagers who tend to live in the moment (Bellaro and Finely 11). This is a perfect example of overgeneralization.Additionally , this quote suggest that adolescents are not as affected by this as much as adults, since they have nothing to lose.However,this isnot true, also, Ballaro and Finely don’t