In the case of State v. Barrett (1996), a drug detection team was brought in to conduct a random drug search of the high school on May 3, 1995 in St. Tammany Parish. Six classes were chosen by the principal, who had mentioned some of the selected classes were known to have some of the "problem" students, including the 18 year-old defendant. During the third classroom search, the defendant 's classroom, students were asked to empty their pockets and leave the room. The dogs were brought in and one of the dog 's alerted a smell on the defendant 's wallet. After the principal searched the wallet and found $400 in cash, he placed it in a different location, which the dog alerted on once again.
Have you ever took a drug test and felt like you had to give up your privacy as a citizen? James Acton did in the court case " Acton v. Vernonia School District". After reviewing the case I 've come to the decision to agree with the school district and believe that the government interest in keeping the students safe from drug use weighs more than this seventh graders privacy. “It has been 35 years since Ronald Reagan’s first inaugural speech as President — the one in which he said, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”” (http://centeroncongress.org/) When presidant Reagan said this, not only do I agree with this but i also believe this is why there is limited government.
Thank you for the privilege of meeting with you, Senator Markey and Jason Allen. We, as well as Elks National President Michael Zellen and Elks Past National President Paul Helsel, appreciated the opportunity to share with you the Elks’ drug prevention awareness work. Drug use prevention has been at the heart of the Elks’ mission for over 30 years. Each year we reach nearly every school and community across the nation through drug prevention rallies, public service announcements and the distribution of millions of anti-drug brochures annually. All of this available at no cost to schools, kids or parents.
Earls was 5 to 4 in favor of the defendants saying that a valid reason is needed in order to conduct a drug test. Lindsay Earls, the plaintiff, argued, “The policy violates the Fourth Amendment as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment” (Board of Education v. Lindsay Earls 4). She claimed that her rights to a reasonable search and seizure were violated. The Board of Education, the defendant, said that the policy was not violating the students’ rights because the government didn’t require it. The policy was simply in place “to send a message to parents and students that they don’t condone drug use” (Boyd).
According to the First Amendment, Congress cannot forbid freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits United States citizens from being denied rights (US Const.). In the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District Trial, seven students wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The incident occurred in December to encourage a ceasefire between North Vietnam and South Vietnam over the holidays. The students were immediately suspended after wearing the controversial armbands (LII).
School officials are not allowed to conduct searches on students without probable cause; and random searches are not permissible according to The Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment states that a person has the right to be secure in their homes, and personal effects and to prevent them against un-probable search cases. For example, these laws and policies affect school leaders decision-making procedures by stating that school leaders must have probable cause to conduct searches against students for specific incidents and locations including any property to be taken from the students. For example, in the case of New Jersey v T. L. O. (1985) addressed the issue of can a search by a school official be called a "search" based on the Fourth Amendment
Some communities and school officials may not think that schools need locker searches, but the do. They will say that it is invading their privacy and that kids and teens should have the ability to protect and defend themselves. Guns, knives, and other dangerous or unallowed items at school should be banned, but others may not recall that they should be. In conclusion, locker searches should be enforced because of all of the violence in our world.
In Conlon’s article, she adds, “The data from these interviews show that a high school’s decision to adopt random drug testing is a result of a complex interaction among all segments of the school community and the larger community” (Conlon 315). After analyzing a survey
Some may argue that teachers have the right to search students if they have a reasonable cause as stated in the amendment but probable cause is subjective and the burden falls upon the student to prove that it is not unreasonable. A study showed that the success of a student proving unreasonableness is highly unlikely because of the systems in place that oppress students according to Expelling Hope, a book written by Christopher G. Robbins. The fact that it is up to the student proves that it is in the students disadvantage and that there is a problem that needs to be
An alternative route schools can take is instead of having locker searches, they can get metal detectors to prevent weapons such as guns/knives and/or drugs being on school property. It would be just effective as locker searches. It also ensures that nobody gets hurt and if someone decides to bring a weapon to school they can stop it at the door instead of waiting for someone to get hurt, then taking action. It’s less likely for students to sneak in harmful things that can put themselves or others in
Resolutions are vehemently being sought to protect schools from possible attacks and to objectively eradicate deadly school shootings altogether. Commonly, security officers are placed in schools in hopes that increased surveillance will inhibit violent outbreaks (Crawford and Burns 2016). Mixed evaluations have been found in association with security officers, while some benefits reportedly transpire, experiences of disparaging consequences remain a regrettable reality as well (Crawford and Burns 2016). Additionally, active shooter drills routinely occur at schools across the nation, however, as Jillian Peterson and James Densley report in their CNN article titled, “The Usual Approach to School Security Isn’t Working,” studies indicate that
If you don't know what the 4th Amendment is, it guards against unreasonable searches and seizures. If students are tested for drugs they may get discouraged about life and want to commit suicide, or they might not try as hard in their school work. Student athletes should not be tested for drugs because it takes money out of their education. Student athletes should not be tested for drugs because it takes money out of their education. They should not test them because it costs so much for a test and to test a couple hundred student athletes.
Being safe at school is something that a person shouldn’t have to worry, about but it has become a concern for a lot of parents, teachers, and school administration. Increasing security in high school, middle school, and elementary school would help control and protect the kids from possible threats, as well as creating a safe learning environment and show kids that police officers are good people. Most middle and high schools nowadays have resource officers in the building or some sort of security within the school. In 2007 only 40% of schools in the country had a school resource officer on campus (James and McCallion 11). From a study done by The Virginia Department of Criminal Justice services, they reported that “‘an overwhelming majority of students and staff feel safe at school’ as a result of school resource officers (SROs) being present in school buildings” (Weiler and Cray).
When one hears "school security" these days, the word that goes with it is "tighten." Indeed, given both external threats and unruly (sometimes violent) student behavior, it makes sense to think that the most sensible course of action is to err on the side of more stringent measures, harsher sanctions and less permissive administration. It largely comes down to liability - whenever an individual with a history of troubled or criminal behavior snaps or becomes involved in an incident severe enough to attract government or media attention, many of the questions asked in the aftermath are variations on "why was this person not in jail. " The same applies to schools, where administrators often end up having to justify themselves to parents and
“Over 60% of teens claim drugs are used on school grounds”(Fitzgerald). Over the years, schools have not been doing anything to prevent this. Teens revealed that, “1 in 5 of their classmates either drink, use drugs, or smoke during school hours on school grounds” (Fitzgerald). More studies show that, “17% of high school students use drugs daily.” Kids in schools know someone who either does drugs, or sells drugs on school grounds (“School”).
