Random Drug testing performed in schools is a major topic up for debate. The act of performing random drug testing is simply randomly picking out individuals and screening them for drug use or other illegal substance use. There are two sides to the issue and each one has their own individual pros and cons. Here we can observe the various techniques that each side uses present to support their argument in order to convince the differing audiences to veer in their direction. Numerous sources are gathered to articulate the data of which is presented to the audience. Although the world has varying opinions on the actions of random drug testing being helpful in schools, it provides both equally negative and positive impacts on schools it is implemented in.
In the Eyes of the Law When a government funded school, or even private school, encounters measures that could potentially be an infringement of privacy on the students and their parents, the majority will turn to The Constitution. Here they see their rights to privacy, an implied “other” right in the ninth
…show more content…
Therefore this makes for a way to test students for illicit drug and alcohol use. Problems arise with this strategy of testing. Stated by Gerada, Clare, and Eilish Gilvarry, testing sweat is more expensive than many of the other methods, simply due to the fact that it requires specialist laboratory services in order to analyze the sample. It can also be contaminated by passive exposure. Urine testing is the lowest cost with a price ranging from 14-30 US dollars, per test. That is the base cost but can rise when confirmatory tests are conducted. After considering the cost per test and taking that into account with the amount of students being tested, the price becomes overwhelming for schools. Just one school district located in the US, which only detected a total of 11 students who tested positive had expenses amounting to 35,000 US
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.
The information is completely factual on both opinions. In reality, drug testing would cost even more than us as taxpayers put in for TANF programs, and things of the like. It would only add to the amount we pay. The government wants to keep everyone happy, but they don’t want to raise taxes, and the people don’t want that either. It is still back and forth and not set in stone as to if they should implement drug testing.
The majority believes that the circumstances were reasonable for the alleged crime that was being committed in the school. The school has an obligation towards the protection for the other students and to maintain order within the school and that the rules of the school not to be broken. The search for the pills are considered just because the search was of places that the pills could have been hidden and if not for the fact the rules were broken and the information about Redding’s disbarment of pills were brought to the attention of the school officials the search would not have occurred. The main disagreements between the parties are the way in which the search was handled. It is an agreement that what the student decided to do were against
Drugs make a person insane and wacky, and that is definitely not needed at school because there is a major populace there. Also, selling or secretly putting a drug in them that they could be highly allergic to could injure or kill them easily. Drugs can kill somebody just as easy as a gun can. Random locker searches are good because of drugs and other violent weapons and chemicals.
One side to this controversy would be that because of the screenings it would lower and prevent the use of drugs in poverty struck households. Many law officials believe that if a user had to submit to drug test they would get clean because the need for the government assistance would be of greater priority than abusing illegal drugs. Though this may be true in some situations, poor social classes are not the only citizens abusing drugs. It is well known that drugs are abused by people of all social classes. America needs to broaden their view point on this social matter because it effects everyone, not just those who live in poverty.
Every welfare dollar that goes toward one recipient’s drug habit is one less dollar that goes toward a child in need or a family that would spend that money on real needs (Vitter). This is why the government should start drug testing anyone receiving welfare money. At most, 18 states have already used the drug test system and were able to cut back welfare cases and save money. Out of those 18 states, Florida is the only one that tested for only illegal drugs while the others tested for all kinds of drugs. With a new revision in the process, the welfare programs will start to drug test anyone who has been convicted in the past 20 years with illicit drugs, and those people will have to pay for their own drug test.
There are plenty of people who disagree with the drug testing. They believe it cost too much money and is a waste. Some think it should only be required to those who have a history of drug abuse. Well that’s all good and well, but what is a
I believe that high school athletes should be drug tested. Drug testing high school athletes has become a popular in school districts and is being considered in many more high schools. I think that random drug testing policies will minimize the use of drugs and alcohol, at least among most of the high school 's athletes. All athletes should be required to take a drug test. Performance enhancing drugs are restricted for athletes to use.
It may seem a little invasive, but schools are permitted to use drug dogs to sniff out contraband during unannounced, random searches and it becomes a controversial problem for all. The use of drug-sniffing dogs in schools is permitted because students do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the school and school search did not go against the Fourth Amendment, which is the right of people to be secure in their personal spaces houses and papers. While drug dogs are becoming more and more commonplace in our public schools and to maintaining a drug-dog program can cost district estimates $12,000 and $36,000 every year. Drug dog must go through a long period of time of training and drug dogs are not dangerous to people, but instead it protects people. Without reservation, we must know the history background, advantages, and disadvantages of having a drug dog searches.
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.
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.
Next, drug testing recipients is not a good use for taxpayer money. Florida started enforcing drug tests so taxpayers would know their money was not being wasted. and of the 800 people tested, only one person tested positive (Cunha). If they tested 800 people and only one tested positive-that is a waste of money. Drug testing individuals costs more than it saves (Cunha).
Drug testing has become a mandatory task in nearly every workplace, no employer would like to employ personnel with unacceptable habits of drug addiction. Employee drug testing is not about catching employees using drugs, it’s about preventing the use of drugs at the work place in order to maintain a healthy environment. Drug testing is a moral obligation and responsibility to keep the workplace safe for all the employees, customers and other related personnel. Common reasons employers implement drug testing is to- • Deter employees from abusing alcohol and drugs • Prevent hiring individuals who use illegal drugs • Be able to identify early and appropriately refer employees who have drug and/or alcohol problems • Provide a safe workplace
“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”).
Pros and Cons of Workplace Drug Testing The drug problem in any country continues to proliferate despite efforts of the government in preventing these drugs from further destructing the lives of the people. Clandestine laboratories sprout on different parts of the world and find ways on how it can reach vulnerable individuals. What makes it more alarming is how drug addiction has affected children as young as 12 years old. The popularity of drug use is caused by the following factors: • The availability of both prescription and street drugs.