John P. Walters, Director of the White House Office Of National Drug Control Policy said the following in a recent statement:
"By giving students an incentive to stay away from drugs, random drug testing helps them lead healthy, successful lives. For that reason, it's one of many tools we believe schools should use to fight drug use among teens."
He is, basically, preaching the pros associated with random drug testing in high schools. Now, there are many people from many different groups that tout the benefits of this policy, and of course there are just as many waving their fists and screaming "civil rights violation!"
What are the benefits to this policy? What are the drawbacks? Does allowing random drug testing in public schools pave the way for other types of "safety precautions?" What about random search and seizures? Is there a racial bias to those types of ideas? What about a sexual bias? Are boys more likely to get pulled for random testing? Black kids? Tell me what you think and for this blog it is VERY important to respond to someone else's post. (450-500 words/55pts)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
57 comments:
This policy has many benefits, for it would produce a decrease in smokers and drug users today. It would scare the students, forcing them to think twice before doing it. I don’t believe it will stop it completely but it will make students think. I believe that if they start early enough with it, it could prevent students from ever doing it. It could also cause a riot. The students who do drugs would think it would be unfair, obviously, but some people may also see it as a violation of rights. Every one has the right to do as they please. They are harming their body, not anyone else’s. This would be a common plea against the random drug test, which would make it hard to do. As for other “safety precaution”, I believe they should be done also. If you are going to allow one thing such as random drug testing, they might as well bring in the dogs. This would prevent kids from bringing in weapons and drugs into school. The problem is, kids may choose to live the way they wish to live, but I don’t believe in putting other kids in danger. If the students want to use drugs and weapons out side of school, then that’s not the schools problem, but while in school it is the schools responsibility to keep everyone safe. So yea searches and random drug tests would make things a lot safer. There are A LOT of radical bias’s against these types of ideas. People feel as though it is against their rights to invade their personal space. Rights. These are the things that people always hide behind to defend what they believe and the funny part is, most people don’t fully understand their rights let alone know how to use them in an argument. This is what makes me feel as though we should have random drug tests, if your not doing drugs then what is the problem, same thing with searches and seizures, if you have nothing to hide then what is the problem. Well if it is a random drug test then wouldn’t random kids be picked. There should be no discretion against one person, race, sex, or anything for that matter. Though some kids will pull that card out. It has been pulled out many times. Like when an African American kid gets in trouble, almost every time the first thing out of their mouths is, “Its because I am black.” Now a days almost everyone else does it to, “Its because I am a girl, or because I am Spanish or whatever.” These are issues that would have to be addresses or not even looked upon. If the school just didn’t care what the students thought or said and went with the random drug testing, with parental consent, then the students would have no choice and would eventually get used to it. Anything that is new will cause a big fuss but once they experience it around them for a while then it will become natural even if they don’t believe it is right.
If you are doing something illegal, should your right to use it be protected? I think not. It is fair for someone to be put through a random drug test. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should do drugs, because they are illegal for a reason. Why should the people that don’t obey the law be cut a break. I am completely for random drug testing.
As Devon said, the only people that would object to such a thing would be the ones that use drugs. As well as her point about searches and seizures, if you have nothing to hide then there isn’t a problem, so just don’t have anything to hide; it’s not that hard. If the high schools can’t stop these kids from throwing their lives away than what will in the future? It’s nearly impossible to convince someone they are throwing away their life by using drugs if they don’t think they are. It is definitely needed in this day and age to intervene and get someone of authority to set these kids straight. If you test positive to a drug test, then you should be forced to deal with the consequences of using drugs and getting caught. Sure we have rights as humans, but your rights do not protect you against something illegal. Your rights are limited in school because of the well being of all of the other students. Positive outcomes of beginning random drug testing would be to catch students who are doing drugs obviously. But I think this should also be followed up by a program to get them away from drugs. This would hopefully serve as a wake up call to these people and realize that addiction could very well be in their near future as well as dieing at a young age and cancers. By doing the testing you would be ensuring to help get student’s lives back on track, even if it has to happen with a little force. There are too many people today getting wrapped up in drugs and wasting their precious lives. Drugs do nothing but distract you from your life. You only have one chance to live and schools need to make sure that every high school student has the right to that chance of a healthy, full life because they are the ones helping us become the adults we will become.
Other “safety precautions” might take place, but only ones that are necessary. Drug use is a huge problem in schools today and needs to be addressed. If this helps to make another precaution that is needed, then so be it. For example, a precaution about guns would be useful with the growing number of school shooting incidents and scares. I would also have to agree with Devon here again when the random sampling should be completely random, not racial or gender specific. Yet, this even today is still used. I personally don’t think of any specific gender or age or race as being more prone to the use of drugs. I think to avoid someone trying to say you did pick them just because of their race or gender, you would need to create a fool proof method of truly random testing.
I totally agree with Brittany when she says that if you are doing something illegal, your rights shouldn't be protected. However, I don't know how effective the random drug searches would be. Take limewire for example, or any other website that allows you to download music onto your computer without having to buy the CD. Everyone knows that downloading songs off the internet is illegal. Everyone knows that by choosing to download these songs, they are breaking copyright laws. Everyone knowns that while YOU might not be the one that is found, there is that slight possibility there. Everyone has heard of the struggling college student who "has never done something bad!" in their whole life, but still has to pay five thousand dollars because they decided to download limewire. And on top of that, they still have to pay off college bills. So, you would think that everyone would stop downloading songs off of limewire because of the thousand dollar fines. But does everyone stop? No. The thought process is that while it is a possibility that you might be caught, there are so many other people in the world that you "CAN'T" specifically be targeted. They'll never check my computer out of all of the other computers they have to search. It sounds and awful lot like "they'll never check MY locker for drugs out of all the other lockers in the school." Or "they'll never drug test ME with all of the other people that they are suspicious about!" Ok rewind here, and let me just tell everyone that I am NOT NOT NOT on drugs, and never will be. But I am just putting myself in the place of someone on drugs through my limewire analogy (because I am one those hypocrites who has limewire, yes, I admit it.)I guess I'm saying that I don't think the random drug tests are going to change anything. If a teenager is severly addicted to drugs, they're going to keep being a druggie because it becomes a part of life. To them, it is worth the risk of getting caught to get high. I think that the random drug testing gives students who are already off drugs an incentive not to start them, but I don't think that it will give a hardcore druggie the incentive toturn their life around and suddenly say, "HEY! drugs ARE bad!" I think that the random searches and seizures work the same way. Maybe students will think twice about bringing their drugs to school, but that isn't stopping them from doing them at home. I think that's why the random drug tests are somewhat more beneficial. There is some bias associated with the whole drug testing deal. I agree with Devon when she says that people think they're being specifically targeted, especially when they say, "It's 'cause I'm black!" or whatever race they are. I definitely don't think that boys are targeted more than girls, what sex you are has nothing to do with it. By saying something like "It's cause I'm [insert racial background or religion here]", that probably just makes the police even more suspicious. If you know you aren't on drugs and the police wants to test you, just calmy go through the whole process because your actions speak louder than your words. A negative drug test also speaks louder than words. I would pretty much rather pee on a piece of paper to prove I'm not on drugs than to argue it out and look like an idiot.
A funny story: Over the summer when I found out I made beach patrol, it was a requirement that everyone had to go to the clinic in Atlantic City to get drug tested. I knew my appointment was at 4:00 and was not worried at all, because obviously, I'm not on drugs. So I just went through my day as usual, my mom stopped at dunkin doughnuts for me before work, I watched the water, saved some lives...you know. Little did I know that the poppy seed muffin I got at Dunkin Doughnuts would make my drug test show up as positive for opium. But my little drug free self didn't know this little tidbit of information, or what "opium" was for that matter. In the end, I convinced the nurse, and learned from this important lesson. :)
Alright, I don’t think that what I’m going to say in this blog fairly represents my point of view, but I’m looking at the bigger picture here. Yeah, I agree with what Devon said about the only people objecting are the people using drugs or who have something to hide. However, the potential effect that this could have on the school as a whole isn’t worth it.
Of course there are going to be biases. The only way to not have biases would be to test everyone in the school, which we obviously don’t have the money for. I was at the mall yesterday and this couple walked into the store I was in and I automatically judged them by what they were wearing. School officials would do the same thing and it wouldn’t be fair.
What would the ramifications be for people caught? That is if there were to get caught. They could easily get someone else to pee in a cup for them. Would they get kicked out of school? There are plenty of smart people that do drugs, and the consequences could be life altering. My uncle (by marriage) has a brother who runs a multi-million dollar corporation and is extremely wealthy and successful. But he still does cocaine. Now if they had random drug testing when he was in high school, he probably wouldn’t have been allowed to graduate.
It would be too confusing. Are the consequences the same for someone who tests positive for pot and someone who tests positive for heroin? What about repeat offenders? How would the civil rights thing be handled? If they’re randomly testing for drugs, can they randomly search our lockers? Wouldn’t you consider it to be an invasion of privacy if you were the one getting searched? Would rehab be offered to repeat offenders or would they be kicked out of school, depriving them of an education and leading them to a life of crime?
I agree with Brittany saying that people are throwing away their lives and they need a wake up call. Let’s be real. Would people with a drug “habit” honestly stop doing drugs because the security guards at Oakcrest scolded them? I don’t think that random drug testing would result in a huge, positive outcome. I think it would result in law suits, fights, and potentially an even larger group of uneducated teenagers. Random drug testing at private schools is one thing because parents have the option to not send their child to that school. Random drug testing at public schools is starting to cross the line.
Random drug tests is a thing many people hear and get scared. And this would be one of the benefits. Kids and others in school would feel different about doing drugs. They would think twice before doing drugs and maybe also stop their friends to help protect them. The random drug tests would also be a big example to show why someone shouldn't do drugs because they will get you in lots of trouble. Another benefit is it would pull out some of the drug users and maybe make others more aware of who they are so they can stay away. Another thing it may do is stop drug use outside of school and make the world a better place. I agree with Devon when she states that there should be other precautions than just drug testing. I also agree when she said these things would make things a lot safer and to me mainly it would make life safer.
Some of the drawbacks to this action would be the safety of the security and others. Ones when being checked may bring violence and others would have to be cautious. Other drawbacks are many people would be against it. And they don't have the right to be doing illegal things so they shouldn't feel this action is wrong. One other drawback would be it wouldn't stop all the drug users. Other than that I find NO drawbacks because I feel schools should be able to do random drug tests and even just drug test everyone.
I think if schools wanted to they could add other precautions because it could only make the schools safer. Once again I agree with Devon on how she says that if you have nothing to hide than there is no problem. Overall other safety precautions like metal detectors and K-9 units would make schools safer and hopefully bring down the rising violence percentage rate. Random searches and seizures wouldn't be a bad idea either. It would stop some kids from bringing in unwanted things such as weapons and drugs. Yea, it wouldn't stop everyone, but it will help stop some. I feel the same about both drug tests and the searches and seizures on how they would just make everything better and safer.
Racial and sexual bias is very popular today and many people feel they are victims of it. Really I don't think more males or blacks would get tested or searched because I think it is just who is more suspicious. But yes people will say "Oh it's because I'm Black, Spanish or whatever" or "It's just because I'm a guy or girl" So overall there might be racial and sexual bias out there but I just mainly think it's who is more suspicious.
None of this would ever bother me because I never used or plan to use drugs. They just ruin your life. And I also don't plan to do anything else to harm others. So really I have no worry that I will ever get in trouble from the searches, seizures, and drug testings. And this is to everyone that if you don't do anything wrong like these things told about above, then don't be worried about the actions and consequences. It will only make us all safer and hopefully healthier.
Drugs are illegal. It is as simple as that. If you want to do something illegal, don't try and use the Constitution and the laws that say you have rights to defend your actions. People who use drugs have no place saying that they have individual rights and that they are "violated" by random drug tests and searches. It is ridiculous. Why should people who are harming themselves and the people around them that they know, not to mention breaking the law, be let off the hook just because the Bill of Rights says you can't be randomly searched ? It is stupid. If you don't want to get in trouble, just don't do drugs. It's really not that hard.
The benefits of random testing is obviously to catch kids who are doing drugs as well as possibly prevent future kids from doing drugs. No one can stop people from doing drugs because they are harming their own body, but they can be closer to stopping it by using random tests. I agree with Devon that these tests will not stop everyone from doing drugs, but it may cause them to think twice, espeically if they play a sport. The athletes sometimes have more tests for tournaments or championships and drugs could affect their ability to play. A drawback to this policy would be the people who get caught claiming that their rights were violated. That is bull, I'm sorry. If you are doing drugs, at least fess up to it. Trying to use legal tactics to back up something you did that was illegal is not only senseless, it's stupid.
As Brittany said, which I agree with, there really is no racial or sexual bias. Males are definitely not more likely to do drugs than females and black people are not more likely than whites or asians. Those minorities or certain groups may play that card, as Devon said, but it will not stop them from being punished. They are just trying to use it as an exceuse like, "You are only accusing me because I'm black." Or because you're a girl, or a Buddhist, or a general student. It doesn't really matter because anyone that does drugs is going to get in trouble. If they don't, that's bad because they are being stupid and hurting themselves whether they think it or not.
I personally, obviously, would never consider doing drugs. I think it is one of the stupidest things you could do to yourself. Adults and schools and television commercials are always saying to avoid drugs and drinking. Drugs are definitely worse than drinking because it is harder to get addicted to drinking and drugs have more long-term effects. They stay in your system and affect you for much longer. Well, those people aren't saying it for their own health. They are doing it for those who are already using. I think that random drug testing is a great idea because it will cause kids to think twice before doing something stupid, and if they already have and they get caught, then all the better. At least they'll finally get the hint.
Drugs are a huge problem in the highschool environment these days. I think at least once a day I walk out of the bathroom either smelling like cigarettes or pot. It's a bit ridiculous. It is one thing to do it out side of school, but then to bring it into school is a whole other story.
I think that doing random drug tests would definitely reduce the problem. Like Devon said, kids would be scared and might not even start to do the drugs in the first place. However, there are the people who would go against this decision. I'm not sure I agree with Devon with her opinion that the people who are against it are those who do drugs. Of course these would be most of the opposers, but I also think others would be against it as well. People who would think that random drug testing was just the beginning of eliminating civil rights would certainly voice their opposition. However, like Devon also said, many people don't even understand their rights.
I don't think things should go too much further after random drug testing. Students have rights. Their belongings shouldn't be allowed to just randomly be searched. If a school feels like students could be bringing in weapons, then they could request for those clear bookbags, or some other solution. A student needs to feel comfortable in a school. If they feel like the school doesn't trust them and that they need to constantly be on their toes, then they won't enjoy school at all.
As Brittany and Devon both said, if these tests are random, then there should be no discrimination. I think people pull that card too much. This is an example of people not understanding their rights. If people are just randomly called down to be tested, then there is no way that it is discrimitory.
If it became too much of a problem, people pulling the racism card, then I guess schools could test on evidense. So many times, students have come to school with their eyes completely bloodshot and just get away with it. I think if teachers see this they should be able to test that person. That way, other students who haven't ever touched a drug won't be bothered with being called down and going through the process of being tested. I don't think boys are more likely to be tested. Girls are just as influenced and persuaded to try the drugs as much as boys, maybe even more. Peer pressure is everywhere. Maybe, if schools have random drug testing it would be as high. The pressurers would be too scared to try it in the first place.
I also agree with Megan when she says some schools will be bias and judge people upon clothes and other things. I don't feel all schools would do this, but some may. Once again stating bias is out there. And I just wanted to add that drug testing is very expensive and not all schools have the money to drug test everyone. That would be another drawback because it is expensive. But, I still think schools should test everyone that way people don't make a big deal about it and then the school knows everyone's story. And really if someone makes a big deal over the tests it should just be ignored. And many students do drugs and hopefully these precautions would help send the rate down.
Drugs are illegal and people shouldn’t do them but things aren’t as simple as that. People do drugs even though they know they might be illegal. If schools set rules enforcing that random drug testing was to occur in school that will cause some people to think twice about doing drugs.
In soccer and other sports in high school, we have to sign a waver saying that we do not take drugs to enhance our performance and we are willing to get tested if we randomly get chosen. This drug testing causes athletes to think twice about using drugs and hopefully the same would occur in school. If people randomly got tested, that would cause some people to maybe stop using or not use drugs ever again.
People do not always realize that they are doing something wrong. Or they will sometimes use the excuse it really isn’t “that bad,” until they get caught and seriously punished for what they are doing. This drug testing may not stop everyone and students still might try stuff until they learn the hard way and get caught. With the testing this might cause people to think twice and they may not want to suffer the consequences.
Megan made me think twice about my view when she mentioned the outside view that not everyone always thinks of or talks about. She said how some people who made out to be wealthy and successful are on drugs and if there was drug testing, their life would be completely altered. She made me think about how some people like the Beetles were on drugs but they made some of their best songs under the influence. This drug testing might alter people’s lives that would have made out fine and lived a wealthy life but due to the testing sent them to rehab or maybe expelled them from school. Megan caused me to think about the other side but I still strongly believe that the testing should still occur and people deserve proper punishment for their neglect to follow the law.
I think the drug testing may lead to other types of safety precautions in the future and all of them are just made to look at for the youth in the schools. I believe that there should be random searches and seizures. This can help protect the school and the people within the school. People do have civil rights but random searches can always help keep the school a safer place and prevents major tragedies like Virginia Tech.
As for biases, there shouldn’t be any. If the testing is done correctly then there should not be any biases. The testing should be completely random and no names or race or gender or religion should be told before conducting this testing. Each person selected should be completely selected and there shouldn’t be any worries about biases. The only problem is people do not always know how to accept the fact that there are no biases. And sometimes people say that I was chosen because I am a girl.
Where do I start with this well I guess I can start by saying that random drug testing is a good idea. I think that if teens are certain to school everyday with the fear of having their parents find out about their drug use and embarrassing them by having the word spread all the time and maybe a possible search of their house you know that if you are caught your going to face some serious consequences. Since students know this I think that the drug abuse rate in teens would go down dramatically and of course you say there are way to beat the system but this still will help. However I do agree with the fact that the people for these tests will have more of a bias opinion to certain ethnicities than others when it definitely shouldn’t be that way. I know kids in Ap courses who you would least expect that use drugs but for some reason I feel that if a cop came to our period 9/10 class without knowing anything about us would probably pick me out of the bunch before they looked at anyone else. I feel bad at saying this but when you look at the news most of the people you see being busted for selling drugs are black. No that’s not because there are no white drug dealers it’s just the simple fact that they aren’t the ones being targeted. In some black communities people may look at it as something that is supposed to be saving their child’s future may in a sense be jeopardizing it. By having these random test it will help older students to get a start on the job path. I know people who will not go apply for jobs because they know that they would not pass the drug test. As far as rights go in school a lot of our rights are already taken away for instance free speech so I think something like random drug testing will not sway the average high school student’s opinion of this if they aren’t on drugs. Some draw backs of this testing is funding. In order for this to be carried out nationwide or even countywide taxes will definitely take a hit. Knowing this some parents may not want to take this hit especially if they know that their child is not involved in any type of drug use. Another draw back of this is how sanitary it would be by drawing blood it seems like there would be more risk of passing around diseases and I don’t know anyone who wants to have to handle hot pee all day (lol) lastly there is the chance of someone’s samples getting mixed up something like that could cost a child their whole future especially if their parents are reluctant to believe that they are using drugs which they would most likely be. One compromise that I could see working is that at least two times a year a parent should have to take their children to a lab to be tested in order to be able to keep them enrolled in school.
The blood shot eyes, exhausted appearance, lack of conversation, and every other reaction people may undergo when using drugs simply comes together to, more time than not, end up with the loss of a great friend. When using drugs, people really do change whether it is just temporary at first and a gradual change it doesn’t matter. So many people have drastically changed once they started using drugs and I hate it. However, random drug tests in schools are not the way to stop or even reduce students from smoking their lives away. Sure, the testing may reduce some kids from being under the influence in school but where does that get you? A 2% increase of participation, maybe if you’re lucky. People are who they are, well, let me rephrase that. Kids are who they are, and they will act like kids until one day they realize all of the mistakes they have made. Once they understand right from wrong, instead of doing whatever they feel like, that is when these irresponsible kids turn into adults. Random drug tests in school have no part in this equation of life. The second they leave the building, if teachers are even lucky, the drugs will be passed around like a hot potato. Living in this state of mind, most teenagers just don’t care and the only thing that is going to change that is them.
I don’t see any other safety precautions following drug tests in school that would result in some successful Oprah story that changes the lives of students. Violence is violence, drugs are drugs. All of the results from both may vary, however, they all are on the path to the same outcome, death, and still, no one who is violent or under the influence ever stops and thinks, “that could actually happen to me.”
Personally, I would have no problem if random drug testing occurred in schools except for the obvious point that it could lead to random search and seizers, and we all know from AP Gov. last year that this right is very important to Americans. Yet, why is it ok for random drug testing to occur at jobs, such as being a life guard? Yes, lifeguards save lives and need to be fully alert, but students have just enough potential to ruin lives too. Maybe I’m contradicting myself because I don’t see why random drug testing should lead to random searches and seizures, yet, regardless of our civil rights, performing a random drug test in school would not, and will not prevent students from using drugs any other time. Maybe they won’t come to school high as much, but I’m sure the second the last bell rings, they all meet up after school and celebrate, if they can even wait that long.
Going by what I hear on the news, I would have to agree that there is a racial bias. At the beginning of random drug testing in schools, it seems as though most would occur in high schools located in Philadelphia or New York City, incidentally were more of the black population are. I am absolutely not saying that more black students use drugs more than white, because what I have witnessed in just one short year, would definitely flip that observation around, yet, once again, by following the news coverage, it would seem those areas would undergo this possess first. I feel the same way about a sexual bias. Do I believe there is one? Definitely. Do I believe there should be one? Absolutely not. Girls are just as likely to use drugs as boys are, however, when it comes down to the statistics, men are found using drugs more than women. Unfortunately, the facts are only what police, and any other political figure or authoritative occupation, can go by. They aren’t able to experience this in schools because they are out in “the real world” doing their jobs. We are stuck in apparently some “fantasy world” where our job is to come to school, learn, and witness so many of our friends deteriorating in personality and appearance with no statistics or facts to back us up.
What America needs is something that can get inside these kids’ minds and somehow force them to stop using drugs but this is not possible. No technology in the world, or the future world, can change someone’s choices if they decide they want to do something. This is why we have civil rights in the first place. Forcing someone to stop doing what they choose to do is “not right,” though sometimes I wish it was because the world would be a different place. Regardless of the decrease of drug use that would occur, an astonishing increase of rebellion would just follow, leading our future into disaster.
I understand where Devon is coming from when she says that all of the people who are against drug testing are those who use drugs, however understanding and agreeing are two totally separate things. I am, as Joanna stated, “NOT NOT NOT” on drugs, and still, I am completely against random drug testing in schools for separate reasons. They will not be effective in schools, other than the fact that it will waste money and get some students out of class for a few moments. With the first year, or years for that matter, when this drug testing would be allowed, it would first occur in schools that apparently “need it”, such as those where the population has more black kids than white. But honestly, just imagine how those kids in like Mississippi are. If you go on the Princeton Review and look up the biggest party schools, you’ll see that the top ten are mostly all in areas where nothing else is around them. Drinking and smoking, which are all illegal, are all they seem to do in their spare time, good students or not. So when Brittany says that if people are doing something illegal their rights should not be taken into account, this is referring to so many of our nation’s “smart, educated, and promising” future generation. So as I was saying before, these drug tests would take a long time before reaching all of the states that really need their students to stop but because of the racial bias, most random drug testing would occur along the east and west coast. Random drug testing in schools is nonetheless, a complete waste!
The benefits of this new policy truly does serve its purpose; keeping kids away from drugs. However, this policy really does have civil rights violation written all over it! According to the second edition of the Students Rights Handbook written by the American Civil Liberties Union of NJ drug testing can only be done with reasonable suspicion that the student is under the influence. The school can conduct these tests after notification of a parent or guardian, and if a parent or guardian is not available then the child is immediately rushed to the hospital where testing then detox takes place immediately. The school is allowed to do this within justifications that to maintain a disciplined learning environment all that the school needs to search/test a student for drugs is “reasonable suspicion.” With that information, why would this policy be any different? I don’t do drugs nor do I drink, but if I was to be subjected to a drug testing without reasonable suspicion I would be really upset. Like Christine said, drugs are illegal, but seriously why should I be subjected to a drug testing when I know I’m not doing drugs. It would feel like a waste of my time because the school is testing someone who doesn’t do drugs and is not doing its job of catching someone who is. This policy would definitely lead to a racial/sexual bias. Even though the policy is set to be random students, that’s not how people are going to take it. It’s inevitable that people are going to start pulling out the race/sex card. It’s stupid, but that’s how social politics works. I’m a young Latina trying to succeed against a racial bias that is not all the time positive. That alone gives me the reason to question whether my race was a factor in why I was chosen for the drug testing. Even though I know it’s at random I ALSO KNOW that some random, most like white man, put the settings on that computer to pick people… “at random.”
I can agree that drugs and the toll it takes on people stifle opportunity and only leads you unto a road far from where you would ever want to be, however if someone decides to do drugs that’s the path that there are taking in their life. Someone else’s habits, unrelated to mine, will not affect me and my life. I will not let my life be “tainted” by random drug testing. Thank you humanitarianism for trying to help out, but no thanks. I think if schools were really trying to help the issue and tried less to get kids in trouble they would follow a students civil rights with a broader definition of “reasonable suspicion.” It would allow for more kids who have questionable habits to get help.
Giving students random drug tests would seem to be as John P. Walters said, a great way to help students lead healthy lives. Students would, as many have said so far, think twice before doing drugs and athletes would try to stay clear of steroids, but I think the usage of drugs wouldn’t decrease as much as people think it would. You know that saying “Where there is a will, there’s a way,” well students would find ways to pass drug tests and depending on what drugs they are taking, (for example alcohol, most amphetamines, MDMA (ecstasy), heroine, cocaine, some barbiturates, PCP, and LSD (acid) stay in your system for 7 days or less) they might not even have to do anything to pass the test. Picking students out of class would definitely strike some as a violation of civil rights, but usually a notice is sent to the person’s house telling them a few days (sometimes even weeks) in advance when they will be tested. Taking kids out of class would probably result in more people being caught for drug usage and I am not against picking students out of class, however, the racial/sexual bias that Mrs. Bunje asks us to elaborate on would probably (I think) end up playing a bigger role in choosing students to test than most would like to accept. School faculty might suggest that certain people be tested because the way they may dress or present themselves along with their gender or skin color. Random drug testing has many good intentions and I can understand why many people would be for it, but on the other hand, it may open up other cans or worms that ought not to be opened. Marijuana deals in school would be joined with the dealing of detoxification pills, some students would live in a state of paranoia, whereas others might protest that they are getting tested because of the color of their skin. The tests, though designed to keep students physically healthy, might cause more mental, emotional, and social problems throughout high schools. In the end, there will always be students who use drugs no matter what precautions are taken. Although I think it is good for people to stay drug free, I would have to say I am against random drug testing as a means of keeping students off drugs because I think people shouldn’t be scared
As Christine had said, drugs are illegal and nothing is going to get you around that conclusion. Yes, you have rights and certain freedoms, but when you are in the position where someone else could get hurt, your rights don't exist. When it comes to schools, random drug testing can yes, decrease the use of drugs in school, but what happens when that student walks out of school boundries? A simple rule is not going to stop a full addiction. Random drug testing is like the school begging for an excuse for the students to burst into riots. "It's a violation of our rights!" they will claim. But they don't realize that this "right" that is being violated is saving their life and other lives as well. Technically, the government can't try and change our lifestyle. Like Gary said, the government can have ways to reduce it, but they can't actually take action. But students getting high or shooting up or whatever you do, puts other peoples lives at stake. So do I agree with the random drug testing? Only half way. What is really getting solved by doing the testing? If the student had no drugs on school grounds, how can they honestly be punished? Random search and seizures are also kind of ridiculous. I have seen lockers busted open with the police looking for drugs. Yes, the lockers are school property, but inside those lockers are private property and unless someone actually saw the drugs with their own eyes, no one's personal belongings should have to be searched.
Watching the news, I believe there is a definite racial bias. I tend to notice that the drug stories are always shown with low end people that happen to be black. What about the low end white people? What about the rich white and black people? (And people wonder why everyone is so racist. The news doesn't seem to help with anyone's judgment of people)Anyway, anyone can do drugs if they wanted, so to only show black people or hispanic people on the news definitly shows some racial bias. But I don't think that there is that much of a sexual bias going on. Yes, it is proven that men are more likely to do drugs then women, but girls do them too, it is just mostly shown that men do. It is as if the men's drug stories are more interesting or something when doing drugs is not intersting at all.
To respond to someone's blog would be hard because I think that mostly everyone has the same opinion. Drug testing is a waste!!! It will take out more time and money to pay for all the testing that we will need to get done and trust me, if Oakcrest ever did testing, we would lose alot of money. The testing and random searches is not needed. If someone chooses to ruin their life, let them learn the hard way how to fix their mistakes, it isn't our problem anymore. From day one, we are always taught that drugs are bad and why, so we warned them. It is up to them to make that final decision. Would they say yes? Or no.
I see the benefits of drug testing. I think it is a necessary threat for sports so cheating will be reduced with steroids, but I do not completely agree that it should be a threat in school. I agree with Rachel that it would make people second guess their choice, but will it really stop people from doing drugs? People turn to drugs because they have some “reason” that they think is reasonable and they often ignore any rules that apply to it. So what would this do for them anyway? It’s just another rule to not abide by.
Hopefully, it would reduce drug usage and make our world a more drug-free place, but it still would not change many people whatsoever. I think Leslie and I are on the same page, the second the kids walk out the doors of these halls, he drugs are passed out and around. I might not be waving any fists and screaming, “civil rights violation!” but the government has no right to even do this. Well, they do, but the government should not try to change our lifestyle. It’s kind of like obesity. The government can try to implement plans to reduce it, but they have no right to take action. Anyway, this might lead to further testing that other people would argue against. If someone is found to be taking drugs, would that give the administration the right to search the student’s possessions and locker? I started writing this during lunch but now I’m at home and it’s 6:04 so I can’t even think straight. I don’t feel like doing my logs right now and I’m tired and I have piano soon so I’m going to put that off until after that. I am listening to a random playlist of heavy metal, indie, and punk music that I haven’t listened to in a while and I’m going to a concert Thursday night. On top of that, my mom had a horrible day at work so she is all flustered here so I think I’m probably going to contradict myself. But back to this.
I still don’t agree with the drug testing but I think if it was implemented, that the searches could be carried out. Because it gives the administrators a reason or the search and possible seizure of the drugs. Students truly don’t have any right in school so this should be the last place they bring their drugs if they have any. But the testing can be conducted without any prejudice or bias. Rachel is right when she said that the testing can be left out of biases. The random choices should have no names, faces, race, gender, or any other description associated but each person given a number and the numbers are chosen randomly. That would cut out any bias but like Rachel said again, people will claim that it was biased, which would increase dislike of the testing. In my opinion, race and gender really wouldn’t have many biases because at Oakcrest, every race and both genders do drugs, equally it seems. There may be a difference between some of them, but it’s still drugs all the same.
Since Rachel talked about Megan’s blog so much, I agree with her that smart people do drugs and can beat the system. But that changed my mind toward accepting the testing rather more. If that person were to be caught, than it would completely alter their life, we may miss something from that person because of them getting caught, but if someone is still doing drugs when they are running a multi-million dollar business later on in their life, then that’s just wrong. But once again, these tests still aren’t right.
What a coincidence! I had a debate about this last year in history.
"By giving students an incentive to stay away from drugs, random drug testing helps them lead healthy, successful lives. For that reason, it's one of many tools we believe schools should use to fight drug use among teens."
I completely agree with this statement. Random drug testing has many benefits that are going to help kids who have drug problems. I feel that if you don�t do drugs, like myself, you shouldn�t worry about taking a test. These tests are not designed for the people who don�t do drugs, they�re for the people who do. It�s a good way to take control over someone that really needs help because for whatever the reason they are too scared to get it themselves. It gets kids on the right path to lead a successful life without the problems of drugs getting their way. After all, drugs are illegal so they can�t be a good substance. They harm you�re body and cause relationships with family and friends to plunder. I think I sound like a health textbook or something, but I believe that these things are true.
Some drawbacks would have to be kids who smoke pot or do other drugs and it really doesn�t seem to have an effect on them at all when playing sports or other school activities. A kid could be the best player on the football team and he could smoke pot everyday of his life. I still don�t think this is acceptable. He should get punished for drugs as anyone else would. He knows they�re bad and he shouldn�t be doing them and he took that risk when he smoked it. Also getting in trouble sometimes makes kids rebel and do more of it and more often. Sometimes these tests aren�t always in every ones favor.
I really don�t think these random drug tests violate any rights whatsoever because first of all you�re on school grounds where drugs are prohibited. Therefore they are prohibited when playing a sport. A teacher can search your locker at any time so why not if you�re doing drugs. It�s only going to help the student get back on track.
These drug tests are definitely biased, even though they shouldn�t be! As Erin said, you always see black people getting busted for drugs. There are white people who do them. Heck, there�s like a million in Oakcrest. You hear about the white people being molesters and rapists, not drug abusers. In reality, every ethnicity abuses drugs.
I definitely don�t think drug testing is a waste of time. I think over time it will make a difference because sooner or later everyone�s going to know someone who got caught and couldn�t play the sport they like or sing in the choir all because of drugs. I think it will really open up everyone�s eyes and take it more seriously.
I believe Devon is right, random drug testing could weed out all the early stages of drug usage. Not only drugs, but eventually weapons and other dangerous items as well. There are many benefits to having this policy, not only does this help weed out the drug usage nation wide but it would also save the lives of the people using it. Many people die from drug usage and even more die from second hand drug usage as well. The only excuses that drug users and drug dealers commonly use is their rights for privacy. But in any cases, only drug users and drug dealers would mind having their lockers sniff out and or having their body’s exam for drug, why would ordinary day to day students mind having themselves tested if they don’t do drugs or have anything stashed away in their lockers?
Other from that, I don’t believe that there should be random searches or seizures. That would definitely be considered a violation of our rights to privacy. Even though random searches or seizures might help take out those who are suspicious of having weapons or plans on bombing the school, it doesn’t mean that they should check out every locker that they want to just because they are suspicious. There are limits to random searches or seizure; students shouldn’t be blamed for future crimes if authorities found an item that, in the past, might prove to be useful in a future case. I believe that the authorities would have to issue a warrant before searching in ANY students’ locker, just as if they have to have a warrant to search a house or car before claiming rights to an item for a case or for blackmailing maybe.
There should absolutely NOT be any racial biasness in random testing or in searches and seizures. There are many cases in which a certain ethnic group would be singled out for drug testing and that is the only bad thing about random drug testing. Should a person be blamed for doing drugs when they haven’t just because of their color or race? I think not. Random drug testing means RANDOM not pick out certain people who authorities may single out as SUSPICIOUS. But according to some facts boys are the bigger percentage in drug usage rather than girls, but that can’t account for all boys. If we corner out the “supposed” suspects than we’d leave the other minority drug users free to roam about. All this random testing is supposed to help keep the drug usage down to a minimal and scare them away, not single out a certain group and let the others be safe against the law. We can’t be safe knowing that the government authorities are all up to good deeds, many can misuse their status and do wrong things to students.
The benefits of this policy outweigh the drawback, in my opinion. IT gives students the incentive to not do drugs and stop if they are. This policy sort of gives an excuse for students to not allow themselves to be pressured into doing drugs. “Sorry, my school does random drug tests. My education is of greater priority rather than getting high.” Not be to stereotypical, but the kids who are doing drugs don’t care. Maybe this new policy will give them the will and desire to stop, reprioritize and realize what is more important.
However, every good thing has its drawbacks. With random testing in school, the kid who ate the poppy seed bagel for breakfast may test positive for heroine. The minorities will complain it is the result of racial profiling. It could lead to revolt, it could lead to anarchy. What a school with major drug problems needs is a revolution. Eventually, our generation’s stereotypical binge drinking and illicit drug use will fade out. At that point random drug testing will no longer be necessary.
Allowing random drug testing in public schools does pave the way for other types of safety precautions. Drugs are associated with violence and gangs. All of which are the last thing a school needs. Random drug tests will hopefully eliminate the use of illicit drugs amongst teenagers in high school. Without the use of drugs, violence and the presence of gangs will decrease, therefore making school a safe place. Therefore making school what it was meant for, to learn.
Random searches and seizures take it too far, in my opinion. Reasonable cause is a much better way to conduct a search on a student. I would feel violated if I was randomly searched, being the “innocent” student I am. This power could be abused, too. Similar to the way the patriot act is abused in America today, I feel random searches and seizures on students will become just as abused. Oh, you have a cell phone, thinks a teacher, every student has a cell phone. So they search you. And confiscate your cell phone. No reason or method behind the random search. I just can see things like that happening, even though the situation sounds stupid on paper.
I definitely think racial and sexual bias will exist behind random searches or and random drug tests, because eventually they will stop being random. Boys and minorities will be more susceptible to these random acts based solely and stereotypes. And while everyone hates stereotypes, they do exist. How can stereotypes not exist when they are based on the observation and analysis of past actions?
In response to what Danny said, while everyone thinks random drug testing would be this great thing to help prevent illicit use of drugs in schools, how much money would it really cost? I decided to try and find out myself. You have a few different options to test for drugs, cheapest being urine samples. Asking for urine samples from students in high school may not be most efficient way to conduct tests, even though its price is low. While other options are available, the most efficient, in my opinion, is a sweat patch test. The test runs about $40 per student. Assuming Oakcrest has a population of about 2,500 students; one can say that testing each student at Oakcrest once throughout the course of a year would cost $100,000. If a hundred students test positive for the test, the school would have spent $1,000 on each positive student. The cost does not outweigh the benefit in my opinion.
In my opinion, random drug testing in high schools is definately appropriate and beneficial to teenagers that are potentially threatened by drug abuse. There are numerous benefits to this policy that should be acknowledged and understood by everyone. After all, what could possibly be negative about eliminating drug use in teens? Drug tests will create a safer atmosphere in high schools in the sense that they will rid fights, gangs, and decrease harm to the bodys of the students. I believe that drugs take on a strong role in creating an unsafe school environment, and should certainly be a top priority of the government to make sure it is taken care of to the best of their ability. Personally, I see no drawbacks in a random drug test. Some may say that it invades the rights and privacy of the people; however, when it comes down to saving the young lives of students in high school, when does the whole "rights invasion" become the weaker fight. This is obviously a very controversial topic due to its potential ability at racism, sexial biaism, etc. If every student gets tested an equal amount of times, there is no lack of just in random drug testing whatsoever. Unless it can be proved or deeply suspected that a student is involved with the use of drugs, than no student should have to be tested among another. If these drug tests can be done fairly, I think it is fair to say that they will make schools safer and students healthier in the longrun.
I strongly agree with Rebecca when she says that if a student does not do drugs, then what do they have to worry about? The only affect they are getting from these drug tests is a posistive one, seeing that it is making their school and peers safer and healthier. It carrys out a more happy school environment and leads students in the correct path for success. If random drug tests are really that fiered among students, then apparently they are hiding something that needs to have attention brought to it. Students should be mature enough to realize that the drug test policy will only steer them in a better direction if they are in need.
"By giving students an incentive to stay away from drugs, random drug testing helps them lead healthy, successful lives. For that reason, it's one of many tools we believe schools should use to fight drug use among teens." This statement can be argued from different perspectives. There are the benefits and negatives. The benefits to this policy are that by having the fear of being tested at any time, hopefully, people will stay clean. But, when you look at the big picture, if you are going to do drugs, you are going to do drugs. If they are not scared to take the chance of going through buying them and having them, they are not going to be scared to do them. That is your decision. There are obvious drawbacks to this policy that include civil rights violations that say it is wrong to be searched and tested with no probable cause. Allowing random drug testing in public schools does pave the way for other types of "safety precautions" such as random searches and seizures. Just imagine if every time a teacher saw your cell phone, they confiscated it and handed it over to the police. Things could get ridiculous. There is also the fact that these “random” searches and tests probably wouldn’t be so random. They would probably be aimed towards people that do not fit the “perfect student”. People who may cause trouble, wear baggy clothes, very quiet or very outspoken, and unfortunately, usually black. Black people are always targeted for the blame of problems. When you turn on the news, they broadcast every problem in black communities concerning drugs and crime but they never talk about the trailer park trash or low life white people who are doing the same thing. Sure, random tests could cut down on drug usage, but it will not stop everyone and random tests probably won’t be random at all. I absolutely disagree with Devon when she says that all of the people who are against drug testing are those who use drugs. I am not on drugs but I am against the testing. That is your own business and if that’s truly, the lifestyle you want to live, you are going to do what you want to do. Sometimes you have to experience things to make your ultimate decision on things. I agree with Tawni W. when she wrote that even though there are benefits, I disagree with this statement because of the same reasons that have been mentioned above. School is about getting an education, not about taking time out of the day to submit to drug tests because of one’s appearance, because really in the end, that’s what it would be all about.
Last year in “the bully’s” class I had a debate very similar to this topic. I was very excited when I got it because I agree with random drug tests and thought it would be easier to defend something you believed in. I was wrong. Even though I hated drugs and everything that had to do with them, I did not realize until the day of our debate just how many people felt the exact opposite way I did.
Well for starters I completely disagree with Leslie and Gary on one major point in particular. The statement “Maybe they won’t come to school high as much, but I’m sure the second the last bell rings, they all meet up after school and celebrate, if they can even wait that long,” is so unbearably untrue. Drugs will remain detectably in your system for at least 24 hours after use… most of them are longer. Using drugs out of school will not magically make your urine pure or erase the substance from your system. IT WILL STILL BE THERE. No matter what someone does to try and make it go away, the drugs will not leave their system until their body has run its course. Knowing this, a significantly lower number of students will not use drugs.
On the other hand, I agree with Brittany when she said your right to use the law to protect you went out the window the very second you broke the law. It really does not make sense how someone can try and use a law to protect them against something they did which broke a law.
Okay, maybe it is just me but I honestly do not believe that just because we could be subject to a random drug test any illegal searches and seizures will be thrown into the mix at our school. Random drug testing will only lead to one thing and that is less kids doing drugs. Random drug tests will only bring benefits to our school. We would be able to enter a bathroom without coming out smelling like an ash tray, we would be able not have to worry so much about losing a friend to drugs, and we certainly would not have to worry as much about being pressured to try drugs if we really do not want to. Students would be better off. They would have the thought hanging over their heads, “If I do this my entire family could find out.” People do so many things they would not want their parents to find about. The thought of a parent finding out their child is doing illegal drugs will ensure a decrease in the amount of kids that actually do these drugs.
I honestly do think there is a very inaccurate bias about the people who do drugs. Most people would expect a black male or a black person in general would be the one they caught smoking. To me, this stereotype is completely absurd. I know more white people who are so messed up from drugs they can barely function, than I do black people who are on drugs. I think what may help promote this stereotype are the black rappers talking about weed and blunts and all that other stuff. People are people. There is no specific group of people who will do drugs. I have personally experienced that it is usually the exact people you would not expect to do drugs are the ones that do.
=)
"By giving students an incentive to stay away from drugs, random drug testing helps them lead healthy, successful lives. For that reason, it's one of many tools we believe schools should use to fight drug use among teens."
Drugs. This topic may cause conflict with some, indifference to others. But first, let’s take a look at this quote by John P. Walters. Are random drug tests really making a difference in teen-agers lives? I don’t think so. Personally, I’ve never really thought about random drug testing. Other kids who use drugs may think about the effects of being caught by a drug test, but I highly doubt it. As Joanna said, everyone thinks it will happen to everyone else. The bottom line is: “Just don’t get caught”. So, I really don’t think any student has said or even thought, “Wow, because of random drug testing I’m living such a better life. I’m healthy, and this policy has really helped me become a better person”. The reality of it is that students will merely view these random drug tests as another obstacle to get around: “Just don’t get caught” is their reoccurring thought. So, until that day when they do get caught, none of it will matter. I think it can be held true that for most kids these days, or anyone for that matter, nothing will be learned unless its through their own experiences.
I disagree with Michael H. when he says the benefits will outweigh the drawbacks. If you are actually using drugs, and regularly, or at least whenever you can get some, you most likely have an addiction. If I were a drug addict, the “chance” of a random drug test would probably not stop my addiction. And, any student who uses, “Sorry, my school does random drug tests. My education is of greater priority rather than getting high” for an excuse to not do drugs probably won’t ever do drugs, despite random drug testing. Don’t get me wrong; there are benefits. Students who get caught will be forced to face the consequences and maybe face discipline from their parents if they care enough, but I think overall, it won’t have much effect.
I can see how random drug testing in school would pave the way for other types of safety precautions to also be made in school. Just because that is approved, all other types of regulations will come our way. It’s even hard to say if random searches and seizures should be made, because on one hand, as long as it’s random maybe it’s okay, but on the other hand, why should we be searched in the first place without notice. If you need a warrant to search someone’s house, why should you be able to search them whenever?
I think that there are probably all types of biases going on, whether we choose to accept it or not. Whether you’re black, white, short, fat, Hispanic, Mexican, rich, poor, boy, girl, or even gothic, you will get judged. Maybe not straight out, but subconsciously. I guess there are more professional ways of randomly picking a person, like from a roster of names or something, but still, when they see the person, a suspicion may be there. And, like Devon said, people will always find an excuse and blame it on their ethnicity or background, so as to cause more of a personal defense.
Alright, now this is a touchy subject. In my opinion, random drug tests should be administered in high schools. As Devon said, drug testing would reduce the amount students that do drugs or hopefully prevent people from doing drugs in the first place. Personally, I don't see the point to do doing drugs in the first place, it seems like nothing good can come from it, so why do it in the first place? Either way, drug testing does have really good aspects to it, but on the other hand, it does have some drawbacks.
There will always be someone complaining about something, or someone trying to find a loop hole to beat the system. People would claim that it violates their civil rights but what doesn't violate civil rights? They say you have freedom of speech, but words get bleeped out on TV and the radio. There are too many exceptions to laws but if random drug tests are administered, it's obvious that people will protest. I think it's human nature for people to dread taking tests. But if the test could drastically change the outcome of someone's life for the worse, why would anyone want to take it? I know from experience how badly getting busted can effect someone's life. This didn't happen to me personally, as you may already know, but it did happen to someone really close to me. I'm not going to mention names but they will always have a dark cloud following them around whenever they apply for a job or anything for that matter. That's not how someone should live. However, he knew what he was doing and deserved his punishment so i can't really feel sorry for him.
Anyway, back to the subject of random drug testing. It's a hit or miss with gender and racial biases. It all depends on the way the administration or whoever is in-charge goes about deciding who takes them or not. If it's just random pull-a-name-out-of-a-hat way of choosing, then there isn't really anyway to accuse someone of being bias. But, someone will find a way to accuse someone of "playing favorites" if you will. The whole situation is sort-of fuzzy, but i feel that it would be good for high schools to incorporate random drug tests into the curriculum. It would probably make high school a better place since there would be less drugs around. As Alli M. said, I would like to walk into the restroom and not worry about smelling like smoke the rest of the day. It's getting ridiculous and it needs to be brought under control. Random drug tests could be the way to go if the people in charge go about it the right way.
Everyone knows drugs are bad. Well the majority of us do. With that being said, some (or most) teenagers do drugs regardless. They are fully aware of the consequences and fully aware of the people they are letting down by doing drugs. Even though drug testing is bad, I really don’t think random drug testing does anything to halt or hinder students from doing drugs. If people want to do drugs, then they will do drugs. They will not worry about the consequences for their actions and what will happen to them. Even if they do get caught, what happens? They get a slap on the wrist, get a half-hearted “don’t do it again”, and get released back into the world without a scratch on them. They didn’t learn their lesson and they never will. Sure there can be benefits to drug testing, but there are more drawbacks to this situation. Drug testing is EXPENSIVE. Where are our schools supposed to get the money to pay for all this? The government? Oh yeah sure, let’s take another humongous tax hike guys! I don’t think that drug testing will prevent anyone from doing drugs and it will become way to expensive for our state to handle. Another reason why this drug testing is completely idiotic, is that in the subject drug testing in sports. Oakcrest athletics are already so bad that they cannot afford to lose anyone. So let’s say that hypothetically if someone as good as Rachel Carlson at soccer gets caught doing drugs through this “random drug testing”, than the soccer team would be screwed. There would be no chance for the Oakcrest to win anything ever again. Drug testing would be detrimental to the athletic process. It is possible that by allowing drug testing, other things like unwarranted searches and seizures occurring. The sad thing though is that this violation of the fourth amendment of the Constitution already happens in our country. Students have rarely any rights whatsoever, especially in the school settings. So actually it really wouldn’t make a difference at all. When I had applied to work at Acme over the summer, they would not hire me until I got a drug test. Even though I have never done drugs in my life, it was a very intimidating experience, but I obviously got the job and did not have anything to worry about. I most definitely agree with Megan when she said that the potential harm for the school is greater. There could be some bias in this problem but who knows. It’s a dumb idea anyway.
I do not think that random drug testing is a violation of rights. The druggies are the ones violating the laws. Certain drugs are made illegal for a reason. They are either harmful, or unhealthy. One of the expectations most people hold to the governement is to protect us. That is what they are trying to do by making these drugs illegal, and possibly to test for them. Protection of a country has to start somewhere, so why not in the country it self? Random drug testing would cause the number of people who use illegal drugs, which would cause a country to become healthier. People would no longer make as many drugs either, because no one would buy them since they would not want to fail the drug test. A decrease n the number of kids that do drugs will also allow the students to do better in school, since they would not be under the influence of any drug. I do not think that it would lead to other types of "safety precautions" unless others were needed.
If the testing was truly random, then it shouldn't have any type of bias. If it turns out that more boys or more gays or more blacks are being chosen, then that is an issue that needs to be addressed when it happens. But how will we know that bias will happen unless we try? I think that random drug testing has more benefits than drawbacks.
I agree and disagree with Emily C, which is surprising because we usually agree about most things. Emily C seems to keep thinking of the "now", and that the random drugs tests would be administered to help the addicts now. I agree with her that they won't help the people that are already addicts, they are hooked, and it is very difficult to get them off. But random drug testing wouldn't be administere for the "now". They would be administered to hopefully convince people not to start in the first place. If scaring the people with the health facts and effects of the drugs don't work, then more serious law action needs to be taken.
Honestly, I was getting sick of reading everyone's posts about how "Smoking is so bad for you. Smoking is terrible. I would never smoke. It's bad. Drugs are bad." Which kind of instigated me to choose the opposing side in this case. The blog isn't about whether you do drugs or not, it's about whether you can violate someone's civil rights and conduct a search.
Obviously, search and seizures are against the law and violate the Constitution if they are conducted without a cause. Whatever people choose to personally do behind closed doors stays behind closed doors. It's one thing if a kid is off smoking pot while he's in the privacy of his own home, but it's another thing if he's in the school bathroom doing it while there are other kids in the vicinity. I believe that as long as you're only harming yourself and not putting other people in harm's way, then it's nothing to get worked up about. As long as the "wrong-doing" is happening off of school grounds, then there is no need to pull students aside IN school and take care of it. It's like if two kids were to get into a fight outside of school at a friends house. The school administration couldn't punish the students for something that didn't happen in school.
I suppose that the "benefits" of this would be catching the so-called "bad kids". But I can honestly say that I know a lot of really good people that just do stupid things. I don't these people should be punished for the dumb things they do if they're smart about the dumb things they do; such as not take their bad habits onto school grounds. Drawbacks definitely include reputaion ruining. I know plenty of AP kids that have tried weed once or twice outside of school just to try it. Now would it be fair if the school randomly chose them to take a drug test and they tested positive even though they had only tried something once even if they're actually a good, hardworking, trustworthy person? I think not.
Random drug testing would without a doubt pave the way for other types of "safety precautions." Take Oakcrest, for example. At first we weren't allowed to walk in the hallways without a tracker, weren't allowed to sign into the library without a pass, and lunches were 45 minutes long. Now teachers aren't allowed to sign regular square passes if a student forgets his/her tracker, getting into the library requires a 13-step process for God's sake, and lunches are now cut down to 25 minutes, where you need your ID to enter. I know most of you are thinking, "what does this have to do with random drug testing?" but if you think about it, it's all just a matter of one school instituted rule leading to something more and more extreme.
There's no doubt in my mind that there would be biases. Our society strives off of biases. Of course they would say it was "random", and it probably would be for the first couple weeks or so. But I do believe that after awhile, the system will start targeting friends of the people who have tested positive. Even more than that, I'm sure that the school will judge people, like Megan said, by the clothes they wear, the classes they're in, their attitude, basically anything that gives off a "rebel" vibe.
I completely agree with Emily C's blog, especially when she says that people who have problems with drugs aren't going to be the least bit threatened by random drug testing. If they have a problem, they're not going to stop regardless of what peeing in a cup tells administration.
I know this blog made me out to be a certain way, but I am by NO means a druggie ! I just honestly feel that there are way more drawbacks than benefits when it comes to random drug testing.
In the gym locker rooms and throughout the halls of Oakcrest, everyday I hear about students using drugs or how their weekend was “crazy.” This is not just happening in our high school, but in many others. There are a couple of ways for administration to prevent students from using drugs. One of those ways is the random drug testing of students. I believe this should be used, but only for the athletes. I don’t think it would be right to randomly drug test students in the school. If it was put into effect, many students would be more careful and turn down drugs. But everyone shouldn’t be randomly tested for drugs. Athletes should be working to keep their bodies physically fit and should not be using drugs. Teams should have drug tests for the teams periodically to prevent the athletes from using drugs. There are many students that participate in a sport and it would be a way to prevent students from using drugs. Randomly testing students is just not right. Should angel Amy be selected randomly to be tested? Should a group be discriminated against just because they seem to be the type to do drugs? There are some students that hangout with friends that do drugs. Should he have to have administration breathing down his back?
If it was put into effect, there would be many group discriminated against. The administration would most likely not bother the AP students or students that they feel aren’t involved, but instead they would target social groups and people do to their race. I don’t think that African Americans would be targeted over Caucasian people. There are many Caucasians that look like pot heads. I’d have to say that if anything, the Caucasians would be targeted more often than the African Americans. (I know that was politically incorrect, but I’m making a point) Groups that hangout in the halls during the morning would probably be targeted first. Why would they waste their time on a quiet, innocent girl? Gender would be an issue as well. More guys would be targeted than girls even though there are plenty of girls using drugs.
I agree with Megan. The school would not include all of the students for random testings. There will be groups that are targeted more than others. How would students and parents react to actions that are targeting a group because of the way they dress or their actions in school? The attitudes of students today aren’t good. If they felt like they were being discriminated against, they would have no problem in voicing their opinion. That could cause a lot of publicity and many problems for the school. Randomly drug testing students in high schools will just cause too many controversies on all levels.
I really hate drugs. I am not one to ever even thinking about doing drugs. Ever. I think they are so stupid and one of the worst things you can do to your body, your family, and your life.
There are plenty of benefits for random drug testing in schools. However, I'm only going to talk about two of them. One, it will lessen the amount of drugs taken by mainly student athletes. Most of the random drug testing going on in schools have to do with athletes, testing for performance-enhancing drugs, or steroids. But I'll come back to that later. The testing will catch students believed to be taking drugs and they will be reprimanded for their drug use. Second, it will scare students into not using drugs. If a student sees one of their friends suspended, expelled, or arrested for drug use and they were caught by a drug test, this will most likely deter that student from taking drugs.
Even though I personally believe that the benefits of random drug testing far outweigh the drawbacks, those drawbacks still exist. As Christine said, a minority population can claim racial prejudice if they are chosen to be tested over someone who is white, smart, or Christian. I personally think these claims are totally bogus and that we should be able to have faith in the people who are trying to get the student tested. The teachers, coaches, and administrators should have enough of a head on their shoulders to make the right decision and test the person they truly believe is using drugs.
I think the random drug testing does pave the way for other safety precautions, such as random searches and seizures. Most actions lead to other actions. I mean, who�s to say that if a school catches a student with drugs in their system, the student didn't bring the drugs to school? Okay, maybe that's not so random, but still. It's going to lead to something. And if a school brings in security officers with drug-sniffing dogs or something, they are perfectly allowed to take whatever the dogs find, if they find anything, and prosecute that student. Stuff like this will help students lead more successful lives because the threat of being caught is enough for many to not get into drug use at all. I mean, I know every drug user isn't going to get caught, and every person won't be deterred from using drugs, but it's a hope.
There is a definite racial bias when it comes to drugs. I agree with Erin when she says that the media plays into the racial bias of drugs. Most of the drug stories are about people who are not white or rich. But there are plenty of white people and plenty of rich people involved in drugs. And I think that for sports, boys are more likely than girls to get pulled for steroid testing. I also think boys are more pressured than girls in certain situations to use the performance-enhancing drugs, which creates even more of a bias.
Bottom line: drugs are bad. No one should use them If no one used them, we wouldn't have to worry about people believing their civil rights are violated because they were caught using an illegal substance.
This deal with having random drug test is ridiculous. This policy would never pass. Drug tests cost too much money for schools to fund anyway. Random drug tests have many advantages. Like Devon said, it will definitely lower the drug use among the students. It could even scare most teenagers to stop any drug or alcohol abuse at all. You may catch the people who are really taking drugs but drug tests are not accurate enough. If some one at school smells the scent of marijuana the test can pick that up. Then the one who has never done anything illegal may be in trouble for someone else’s action. Some tests aren’t even sensitive enough to pick up someone who has done drugs. Drug tests that the school can afford are still way too expensive and are faulty. Although this may help with steering students out of drugs, it will cause a conflict with the right of the people. We have freedom as long as we don’t cause a conflict with other’s rights. The one who does the drugs have broken the laws but has only affected themselves and no one else. This will soon break out into protest around the United States. I believe this does violate the rights of the students. By law a person under-aged cannot take a drug test unless there is permission by the guardian or parents. This violates the rights of the youth. Like Devon said, this can break out into large protest, riots, or even boycotting against school. By this happening these students will be held back because of the inadequate structure for education. Not only is drug testing against rights and not perfectly accurate, the random selection may be fault as well. Unfortunately racism is still in the U.S. today. Many students because of their ethnicity may be targeted more then others. This is unjust and against rights. Not only will the wrong people be targeted but a small portion maybe targeted also. Not only is racism a factor but also gender. Because you are a male, there is a better chance you are or have done drugs, statistics wise. Unfortunately ethnicity and gender can cause an unjust conflict. As I have explained the system of random drug testing is way too faulty; there are problems with racism, inaccurate drug tests, and so many other variables. Over all I go against this policy of random drug testing. I believe it is unjust and against the rights of the people. Not only is the whole system faulty but it is also way too expensive for schools to budget. This means we have to pay more taxes which is a whole other argument all together.
According to the men in the White House random drug testing is an effective way for people to resist the peer pressure to use drugs, because after all you would now have a reason to say no. Critics on the other hand believe that random drug testing fosters greater mistrust between school officials and students, deters involvement in after school activities, creates an incentive for student to go onto more dangerous drugs which don’t show up in urine, and strips us of our 4th amendment rights. Personally, I think that random drug tests a mediocre idea. Surely there is much smarter things that could be done to curtail the drug problem, but we have to start somewhere. Nothing is ever done perfectly the first time, and people must learn from where their predecessors went wrong.
Allowing random drug tests could definitely pave the way for other types of “safety precautions,” but the people need to know when enough is enough and they can’t allow any more invasions into their privacy. I highly doubt that random searches and seizures will ever be allowed, the 4th Amendment protects us specifically against that. There could be a racial bias, but I don’t really see that. There is definitely a sexual bias though; males will much more readily be tested for illegal drugs than females will. It just not a common thought to think of a female as a drug user, at least not for me.
Overall, I agree with Caitlin M., everyone does know that drugs are bad and what the consequences are if you use them. The problem is that people just don’t care about the consequences of there actions. All teenagers have the that-will-never-happen-to-me attitude and think they are invincible, but that is the wrong attitude. Anything can happen to anyone of us at anytime and we are all only human. Like Caitlin, I believe that the punishment for using illegal drugs is totally ineffective and needs to be more severe. Maybe it would be more effective if teens caught with drugs were forced to work in rehab facilities for a length of time so they can see first hand what drugs do to you. To answer Caitlin’s question, actually the government will pay for the random drug tests. The Bush administration planed on spending 15 million dollars on drug-testing grants this year; I don’t know if they did or not however.
Random drug testing is not something that I see something worth the trouble of enforcing. Teenagers think they’re invincible. Whether or not they choose to do drugs is up to them. If they don’t do it in high school because of the threat of random drug testing, they will just do it some other time when there isn’t that threat. Unless they honestly don’t want to do drugs they’re going to do them at one point or another, regardless of the threat of a random drug test. Secondly, I don’t think it should be the schools responsibility to keep kids from doing drugs. I feel that’s more up to the parents. If the parents feel the need to drug test their child than I say go for it. Unless it is causing an issue for that child and other kids in school the school should just stay out of it. If that kid is doing well in school and not causing problems they should just let them be. I agree with Megan’s ideas for this subject. Her uncle is successful in what he does; however, if the school had intervened with his private life who knows if he’d be as successful as he is today. My guess is probably not. As long as people are not disrupting other’s lives I feel there is not need for drug testing; especially not random drug testing. Why should the innocent teenager have to pee in a cup while being speculated of committing a crime they never committed? It seems a bit unnecessary. The only time I feel drug testing is suitable in school is when this person is disrupting the learning environment. Otherwise the school should just mind its own business. Their responsibilities are to educate this person. It is the parents who are responsible for the well-being and health of the child.
I suppose the benefits would only be effective for the few people that would actually stop using drugs forever after getting caught once; although, I find this idea extremely hard to grasp.
Random searches and seizures are just ridiculous. I say pay more attention to what’s going on in the school. If they listened to what kids were saying and these types of things than the searches wouldn’t be RANDOM. They’d actually have a reason for going through this persons personal belongings. I think authorities should always have a reason to suspect something before invading someone’s life. And this way, they would be doings something because they have reason to suspect this person is not behaving responsibly. There then would be no question to whether they were searching because this person was...whatever they are—everyone is something different. They would be searching because this person said or did something to make him or herself a suspect.
Last year in AP Government we were asked many constitutional questions that were along these lines. And, as with many of the policies we discussed last year, this policy has many benefits but just as many drawbacks as well. John P. Walters basically summed up the benefits of the policy when he stated, "By giving students an incentive to stay away from drugs, random drug testing helps them lead healthy, successful lives. For that reason, it's one of many tools we believe schools should use to fight drug use among teens."
It's obvious that this policy would decrease drug use among teens, whether it be in terms of large scale or only marginally. The main thing is that drug use would almost certainly decrease. But, really, is that worth sacrificing our Fourth Amendment rights of freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures? In the case of Mapp v. Ohio: in a majority vote of six to three, the Supreme Court ruled, "all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is, by the Fourth Amendment, inadmissible in a state court."
So, basically without a search warrant and probable cause, the school shouldn't be permitted to perform random drug testing. Children are people too and should be allowed their rights in school. And, like Gary said, random drug tests might not necessarily prevent people from doing drugs in the first place. There will be people who are willing to take the punishment without changing their ways. Sure, the good intentions are there. But the road to hell was paved with good intentions.
And, contrary to what some may believe, I don't think that this policy affects any one particular group of people. As I walk through the halls of Oakcrest, I can pick out who does drugs and who doesn't (don't ask how; it's a gift). And, to be honest, the number of drug users is about the same between whites and blacks and boys and girls. So, by saying that the people who formed this policy were racist or sexist is ludicrous, in my opinion.
Additionally, without drugs, we wouldn't have the magical sounds of Jimi Hendrix, the Beatles, or the Doors. I'm not saying that drugs are good. I'm just playing a little Devil's Advocate here.
In this case, I feel that the students' Fourth Amendment rights outweigh the prevention of student drug use, simply because students' lives outside of school should be kept private.
This is kind of a weird blog to me. I kind of feel like random drug testing has become necessary in today's society. I don't do drugs, so I know that I really don't have much to worry about. I think aiming for the cup might be a little hard, but uh...yeah.
Anyway, maybe Walters is right. Maybe the pressures would "relieve" the drug problem. (Get it? RELIEVE! hahahaha) If the testing could "weed" out the drugees, (haha there I go again), maybe the student body would be happier, more efficient, and most importantly, safer. So, I completely agree with the first three blogs. People who have nothing to hide wouldn't object to the testing.
The only possible drawback I can think about kids objecting violently to the testing, and lashing out at an officer or tester. Some people really get crazy about this "snuff". (HAHAHA!)
If this process led to other safety precautions, GOOD. I hate being scared all the time that some idiot's going to whip out a gun and really hurt somebody. But I guess a metal detector in the hallway would do nothing to SPEED up the congestion. (man I'm good.) Random searches? Go ahead; I've got nothing to HIGHde!
I think, unfortunately, that there will always be a bias. It is a shame that a few bad seeds can spoil the whole bunch. This leads to the current stereotypes. Black kids and aggressive looking males will always be the first lockers raided. I guess this means that white girls will unjustly have the UPPER hand!
Well, this was an awkward blog. And kind of random. But I think I did a good job. Everyone have a great break! LSD you all Tuesday!!! (that one didn't really work.)
This idea would wreak havoc. Kids at school would be getting kicked out almost everyday. The "random" testing would cause more problems then the drugs themselves would. How would they know who is using? Black's with baggy pants? White kids with long hair? It would be a horrific event if they ever tried it. There is no way of knowing who is using drugs. I would be completely appalled if somebody accused me and said I looked like I used drugs.
Don't get me wrong I think the pressure of knowing that you can get picked would make a lot more students think about what there doing but the risk isn't worth the reward. This would be Oakcrest's own version of McCarthyism. Students would be getting caught and they would be ratting out others and kids would be getting into such big messes that don't even deserve it.
Random searches and seizures are the same thing. They stereotype and are as racial as they can. The way the school would handle it is very predictable also. They would get a list of statistics from the government which they have conducted and they would follow that guideline. Even though there is no set standard for what a "drug user" looks like. CEO's of major companies could be, it could be the mailmen, and there is no way of knowing. Maybe if they can a less racial and biased procedure we can finally eliminate this horrible drug problem. Drugs are obviously the cause of everything bad in our system and ruin everything.
I like the stand point Kim is taking on this subject. She is right that drugs stay in your system for 24 hours or something. Just because you make one wrong decision doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be allowed to go to school. She does change her views though but still makes a good point about the benefits. Also I agree with her that the stereotypes are wrong.
Personally, I believe that it is a violation of civil rights. However there are some benefits to this policy like kids may think twice before doing drugs and it can lower the rate of kids doing them. The drawbacks I believe are that drugs are to be handled inside of a family and by schools taking charge of it, it could ruin someone’s record when it could have been handled inside their family and still went to a good college.
By allowing random drug testing, you really are opening the door for other attacks on civil liberties. Just as this has come after the allowing of the testing of athletes for steroids at the high school level. I believe that random searches and seizes are ok though due to the fact that it only says that you are in possession of a substance and never implies that you are a user. This is ok because schools have a right to stop the selling of drugs in their schools. Drug tests cross the line though because it is not stopping the selling of drugs which is what the real mission of the school is. To have students not be affected by drugs.
I believe that these tests are sexual bias, but not racial bias because people see white males just as black males to be likely to do drugs. They however do not like to believe the women do drugs even though they do which is where the sexual bias part comes in.
I agree with Danny L that it will scare kids, but I do not believe that it will come close to stopping it altogether. There is no real way to completely stop the use of drugs in teenagers, but I do believe that even though this can be considered going against someone’s civil rights it is necessary to try and stop the drug flow that is penetrating the walls of our school and society.
In conclusion, I feel that sometimes there comes a time when our civil liberties have to take a backseat so that we can preserve our way of life and not allow our children or futures to be clouded by something that can destroy our society as it has already ruined many life’s throughout our history and going back through out time since the inventions of tobacco and opium to the drugs of today pot and heroine.
In order for this system to work the Random testing needs to be just that, Random. That way you can at least attempt to sidestep any attempts to claim that your picking someone specifically because their black, or male, or half-man half-lizard or what have you. If this program is based on luck-of-the-draw choices rather than teacher’s preconceived notions of certain students then I don’t find too extreme of a problem with it. It is the sort of test that bears little possibility of interfering with other facets of life. If this sort of testing were based purely on the behavior of students I get the suspicion that I would likely be chosen. Even though I never have done drugs before (that is beyond medical usage administered by physicians,) I certainly behave oddly enough to make people expect that of me at times.
As far as civil rights go, this is a fairly vague zone concerning constitutional rights. I’m not sure if it denies the rights given to us in the Bill of Rights. I have one idea that schools could implement that would help the school to drug test without creating compulsory drug test. Drug tests are performed by testing a sample of urine, correct? And students urinate anyway, correct? What if we could take the stream of urine already being dumped into our school toilets already and make use of it. We set up the camera to watch who enters the bathroom at any given time and then test all urine and stool that is deposited in the bathroom automatically. Compare who enters the bathroom at what time with when the drug sensors are triggered to discover who exactly is puffing the magic dragon. Now, in order to make this not be forced drug testing the school officially labels all toilets as “Free drug testing stations.” This way if they’re really desperate to avoid being tested they can just hold it in until they get home.
I was sort of surprised to read the responses of every. I was just sort of shocked to see that their was practically no one who was really against drug testing. My expectation was that pretty much every other of these would include the phrase slippery slope in bold print. It seems like the only main argument that is being made against this drug testing is that it may not be affective enough of a deterrent, which is somewhat suprising. One of the things I would be nervous about is that it often seems like the more you push to stop something, the more it fights back. To try to make the restrictions on drugs more strict could potentially cause people to become even more likely to fight back. Modern youth have a strong desire to be a rebel of some sort. Their so quick to rebel though, they refuse to waste time trying to find a cause that’s actually important to fight for. I just fear that random drug testing could be the thing that pushes many of today’s youth to use this as another opportunity to voice their shallow insurgence. In their attempt to fight back (or “stick it to the man” as any hippy would word it) teenagers could possibly use this as a reason to increase drug use just to be a jerk.
“Drugs are illegal. It is as simple as that. If you want to do something illegal, don't try and use the Constitution and the laws that say you have rights to defend your actions.” Christine took the words right out of my mouth! Random drug testing is a very successful way to put a stop to drug use in schools. If I was a drug user hypothetically of course (unlike most people this is extremely hypothetical) and I knew I could be at risk for getting tested I wouldn’t go near drugs. So therefore random drug testing will help improve the drug problem in are schools. I know for fact that the random drug tests in sports are extremely helpful. All athletes must sign a waver before each season agreeing to take a test if chosen. I know a few athletes who have stayed clear from drugs because of the test yet I don’t know anyone who has been tested. This proves that random drug test do give incentives to stop drug use.
The few drawbacks may be that not all students will stop drug use completely. Some drug users will be able to sneak by the system. Also people feel like it violates the constitution, I don’t see the problem. If you’re not doing drugs then you should have no problem with taking a drug test when called upon. I would take one because when other students see this system in action they will stop drug use. Also the search needs to be completely random. Therefore the school needs to develop a system that will insure that the students are chosen at random.
As far as random searches and seizures without warrants are concerned I don’t agree wit them. I don’t believe that random searches will help control drugs and weapons in our schools. Other things like metal detectors scanners and such are better for controlling that sort of thing. Also metal detectors and scanners aren’t random everyone is searched fairly. This would stop anyone from slipping through the cracks, and it would definitely control what was brought into our schools.
I agree with Danny and Megan about the bias that comes with a procedure like random drug testing. If you took me and white girl that did drugs but was in all my classes and activities. I would most likely be tested because I am black. As well as males would be subjected to more tests than females. In order for the procedure to work it must be completely random. Our society is to stereotypical to perform our own random drug tests without bias.
Well this log should not be too hard for me, not saying that I do drugs, just saying because this was basically the topic of my debate last year.
I am going to start with commenting on Caitlin’s blog. I agree that everyone knows that drugs are bad and if you get caught there are consequences. I think the real problem is that people just do not care. They care too much about their next high rather than thinking about what they are doing to their future.
The benefits to this policy are that some students will be scared that they will randomly be selected hence they will not do drugs. On the other hand, there will be students who will not care because they think that they will never get caught. I think that the drug testing is a good thing with athletes because it is giving them an unfair advantage over other players if for instance they are taking some type of performance enhancer such as anabolic steroids. I think that drug testing in students is a waste of time and money. Yes it will stop a few students from doing drugs, but the majority will not care and will not get caught because it is “random” drug testing. I do not necessarily think that random drug testing will pave the way for other safety precautions because again drug testing is not going to get everyone. People will find ways to get around it even if they are tested. Like Tawni said, “where there is a will, there is a way”. If someone wants to get around the screening process badly enough they are going to find a way. People are getting too smart for their own good in some cases. As much as no one wants to admit it, I do think that there are biases sometimes. Not saying that I agree, but some people are still prejudiced against minorities and feel that none of them are good and that they are all bad. The sexual bias reminds me of back in the day when we would be like “girls go to college to get more knowledge, boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider”. People usually think that boys are bad because of the fact that they are well, boys. Boys will be boys! Haha. I think that boys are more likely especially in athletics because Boys tend to be more competitive than most girls so they are always striving for perfection and they don’t care what they have to do to get there. Also, some people are judged on the way they present themselves and the way they dress. The person who dresses in the so called “gangster” style of clothing would probably be more likely than lets say a sweater vest pocket protector wearing kid to be “randomly selected” or even to be under the suspicion that said person is under the influence of drugs.
What area of life in any place or situation does not have some type of bias? There always has been and always will be bias, both for race and for sex. But things such as this should not be taken into consideration for drug testing or any crime, specifically being black. In fact, I know quite a few people who do not fit the “druggy” persona but do break that one law. Most expect people on drugs to have no life and no future, to be lazy and disrespectful; when in fact many of the people who do smoke pot or take other drugs, are quite the opposite.
I guess that random drug testing does violate a person’s rights, but if they aren’t doing drugs, what are they worried about? And if they are doing drugs they are violating the law, so is that fair either? Also, if they are warned about the test before hand, many know how to get around it, or simply stay clean until after the test.
Finding those who do drugs and getting them help is a really important step that needs to be taken in our society. Drugs are terrible things that rip lives and relationships apart. I don’t feel that there are any drawbacks to this random testing, except maybe the money that could be wasted for the test that come up positive. But if just as many come positive as they do negative, is it really a waste?
Taking this one step toward prevention of dangers could very well help to “pave the way” for other processes to take place. But, there is no definite that this will happen. If random drug testing were to take place, it may not be received well, and even dismissed, causing us to start back at square one.
What Erin said about what you find on the news seems to be true about only seeing lower class males on the news for drugs. But, you also do see things about high end women in modeling, acting and the likes being put into rehabilitation clinic for drug use (alcohol included.) For example, Lindsey Lohan was recently in rehab and Paris Hilton and Nicole Richie has tickets for drunk driving. I also agree with Erin about her saying that the news helps to feed the racism in our society. You do seem to only see black men or Hispanics, as if white people are too good for that, when really they just pay someone off to hide all their problems.
All in all, drugs are bad. This may sound juvenile but in all seriousness, they ruin lives. At the time they may seem cool, or make you feel good, but it is only for that time. The long term side effects are what really matter.
After reading several of these responses, I find that I identify with Megan's viewpoint the most. While I do see the merits of Niah's argument that the really competitive athletes may be more wary about their drug use if they do do drugs (and if they did, it would be stupid because it would impede game play anyway, unless they were steroids in which case that's just as big of a risk), I think that largely people that do drugs will not stop because of the threat of random drug testing. Like Joanna said, there's the philosophy, "Oh, it will never happen to ME. They may test others, but they won't test ME. So I can keep on using drugs." (I'm pretty sure everyone knows I don't do drugs, but let me just put it out there. I don't do drugs and I am completely against them.) However, drugs are illegal and those who are using them are taking an incredible (incredibly stupid, really, but still incredible) risk in using drugs in the first place. It is not that much more of a stretch to continue using them despite the fact the users have been warned that they MAY get caught via random drug testing. There are all kinds of other ways they MAY get caught as well, but kids still continue to do drugs despite the odds against them (ie: jail time, as drugs are illegal. Really, what do people think?) I think in creating a drug-free America, we need to think that we are still in America. I can see the anticipated merits of random drug testing. But this is the real world, and there will always be impediments to a program that sounds good on paper. I feel like it would be hypocritical for me to say that I am for random drug testing (because if kids that do drugs get tested and caught, that's fine with me. That's great, actually), because I would not actually want to be randomly selected to do the test myself. It would be humiliating, degrading, and pointless as I don't do drugs. Others like me would be forced to endure the same process to no avail, because they don't do drugs. There would also be the inevitable bias, which is not necessarily a bad thing because hey, sometimes what you see is what you get. Nevertheless, this bias would cause controversy, unrest, disputes, and even possibly lawsuits among the unsettled student body. So, to conclude what I think in one sentence, I think that random drug testing looks good on paper but in an actual policy it would fall flat.
I was just reading the comment posted directly before mine and I had to comment on something. I don't want to start a major dispute so do not take this personally, but I need to say this - in response to Katie's comment
"I also agree with Erin about her saying that the news helps to feed the racism in our society. You do seem to only see black men or Hispanics, as if white people are too good for that, when really they just pay someone off to hide all their problems."
As soon as I read that I was so surprised I had to read it again. Since when should the news have to have affirmative action? The news is the news - they report what happens. They shouldn't have to fill quotas of so many black people on the news for crimes and then feature an equal amount of white people. The newscasters just report what happens. The criminal that shot the police officer in Philadelphia? The news can't help that he was black. They don't get a choice in the matter. He happened to be black, and so showing him on the TV for the monster that he is, committing the heinous crime that he did, isn't an issue of racism. I think, and I can only speculate here because this is not my opinon, that the reason people think the news "contributes to racism in our society" - and I definitely do not believe that - is because maybe on stations like our Channel 6 Action News more black people than white people are featured for committing crimes. This isn't because the white people are "paying them off" - because white criminals are no better than black criminals - it's because in that city there are more black people committing crimes. And yes, it creates a percieved racial bias, but if the black people are committing the crimes, this has to be reflected as such on the news. This is not a perfect society. Honestly, it would be the same if we had a white street gang or if we were big into the Italian mafia or something. In that case it would be all white criminals on the news. We also don't currently have "all black people or Hispanic people" on our news as the criminals. We also have the equally heinous crimes of white people. If there do happen to be more minorities, it's not a racial bias, it's a reflection of what goes on in our area.
ok. i'm starting this at 11:24 p.m. on 11/7/07... in about 40 minutes it will be considered late, but I wanted to start now so by the time I do submit this i you'll know that I started before it's too late... =)
Ok, I am diagnosing myself with narcolepsy. I fell asleep on the computer and just woke back up a little while ago, this is sad. Anyway, I believe that random searches and seizures are acceptable and would help the school with drug use. I think people would be opposed to it though, because they may think it goes against people's rights. When it comes to rights, it gets confused and my opinion is in the middle. I know people who have tried drugs before. This could range from drinking wine to taking acid. What if someone made ONE wrong decision? I know several people who have gotten drunk before or smoked weed one time. This doesn't make me think differently of there character. If they were chosen for the random drug test and failed, they'd be kicked out of school, I'd feel bad for them. People make mistakes, and unfortunately, that one mistake could ruin their life. On the other hand, the argument could be that they shouldn't have been a drug user in the first place. That's where I'm caught between. I think I'm leaning more to the "they shouldn’t have done it side."
If these procedures should be done, it should be completely random. For some reason, after reading John Miller's comment, I believe the school would do it by government's statistics and choose students based on both teacher's, students, and principal's opinions to choose student's that are possible drug users. This is not completely effective. Although statistics could help, the tests should be more random. Anyone could be a drug user, schools fail to realize that.
I agree with Niah too when she explains how drugs are illegal, and if you use them, you're should be in trouble. That's a good way to lay it all out on the table.
I think the tests are bias because they would most likely choose people who wear baggy clothes, black guys, and party animals, usually white guys. About guys, males seem more likely to get tested. for some reason, people must think females do drugs less, but in actuality, the girls are the ones right next to the boys giving them a match to light some weed up.
I agree with Monica completely. I'll use her quote as an example. "I don’t think it should be the schools responsibility to keep kids from doing drugs. I feel that’s more up to the parents. If the parents feel the need to drug test their child than I say go for it." If parents knew what their children were doing, schools would be less concerned. The only way I'm opposed to this is because parents don't keep a watch on their children. This is the reason why schools have to do random drug tests; parents aren't doing their jobs.
In conclusion, I do believe schools should have random drug testing. I have several opinions on this subject; however, overall, I think it would be fine. As long as you don't do drugs your fine. Schools must be sure that the testing is not bias and completely random. I'm sure with those standards; it could effectively lessen the amount of drug users in high schools.
Random drug testing is just a way for school's to gain more control over their students. Like most school administrators, the less rights students have, the better they feel. The Fourth Amendment demands that searches (1) be conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued upon probable cause; or (2) be otherwise “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment. As for random drug testing, which are based of the Acton-three-part test, this is violating student’s rights whether the student complies or not. There are most, nine times out of ten, no signs of probable cause for random drug testing and warrants probably are never present. Random drug testing also doesn’t guarantee a change in drug use within the teenage community. With today’s technology there are ways around drug testing, and a lot of times the repercussions for getting caught smoking marijuana doesn’t affect kids in a way to make them completely stop. So what are the benefits to this policy? There are no benefits. As a result to this random drug testing there are more drawbacks compared to benefits, drawbacks such as less students joining academic activities. Not only will students stop joining certain activities, students will also begin to think the drug testing is being directed towards certain races. Although there probably is some racial and sexual bias behind the random drug testing which at times is extremely apparent. For example random drug testing for sports, sport teams such as football, soccer, or wrestling are some of the most common sports that are given random drug testing. Most of the members of these teams are guys, showing that there is some racial bias behind the random drug testing. Along with guys being the group that is more likely to be tested, black guys are probably targeted most. It seems as if the random drug testing is targeting people solely based on appearance. Because one kid is faster, stronger, and more agile, they get picked for random drug testing. This policy seems unfair and a little extreme. If an athlete or a student is motivated and cares about their future they will do what it takes to get there, why is it anyone else’s business or responsibility to insure this?
I disagree with Alli when she says drugs are a major issue in schools today. I mean it is an issue but like most problems that exists in school environments it can be easily taken care of or isn’t an ongoing problem that is seen happening everyday. Most drug issues are taken place outside of school which really isn’t anyone else’s concern once outside of school grounds. If students are granted to rights such as keeping the privacy of their belongings then why should they be granted the right to not be randomly drug tested? Random drug testing seems like it would just create more problems rather then lessen them.
It is with out a doubt that random drug testing is a good idea anywhere, in the work, school, or athletic environment. It is a possibility that the random drug testing will create an imaginary yellow caution tape line that a successful athlete on the verge of D-I to prevent from smoking that before the big game. It will trigger a mental message throughout the questionable persons who contemplate drug use for any reason. I am not saying that it will miraculously stop all drug usage. But the benefits that it has the POTENTIAL to reach are worth taking on the skeptics.
It is easy to say that this is a violation of privacy, and unconstitutional, like Becca said. But I do not feel that it is “It’s a good way to take control over someone that really needs help”. Controlling? I think that this is a misuse of the word. The drug test are not to control anyone from doing or not doing drugs. They are a safeguard to protect the welfare of those around the drug users. The drug test is not a form of prison, which is how we control criminals. It is not a form of a cage, which is how we control our animals, it is the chance to prevent the criminals from going to jail, the chance for animals to sit when you say so. I feel that the random drug test is a form of intimidation and prevention for those who may be affected.
As I said before it is impossible to resolve all drug problems. But the 10-20% that can be resolved lessens the equation drastically. If random drug testing did solve 15% of the problems, it would allow an easier time trying to figure out a way to chip another 15% of the block. It’s like playing jinga, without adding them to the top. The more ways you find to take away from the whole, the harder it is to progress without failure. However there is more room for maneuverability which will only lessen the problem overall.
The key thing with random drug test is it potential. There is no fact that it will stop even one kid from doing drugs, but it will introduce the mental signal that in turn alters the minds decisions. It will have the subject second guessing every move they make, and if that affect can be widespread among 20% of the target population, then absolute progress has been made. It is crucial to look at this is the long run because short term effects will overload the con side. Over a long period, the random drug testing may effect 5 kids, who then each say something to 5 more kids, who then say something to 5 more kids. The seed is planted, and the individuals who chose to water it will not only water themselves, but the whole garden.
I am not one to support the practice of random drug testing in schools. First of all, it is school, which is a place where many kids are forced to go, which means it is not like a sport where people have to make an agreement to not do drugs. We go to school to get an education but we make school what we want it to be. If someone doesn’t want to care about school in any possible way, and let their lives be overtaken by drugs then by all means let them. Random drug testing will not necessarily keep kids away from drugs and cause them to live a prosperous life, it will just make many kids try and think of ways to beat the system. Sure if every school had a random drug test for any student they could do their best to get that kid away from the drugs, but in the end if the person doesn’t want to stop, they won’t. Also things such as random search and seizures should not be allowed because they too violate our civil rights as does the drug testing. I am sure that there will almost always be some sort of racial and sexual biasing. Many people would assume that most boys do the drugs, or at least more than the girls, which is not always a true thing. The same goes for the different races, some may suspect that black people do more drugs than white people but neither the sexual or racial bias is true in any way, anyone of any race can be abusing drugs. So drug testing for a thing such as high school, especially public high schools, should not be something that is practiced. As far as what Rachel Carlson is saying, I do not believe that the fact that athletes must sign a waiver making them susceptible to random drug testing makes them stop or avoid drugs. I know of many, many athletes who do drugs without even thinking about what could happen. Also, as far as the people who get caught may not have to deal with consequences. There are parents out there who could care less about whether their kid parties and smokes. Drugs are something that shall always be existent and it is nearly impossible to stop the use of them. People will not always suddenly be enlightened that their life may be going downhill and just stop their drug abuse. I can understand if a college, job, sport or any other thing that someone must be qualified to do under their own will requires a drug test. However, this is a public high school which means that people are coming here because the state law is pretty much forcing them too. Let people live their lives and realize in the future that they messed up
Well about the racial bias part if the tests were actually random then there shouldn’t be any bias. There is another way that you could do this without there being any thought of a bias against anyone. If you haven’t seen yet then I will tell you that I am for this idea and I’m going to try to show you how this can work out for everyone. All you have to do is that instead of having a random persons test declare that every semester there is going to be a randomly placed day in which case every boy, girl, and teacher would be test for drugs. That way there is no way for anyone to say that they have been discriminated against because every person attending and working in the school is to have been tested.
I do feel that teachers should be tested also just as all of the students to put all the parents minds to rest about the fine educators who are taking care of the parents children. This will decrease the want of children to do illegal because of the large risk that there will be a drug screening and legal actions will be taken by the school and you will be taken out of the school system and there will be no stopping your parents from knowing that you did drugs and now you’ve been kicked out of school.
People might be losing some of their rights but it is to better themselves. If this is to take place in the school system than there would be an immediate drop in the amount of drugs inside of the school system. This in my opinion is not violating you freedom of rights. My reasoning for believing that is because of the fact that it is against the law for you to own or consume any of these drugs so if you are doing any of these drugs than you’re going over the limits of that amendment in the constitution and you need to be stopped. You can’t break the law and say that it’s your freedom because if the Supreme Court thought that when the law was made than it would have never gotten passed. The Supreme Court would have without a doubt in my mind deemed that law unconstitutional to arrest someone with drugs because it’s allowed by the first amendment to get high, OD, ruin your own life, and jump off buildings thinking you can fly.
I agree with Kim just like what I said as soon as you touched the illegal substance your rights go out the window. Just like the police officers say when they take you in. The only right that you have after you start using those substances is the right to remain silent.
Hmmm this is quite a good question to ponder on Bunje! I truly believe by having random drug testing in school would be crazy but than again there are more pros to having it than cons to why you shouldn’t have drug screenings in school.
Having drug testing in school would be a way to stop teenagers from using drugs because of the fear that they will get caught and there future and reputation will be ruined but than again there are always the rebels out there in society that will do it anyway. They go with that whole theory that “rules are made to be broken”. So though having the school drug testing may slow down the use or number of people in school using a drug there still are chances that either way it is going to be used in one way or another.
To tell you the truth I don’t think anyone can go upon a situation with being biased, so of course I think they would be some type of biasness when doing this screening. For instance, being the friendly person I am and knowing a wide range of different type of people I was talking to one of my friends, very smart, in all AP and honors classes; you know the type you would look at to be a geek. She was telling me how her weekend went and how she went to a party. So first thing I thought was that it probably was some type of educational party, where they would compete to see who could read the most books and played like AP scramble; little did I know that was the opposite. She told me how they drank and smoked pot all night and I was flabbergasted. After that I tried never to judge people on what they were capable of doing and not doing. That’s goes back to whether or not I think people would be biased against who was drug tested.
Personally I think it would be a list in order of who was drug tested
1.black boys with sagging pants
2.black boys who don’t fit the other criteria
3.Skater/rocker white boys
4.Jocs for steroid and stuff like that
5.black girls
6.white boys that don’t fit the other criteria and are not geniuses of the school
7.white girls that are not geniuses of the school
8.Geniuses of school
An although this list may be a bias one because of my perspective of things; it is truly how I think it would work.
Cosigning to what Kylie was saying about the disadvantages of this drug testing. I thought she brought up marvelous points when she explain how hard it would be to fund and how much money these drug testing would cost schools. I also like the fact she brought up getting drug test mixed around with somebody’s else which is another aspect human insufficiencies . All little mistake like that can jeopardize someone greatly.
Drugs. What is the purpose of even having them? Drugs are constantly being used throughout many types of people of all different ages. What freaks me out is listening to students that I know, and I consider as friends talking about where to get the best drugs and what drugs they took over the weekend or before school. Can you believe that there are students who actually drugs everyday before school? I can’t. I agree with Devon and Christine, and other students who think random drugs tests is a benefit to have in school. When I read what Christine wrote, I found it interesting that she talked about people who would think that the random searches would take away their right as U.S citizen. Christine is completely right. It always seems that people, who don’t really know their rights, misuse them. For example, in this situation, if high school students were to be randomly tested in school, it wouldn’t be a violation of their rights because they are under the authority of the high school. At least that is what I think. I honestly don’t exactly remember from AP Gov.
Anyway I totally think that there would be issues in how the school would pick people to be tested. In Oakcrest especially, I really think students would feel targeted. For instance, and not to be racist or anything, but I think the black kids would feel the most targeted. If the black kids were being pulled aside more often than the white kids, I honestly believe that they would feel like the racist card was being pulled. Hopefully, the schools wouldn’t pull aside the black kids or even the Hispanics more than the whites. I personally believe that there are more white students doing drugs than minorities. At least that is what I perceive from Oakcrest. I also think that boys would probably be more likely to test than girls.
In general, the random drug testing should be used, despite the sexual and racial biases that the school would face. Having the random drug testing would eliminate the number of students doing drugs. Yes there may be those rebels who would still do drugs and just hope that they wouldn’t be caught, but all in all, a school should definitely do the random testing. The randomness of the testing would catch students off guard and they would never know if they were due for a testing and therefore, wouldn’t be able to rid the drug from their system. There are drawbacks, however. The drawbacks would be the students who are on specific medications that would cause them to test positive for drugs. This may cause innocent students to be punished for illegal drugs, even though they’re using legal, prescribed drugs.
By randomly testing kids, there would be an incentive to no longer use the banned substances, and may sway certain students to stay away from them. Others might continue to use them and not care what the consequences to their actions may be, but who wants those types of kids in our school system, it would be better for them to just drop out and get a job.
I agree with Dave's post; student athletes should be tested. I know, personally, a few student athletes that use illegal substances, and if they were steered away from those substances, they could lead better lives, and have better athletic careers.
But what would the limits be on these substances? Which substances would be tested and which would be overlooked? Alcohol? Weed? Cigarettes? Who knows. Personally I know that there would be some students that would be furious if alcohol was tested. Some parents let their kids drink and have no problem with it in a controlled environment.
In the case of the racial and sexual bias in the drug testing, there definitely would be a bias. The testers would select people that are socially known for acting in a rebellious manner. Also, they would use stereotypes, which isn't at all fair, but it wouldn't be prevented. On top of that, males would be subject to more testing than females, even though the drug use between males and females isn't astronomically different.
This could be an advantage in school systems to eliminate the drug use and create a cleaner road for high school students. On the other hand, I don't think drug testing would comply with the student's wishes and thoughts of privacy. I don't think it would be effective because people do what they want even if there are consequences.
People would demand their rights, even though legally the school could put random drug testing into effect. Many people though, including parents would like this system. It would prevent their children from being around drug environments and if their child is a drug user they can get help. Some of my friends have used drugs and their parents are completely oblivious. Then, some time later, they get involved in serious substances like heroin or coke. They lose all of their friends, all of the dreams they ever had, and any chances at becoming anything in life. If the drug testing were put into effect, parents would be able to get their child help before anything serious were to occur. I know personally, I wish that I could have helped one of my friends by telling her mom what she was up to. Thankfully she got caught doing drugs anyway, and she was set straight but I could have stopped it in the beginning.
Drugs can take a very bad toll on anyone that uses them, but they can also be easily prevented with a little help. Putting the testing into effect would result in many good things, but must be used in the right manner to be effective.
Well, there are some obvious benefits to random drug testing. People that are on the fence of whether to do drugs or not have an incentive not to get involved with drugs. The people that do drugs can get help, because while we are still in school is the best time to help addictions such as drug addictions. People that are drug-free will also benefit because they won’t be as pressured, and will have an excuse out of peer pressure.
But what about some other benefits? Are there any? Don’t get me wrong, these are some important things in young people’s lives. It is important to intervene before the addiction becomes habit, because once that happens, there’s much less hope of breaking someone away from harmful activities. But what about the people that aren’t addicted? What about the people that may only do it a couple times a year? By drugs I’m assuming that the substances meant are intoxicating substances, and isn’t being intoxicated a few times part of the growing process for teens? We all saw the example with a certain someone in our class, and I know that I, even if no one else, learned an important lesson. Would I have learned that lesson, though, if this particular person didn’t get caught? If I didn’t learn the lesson in high school, when things are still forgivable and records get cleaned, then would I learn the lesson in college, where things are permanent? I’m sure whoever is reading this is thinking, “So letting students do drugs to learn a lesson is a better option than preventing it before it happens?” The problem is, though, that, this is an arbitrary number from my personal experiences, half the high school students in Oakcrest would have to learn the lesson after high school. As mentioned before, once someone turns eighteen, things are permanent. If someone is caught before the age of eighteen, the consequences are not as bad as if this person was caught after he/she turned eighteen.
The reader of this is probably also thinking to his/her self that this program would help catch those students to teach them this lesson. The thing is, though, that either students wouldn’t care and would do drugs just as much just to be rebellious and the school would end up suspending people every time someone was tested, or people would drop out because most students at Oakcrest feel that their social life, which includes intoxicating substances, is more important than their academic progression, if it can be called that. AP students that are brilliant, but have a problem controlling themselves with certain substances would get expelled. These students may have just been going through a phase, and now their life is ruined because of a random test. No college would want a student that was randomly tested and tested positive for drugs. I personally know more than fifty students that graduated Oakcrest that did drugs and went to good colleges. These fifty students wouldn’t have gone to these colleges if they had been caught by the school.
It is the student’s parents’ job to keep the child out of trouble. If the parents aren’t doing their job, than the student shouldn’t necessarily be punished. If the school tested a student positive for drugs, then the school would have to punish the student. These are a couple of the reasons. Notice, I haven’t mentioned our right to be protected by random searches and seizures. This random testing is illegal because it goes against the Constitution’s no random searches and seizures. I haven’t mentioned the embarrassment factor, as Emily Brill was talking about, for the people that don’t do drugs. Why should the people who have done absolutely nothing wrong be forced to endure something as embarrassing as peeing in a cup? I’ve done it before for blood work, and it is quite awkward. I can’t imagine how that can be expected to go well for a member of the opposite sex…
Well, there are some obvious benefits to random drug testing. People that are on the fence of whether to do drugs or not have an incentive not to get involved with drugs. The people that do drugs can get help, because while we are still in school is the best time to help addictions such as drug addictions. People that are drug-free will also benefit because they won’t be as pressured, and will have an excuse out of peer pressure.
But what about some other benefits? Are there any? Don’t get me wrong, these are some important things in young people’s lives. It is important to intervene before the addiction becomes habit, because once that happens, there’s much less hope of breaking someone away from harmful activities. But what about the people that aren’t addicted? What about the people that may only do it a couple times a year? By drugs I’m assuming that the substances meant are intoxicating substances, and isn’t being intoxicated a few times part of the growing process for teens? We all saw the example with a certain someone in our class, and I know that I, even if no one else, learned an important lesson. Would I have learned that lesson, though, if this particular person didn’t get caught? If I didn’t learn the lesson in high school, when things are still forgivable and records get cleaned, then would I learn the lesson in college, where things are permanent? I’m sure whoever is reading this is thinking, “So letting students do drugs to learn a lesson is a better option than preventing it before it happens?” The problem is, though, that, this is an arbitrary number from my personal experiences, half the high school students in Oakcrest would have to learn the lesson after high school. As mentioned before, once someone turns eighteen, things are permanent. If someone is caught before the age of eighteen, the consequences are not as bad as if this person was caught after he/she turned eighteen.
The reader of this is probably also thinking to his/her self that this program would help catch those students to teach them this lesson. The thing is, though, that either students wouldn’t care and would do drugs just as much just to be rebellious and the school would end up suspending people every time someone was tested, or people would drop out because most students at Oakcrest feel that their social life, which includes intoxicating substances, is more important than their academic progression, if it can be called that. AP students that are brilliant, but have a problem controlling themselves with certain substances would get expelled. These students may have just been going through a phase, and now their life is ruined because of a random test. No college would want a student that was randomly tested and tested positive for drugs. I personally know more than fifty students that graduated Oakcrest that did drugs and went to good colleges. These fifty students wouldn’t have gone to these colleges if they had been caught by the school.
It is the student’s parents’ job to keep the child out of trouble. If the parents aren’t doing their job, than the student shouldn’t necessarily be punished. If the school tested a student positive for drugs, then the school would have to punish the student. These are a couple of the reasons. Notice, I haven’t mentioned our right to be protected by random searches and seizures. This random testing is illegal because it goes against the Constitution’s no random searches and seizures. I haven’t mentioned the embarrassment factor, as Emily Brill was talking about, for the people that don’t do drugs. Why should the people who have done absolutely nothing wrong be forced to endure something as embarrassing as peeing in a cup? I’ve done it before for blood work, and it is quite awkward. I can’t imagine how that can be expected to go well for a member of the opposite sex…
Post a Comment