Drug testing reaches local high schools; Includes cheerleaders, band members ($1 Million cost)

Iknowbakersfield ^

[chance33_98]

Drug testing reaches local high schools; Includes cheerleaders, band members
By Mai Do
KGET 17 News
06/28/02 

Bakersfield - A new ruling by the Supreme Court says that students involved in extra-curricular activities can be tested for drugs. Right now, the Kern high school district doesn't do random drug-test of any students. But that could soon change thanks to a new ruling by the Supreme Court.

Jocks are no longer the only ones open to random drug testing. Now it's the cheerleaders, school choir singers and band members.

Even the highly academic team of the "We the People" team.

According to Justice Clarence Thomas, "testing students who participate in extracurricular activities is a reasonably effective means of addressing the school district's legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use."

According to the high school district, at least 50 percent of students on campuses are involved in extracurricular activities.

Officials at the Kern High School District say privacy issues aren't the only thing keeping them from doing random drug testing.

The main problem is the price.

Assistant Superintendent Don Carter says just a 5 percent random testing of the student body would likely cost the district more than a $1 million.

[chance33_98]

Who is going to pay for it?

[chance33_98]

Bump for discussion to the wod_list

[jiggyboy]

If a school district won't accept that it is a blatant invasion of privacy, let's hope that they have at least the sense to do a cost-benefit analysis to show themselves that it's a %$#@! waste of money as well.

[Wolfie]

Pass it on to the students.

[RightWhale]

band members

Start with the woodwinds. Highly suspicious the way they soak the reed in their mouth forever.

[WindMinstrel]

"Hrmm, that saxophone would make a great pipe!"
- Homer Simpson

[Shermy]

According to Justice Clarence Thomas, "testing students who participate in extracurricular activities is a reasonably effective means of addressing the school district's legitimate concerns in preventing, deterring, and detecting drug use."

No it isn't. It will just mean any kid with a trace of marijuana in his or her blood will opt out of such activities - and still remain in school. The consequences - less hope, less participation, more intrusion, more seeming random oppression.

[AdA$tra]

Who is going to pay for it?

Me. Haven't you heard, we pay for everything else the government does for/to us as well.

The irony is that the kids that are not getting tested are the same kids that are skipping school, hanging out on smokers row, getting too low of grades to participate in qualifying after school programs anyway. Those are the kids at risk that might need a little tough love. Most kids just need to live and learn a bit so they can grow up. Some never will grow up regardless. Perhaps the government should just butt out of our personal lives anyway, and simply judge people by their contribution to society. This program would have wrecked my high school debating career. That is for sure.

[Sloth]

Amendment IV: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Sounds like privacy to me.

[RightWhale]

The Right to Privacy is implied in the 1st Amendment, freedom of expression, as well as other places. But we know that the spirit of the Bill of Rights has been under increasing attack since at least the 50s.

[WindMinstrel]

I'd be rather interested in the efficacy of school drug testing. Does it actually decrease the use of drugs by school kids? Or does it just decrease the number of people taking part in extra-curricular activities (and of course, increase the bottom line of the drug testing companies)?

[Henrietta]

This is part of an insidious scheme to gradually tighten the noose on liberties. When these kids grow up, they won't even think of challenging in-school drug testing, 'cause they had to go thru it when they were kids, so it's normal, right?

Drugs are bad, and I think people should not use them, but I don't think it is govt's place to snoop around and make sure kids aren't using drugs. That's what parents are for.

[CecilRhodesGhost]

Drug testing is great. It is very useful. It works. It's a helpful tool to weed out the pot-smoking, law-breaking future criminals from public schools. As America has realized with the new Patriot Act, there is such a thing as too much privacy or too much freedom. Drug searches and tests in America's schools will serve several great purposes. It will identify the young Americans who are (at a young age) already showing signs of disrespecting authority and the rule of law. It's a great barometer of future voices of dissent. It's also a great tool to educate new generations of Americans to accept less privacy for the sake of progress. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few privacy-kooks, especially for America today. It goes without saying that in the future, biometric IDs, DNA scans, implanted medical chips and On-Star on every vehicle will be easier to introduce if minor issues like drug-testing are introduced to future American taxpayers while they are still in the public school system.

This is a win-win for the war on drugs and the long future war on terrorism. America needs to raise its young to embrace solidarity and weed out the lawbreakers and dissenting anti-American drug-using scum.

[vin-one]

drugs are bad, and highschool kids should not be using drugs, including alcohol. That being said when they are older it should be up to them what they injest.

[FreeTally]

Sounds like privacy to me.

Some people will just never understand that since the stupid SCOTUS invoked "right of privacy" as part of the Roe v. Wade decision. They can not accept that a faulty ruling doesn't negate a clear Constiutional guarantee of privacy, per the 4th Amendment.

[Sloth]

True. SCOTUS could just as (il)legitimately said that abortion is protected under "the right of the people peacably to assemble", but that wouldn't negate the right of assembly.

In this case, the citizen (student) is being denied security in his or her person without probable cause -- a clear violation of Amendment 4.

[MindBender26]

You are so right... and this issue of "privacy" is BS. Anyone who ever took a shower with 120 other smelly guys after a phys ed class knows there is no expectation of privacy in high school.

(PS, First year they integrated our high school, and the black guys took showers with us whiteys,,, wow, were we intimidated for a while!

[CecilRhodesGhost]

Slowly, the idea of privacy should be re-framed to mean "anti-American" as drug-testing of students expands... this is the path to a stable domestic America.