Posted on 03/19/2006 4:30:53 PM PST by Crackingham
Student athletes, musicians and others who participate in after school activities could increasingly be subject to random drug testing under a program promoted by the Bush administration. White House officials say drug testing is an effective way to keep students away from harmful substances like marijuana and crystal methamphetamine, and have held seminars across the country to promote the practice to local school officials. But some parents, educators and school officials call it a heavy-handed, ineffective way to discourage drug use that undermines trust and invades students' privacy.
"Our money should be going toward educating young people, not putting them under these surveillance programs," said Jennifer Kern, a research associate at the Drug Policy Alliance, a non-profit group that has frequently criticized U.S. drug policy.
Requiring students to produce a urine sample or hair sample for laboratory testing is a relatively recent tactic in the United States' decades-long "war on drugs," along with surveillance cameras and drug-sniffing dogs in school hallways.
Adults in the military and many workplaces have long been subject to testing, but U.S. courts have ruled that public schools cannot impose random tests on an entire student body.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1995 that schools can randomly test student athletes who are not suspected of drug use, and in 2002 ruled that all students who participate in voluntary activities, like cheerleading, band or debate, could be subjected to random tests.
Since then, the Bush administration has spent $8 million to help schools pay for drug testing programs. The White House hopes to spend $15 million on drug-testing grants in the next fiscal year.
Your papers, please. And also your piss and blood. We're the government and we're trying to teach you to value freedom.
And you've ignored talking about the organized Drug Cartels. I suppose the average school student created those?
Low IQ people in the pub schools are Not necessarily the problem, in fact, that's why pub schools began in the first place -- to try to RAISE IQ: Low IQ faculty and administrators ARE a problem. So are kids on drugs encouraging other kids on drugs, and the adults who recruit newer drugged kids to sell drugs to others.
And your suggestion that the drugs and the "low iq" students will leave the schools altogether is absolutely a hopeful wish, IME. As long as there's a captive audience, predators will always be near. Just witness what an organized School Union lobby can do -- witness... California. And.. what is it up to now $8K per students times 13 years (14 if Rob Reiner's "preschool program" wins), and over HALF of the student population cannot pass a really, really low-brow proficiency test? I've seen the test. The students are being TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF by an organized group of adults more concerned with their own incomes.. and because they have a captive "base" to fleece and feed upon.
"Also, Don't align yourself with a troll like Takenoprisoner. If anyone like him trashes the US military, he isn't worth my or YOUR time."
Good thing you have someone as wise as mike in from wherever it happens to be today to advise you on your alignments.
Indeed I am someone who defends our constitution, our freedoms and who speaks out against tyranny at every opportunity. Mike in or from wherever he decides of late has most likely never himself served and is jealous of the fact that I am a Marine 69-73.
He stalks me and trashes me constantly ie "troll, takenomoron etc."
I spoke out against a harbor raid perpetrated by the USCG on sleeping citizens while docked on their private boats in a private harbor. Mike believes these kinds of abuses of power are justified as well. Mikey went ballastic claiming I was "trashing the military" and set out to get me banned from FR. He has thus far failed, but continues in his quest to silence a Marine who dares to stand for freedom and against tyranny. Which is exactly why he showed up here...to defend abuses of the state and a great opportunity to trashmouth me as well.
Now you know .
And mike, if you bring this back ever again, I will hit the abuse button for your constantly stalking and trashing me...fair warning.
Wanting the government to do that which any citizen can do for themselves is counter to the ideas of "individual responsibility" and personal freedom that are the foundations of a free society, and that some of us still value.
There is simply no reason for schools to do random drug testing -- except to make money for those that sell it.
Yeah. The schools SHOULD be getting schooled. Instead, it's become a place most kids don't wanna be. And not because of "random drug tests". For a lot of kids, school is a DANGEROUS PLACE with DANGEROUS PEOPLE. And as far as your paycheck going to fund drug-testing kids, it's a done deal. Write the IRS and demand your money back; like that'll work.
And THANK YOU for your service to our country.
Outside your paranoid wonderings about me, yes -- these drug tests do cost money. And those who are involved with it, will be paid wages. And maybe make a profit.
How's that any different with anything else that goes on?
But just so I can play your game too... Are you a dealer? Grow some? Are you involved in anyway with making money offa school kids? You keep trying to start some paranoid wierd thing about me.
If there was an adult sex ring thing involving minors, at the school, would you author post after post that some Red State Nannny should keep her nose out of what children are doing at schools? If not, why is your focus on "drugs". Out of curiosity is this a pet interest?
A lot of stuff looks like a "done deal" to the people who really want it done, like Harriet Miers and the UAE port terminals.
Yes,if you could eliminate all drugs by waving a magic wand, there would be fewer addicts, at least fewer drug addicts (they would still be addicted to getting high, with glue, or paint thinner, or sex, or whatever).
I was in HS and college in the drugged-out 60s. Every single person I knew who got into drugs was f***ed up somehow prior to the drugs. Every addict I have ever treated has major unresolvable personality disorders, and if somehow you devise an intervention that makes the drugs go away, they're still very screwed up people.
This has zero to do with my politics, except that I suppose my politics have been influenced by my experience.
L
I have also managed to raise my (now adult) children - drug free, and without random testing.
Given that there is no reason to do these tests on kids, why do it? (Here we go with that "money thing" again!)
I am against both of those. The weapons possesed at home are the buisness of the home owner.
The abortion question, that child is a minor, shes the parents responsibility and the life inside her is also the parents responsibility, not the states.
The drugs in our culture are getting more sophisticated and the ages of those taking drugs is getting younger. If the schools don't take affirmative action (concrete steps), they can be sued by parents suggesting the "schools knew the kids were taking drugs but didn't do anything about it"). There's plenty of parents out there who would do such a thing.
This then removes a TON of money from any district being sued by parents "who didn't know". You could see this from a liability standpoint. I do. And I don't agree with what is going on in pub ed. But I do see the need for the districts to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits which more than likely, because districts are deep pockets, WON'T be deemed as frivolous lawsuits. Or sued by parents of kids who were killed by Columbine-type drug pushers at the schools.
And if the schools then begin "allowing" RU486 type drugs, and daughters die, you can bet there'll be a ton of parents demanding tests of this sort or that. Pub Ed is a war zone of conflicting opinions.
But the Federal Laws say illegal drugs are ILLEGAL. What part of "ILLEGAL" don't some posters get? They use the same phrase concerning "illegal" immigrants; but some then turn right around and don't get what the word "illegal" means with regard to drugs.
No, I'd prefer the drug tests didn't / weren't/ have to happen at pub ed institutes. I'd prefer that parents took personal responsibility in seeing to their own children's education and welfare.
Like that is going happen.
I agree with this of yours. It's my experience in witnessing this too.
And of course, include those that conduct the tests.
Test for nicotine consumption - nicotine is a very common plant alkyloid. Cauliflower, eggplant, tomatos for starts.
Congress exempted itself from drug testing. Wasn't that sweet? Now members can be drunk and doped up when voting on laws that effect all our lives.
Surely if any drug tests are to be done on our children and the common citizens, congress should be the very first tested on a random basis when considering the influence it has over all our lives. I personally dont want some doped up drunk congress critter voting on matters affecting our constitutional freedoms.
Only a fool could believe that this is anything but a useless and expensive project. Those who do drugs in high school are not the ones doing after school activities at school. Anyone who went to public school would know it. It is simply conditioning for further socialist nationalist control by imbeciles that think that there is anything left of social security or that it will be there in the future.
All your fluid are belong to us!
"Start with teaching the kids and they won't do drugs in the first place"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.