Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Frontier in Random Drug Testing: Checking High Schoolers for Tobacco
Associated Press ^ | Oct. 7, 2002 | Greg Giuffrida

Posted on 10/08/2002 4:35:09 AM PDT by Wolfie

New Frontier in Random Drug Testing: Checking High Schoolers for Tobacco

Breath mints won't cut it anymore for students who have been smoking in the bathroom -- some schools around the country are administering urine tests to teenagers to find out whether they have been using tobacco.

Opponents say such testing violates students' rights and can keep them out of the extracurricular activities they need to stay on track. But some advocates say smoking in the boys' room is a ticket to more serious drug use.

"Some addicted drug users look back to cigarettes as the start of it all," said Jeff McAlpin, director of marketing for EDPM, a Birmingham drug-testing company.

Short of catching them in the act, school officials previously had no way of proving students had been smoking.

Testing students for drugs has spread in recent years and was given a boost in June when the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed random testing of those in extracurricular activities. Tobacco can easily be added to the usual battery of tests.

"I agree with it," said 16-year-old Vestavia Hills High School junior Rosemary Stafford, a member of the marching band. "It's illegal, it's addictive. Maybe the punishment shouldn't be as severe, but they should test for it."

In Alabama, where the legal age for purchasing and smoking tobacco products is 19, about a dozen districts, mostly in the Birmingham area, test for nicotine along with alcohol and several illegal drugs, including marijuana.

In most cases, the penalties for testing positive for cotinine -- a metabolic byproduct that remains in the body after smoking or chewing tobacco -- are the same as those for illegal drugs: The student's parents are notified and he or she is usually placed on school probation and briefly suspended from sports or other activities.

Alabama's Hoover school system randomly tested 679 of its 1,500 athletes for drug use this past school year. Fourteen high school students tested positive, 12 of them for tobacco.

Elsewhere around the country, schools in Blackford County, Ind., test for tobacco use in athletes, participants in other extracurricular activities, and students who take driver's education or apply for parking permits.

In Lockney, Texas, a federal judge recently struck down the district's testing of all students for the use of drugs, alcohol and tobacco.

In Columbia County, Fla., the school board will vote Tuesday on a testing policy that would include tobacco. Teenagers who take part in extracurricular activities or apply for permits to drive to school would be screened.

"Tobacco does and will affect a larger majority of the students than alcohol or drugs," said Gloria Spizey, the county's coordinator for Safe and Drug-Free Schools. "Tobacco use can be devastating. We felt it needed to stand with the other drugs."

Screenings can detect cotinine for up to 10 days in regular smokers of about a half a pack, or 10 cigarettes, a day, McAlpin said. Experts say it is unlikely that cotinine would collect in people exposed to secondhand smoke.

"Tobacco is illegal for them to have -- it's also a health and safety issue," said Phil Hastings, supervisor of safety and alternative education for schools in Decatur, which recently adopted a testing program that includes tobacco. "We've got a responsibility to let the kids know the dangers of tobacco use."

While random drug testing overall is being fought by the American Civil Liberties Union and students' rights groups, the addition of nicotine testing has drawn little opposition.

Guidelines published last month by the White House drug office do not specifically address tobacco testing.

"On tobacco, we have the same policy as on testing for drugs -- it may not be right for every school and community," said Jennifer de Vallance, press secretary for the office. "We encourage parents and officials to assess the extent and nature of the tobacco problem."

Shawn Heller, executive director of Students for Sensible Drug Policy in Washington, said tobacco use by teen-agers is a major problem, but testing for it is just another step in the invasion of students' privacy.

"We're making schools like prisons," he said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: alcoholsbadenough; dopefuelsterrorism; dopeuberalles; drugtesting; obeyorpay; onlydopesusedope; pufflist; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-209 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Wolfie
Well, there you go. Just one more reason to homeschool the little libertarian addicts-in-training.

. . . but for the fact that most pro-dopers apparently don't have children. (Who needs kids when you have dope to build your life around? In the timeless paraphrased words of the inimitable Foghorn Leghorn: "I got--I say, I got mah dope ta keep ME warm!")

Or was it RJCogburn? . . . Wolfie? Hemlock? Dark Lord? headsonpikes? GreenGrinningHorkPhlegm?

I can't keep track these days.

22 posted on 10/08/2002 6:41:20 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
"Elsewhere around the country, schools in Blackford County, Ind., test for tobacco use in...students who take driver's education or apply for parking permits."

Oh yeh, I sure wouldn't want to park next to someone who was high on Virginia Slims...

23 posted on 10/08/2002 6:42:12 AM PDT by Exeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: enfield
SPAGHETTI!!!!!!!! OH NO! My family is DOOMED!
24 posted on 10/08/2002 6:46:21 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
(((giggle)))
25 posted on 10/08/2002 6:51:14 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
most pro-dopers apparently don't have children

Few if any here are "pro-dope," and you have no basis on which to speculate about drug-freedom advocates' families. (I have two kids, who I have instructed at length on why they're better off without alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs.)

You simply revel in dsiplaying your ignorance, don't you?

26 posted on 10/08/2002 6:52:39 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
but for the fact that most pro-dopers apparently don't have children.

KC I ignore most of the crap you post but this one is by far the most BS,
I have ever seen. you don't get out much do you. In fact most of the people I know who smoke MJ have kids,
and are mostly conservative, church going, hardworking, involved parents
27 posted on 10/08/2002 6:57:09 AM PDT by vin-one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
I'm strictly amateur - trying to presrve my Olympic eligibility, doncha know.
28 posted on 10/08/2002 7:02:36 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Few if any here are "pro-dope,"

24/7

29 posted on 10/08/2002 8:58:35 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
You're a dope 24/7, true.
30 posted on 10/08/2002 9:10:02 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
The "pro-dope" contingent on FR usually aren't honest about their agenda.
31 posted on 10/08/2002 9:36:01 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
What is the agenda of the "'pro-dope' contingent on FR"?
32 posted on 10/08/2002 9:54:43 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Legalized dope.
33 posted on 10/08/2002 10:00:06 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina
What "rights" are being violated by the tests?

4th Amendment rights. The state, through its agents is conducting searches with neither probable cause nor a warrant.

Some will say children have no rights. That's what the "It Takes a Village" crowd would like you to believe. Children do have unalienable rights, but because they are minors they lack legal capacity to exercise them. Their rights are instead held and exercised by proxy by their parents or legal guardians. If the parent exercises the child's 4th Amendment right, then no probable cause and no warrant means no search.

Some will say students voluntarily waive their 4th Amendment rights by asking to participate in extra-curricular activities. They forget, this is the state we are dealing with, not a privately funded school. The state has no legitimate power to barter rights for tax sponsored priviliges. This ignores the unalienable nature of rights, and uses taxation as a lever to coerce forfeiture of rights. It is akin to forcing those who get drivers licenses to forfeit freedom of speech or religion.

And finally some will say the courts have ruled otherwise so it is a mute issue. To them, I remind them of Roe v Wade, and even slavery. The courts are wrong there and they're wrong here too. In fact, the courts are wrong so often and hold such deep contempt for the Constitution they are sworn to uphold, that they have undermined their legitimate authority to the point where their opinion is worth no more than that of your common man-on-the-street. The only difference being that these black robed princes have the power to back their whimiscal, illegitimate opinions with brute force. It is now fear, not respect for law that they wield.

34 posted on 10/08/2002 10:15:54 AM PDT by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Roscoes "communitarian" contingent on FR usually aren't honest about their agenda.
35 posted on 10/08/2002 10:17:24 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Opposing legal bans on "dope" doesn't make one "pro-dope" any more than opposing legal bans on non-marital sex makes one "pro-non-marital-sex."

When has any opponent of legal bans on drugs denied holding that position?
36 posted on 10/08/2002 10:26:42 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Roscoes "communitarian" contingent

Is that what you call mouthing support for freedom while pushing people around?

37 posted on 10/08/2002 10:27:37 AM PDT by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Opposing legal bans on "dope" doesn't make one "pro-dope"

Like I said, the "pro-dope" contingent on FR usually aren't honest about their agenda.

38 posted on 10/08/2002 10:35:52 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Roscoes communitarian contingent seem to think that community 'standards', - IE majority rule, - trump our constitutions safeguards of individual liberty.

Ban drugs, ban guns, - its all the same to them. The mob rules, - in their mind.
39 posted on 10/08/2002 10:40:47 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Ban drugs, ban guns

Equating guns to drugs is one of the oldest and most tired arguments of leftists and their Libertarian cousins.

40 posted on 10/08/2002 10:46:27 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-209 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson