#10
Tanner Tomasi
4/11/2011
There are two sides to every story.A boy named Jack Gilbert was searched at his school in Texas. One of the kids at Jack’s school had told the principal that they had saw jack out behind the school smoking some weed. Jack ends up being searched at school and his mother and he bring the case to court. The court ends up ruling for the school. With that example Schools should have the ability to search students, when they have reasonable cause and contraband that invokes other students lives and learning environment. Imagine yourself in this situation, if someone searched you for an object that was a violation of the school rules, wouldn’t you feel awkward and embarrassed? Then why would you risk being known as a hooligan and putting the well being of others in danger? Think about it, student searches are the key to preserving our schools and our community.
The term and meaning of contraband is basically anything that’s prohibited by law. For the topic of student searches some contraband examples could be a pack of cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, heroin, a knife, weed, or a gun that is brought to school. In addition the term and meaning for a reasonable cause is when a person has been, is, or is about to be become engaged in a crime that usually involves a contraband. This activity is based on specific and clear facts and inferences that one is about to do something bad. An example for reasonable cause is if Bob hears about Jack going to interfere with illegal substances at the school and jack decided to tell a teacher .Then that right there is enough evidence for reasonable cause. Why this is that way is because at school teachers and counselors must act like in loco parentis. This word in loco parentis means "in the place of a parent" or "instead of a parent,” this means that the school adults are basically the parents of the kids at the school until they get home.
Student searches are needed to protect everyone in the school. Like Officer Flore says, “Everything I do must fit the U.S. Constitution & Vermont Constitution and secure the safety of others.” Flore makes a point by supporting student searches because it falls under the democratic ideal of the common good. According to “Teen Drug Abuse website” these were the results from a school gathering in New Jersey about Illicit teen drug use in the year of 2003. 8th grade 30.3%, 10th grade 44.9%, 12th grade 52.8%. This example represents why we need student searches in schools. In a case called New Jersey vs. Tracy Lois Odem January 15, 1985. These two girls are caught smoking on the school grounds. Then are brought into the principal’s office were their bags are searched. What the principal found were a large amount of money, marijuana and a list of people that owed her money for the drugs. Later when this is brought to the court the principal ends up winning the case, not to mention that one of the school rules was that smoking was prohibited on the school grounds. With that rule that the girls had broken, it was pretty clear that the principal had the right to search those girl, because they had already broken a school rule. I agree with the outcome of this case, because the student was already breaking some of the schools rule, so the fact that the school won this case was good. This cases outcome fits my argument because it connects with my statement of how student searches will help secure the safety of others. If the principal hadn’t caught those two girls there could have been many things that could have happen. They could have gone on a rampage for the people that owed them money or they could have just done something bad or stupid from an overdose of marijuana. This case shows a great example of why student searches are needed for schools.
My second argument is that student searches are needed to secure our learning environment. In a case called Washington vs. Chrisman January 13, 1982. On one night at a college, a police man was out on the campus, when he spotted this young man with a half gallon milk jug that was filled with gin. So he went over to the young man to see if he had identification, what ends up happening is that the young man didn’t have it so they went to his dorm to go and get it. When they get to his dorm the police man stands in the door way and when he glanced in the room he noticed a lot of illegal drugs. He asks the young men’s if he could search the room, and if they wanted he would get a warrant. However the young men’s said no that it was alright so the police man searches there room. Later on one of the young men brought this case to the court and the case ends up with the policeman winning the case (Opposing Viewpoints.) I agree with the ruling of this case because the campus had a set of rules and one of them was that any type of alcohol was prohibited on the campus. Once again this case does uphold with my argument. This case is important because it shows a good representation for my argument of how student searches are needed to secure and protect our learning environment.
The arguments that are against my side are the fact that student searches are a violation to the student’s privacy. My focus case was called Safford Unified School District v. Redding in 2003. This was a wonderful example for someone’s privacy being invaded. It’s about a thirteen year old girl named Savana Redding who was striped searched at her school because one of her classmates had told the principal that she had been selling ibuprofen to some of her classmates. The supreme courts end up ruling in favor with an 8-1 vote for Savana Redding. I do agree with the Supreme Court ruling for that case because the school officials didn’t even have a good reasonable cause or a dangerous contraband. Then the fact that they went into a strip search, I do believe that this was taken too far and was over the top making it an intrusive search. Poor Savana Redding dropped out of school and became home schooled because the school violated her privacy and that made it uncomfortable for her. I understand why they don’t want to do student searches, because of outcomes like this, however if you think about it like I said before the Safford guidance people didn’t not have much evidence about Savana and her “drug dealing” of ibuprofen. This was bad on their part. Although not every case comes close in situation wise like this case, because know days the type of search depends on the certain contraband that one has. As Bud Allen said at panel day “We chip away at our rights for safety “when he said this he explained to us that Americans are trying to remove the bad stuff out of our lives. Although we are losing rights that we will never get back because of our fear of what might happen. I don’t agree with Bud Allen, but I will say that he does make a good point. Even though were chipping at our rights to freedom it’s not like it’s just certain people who are loosing their rights. It’s everyone and also its making sure that everyone one is staying alive and safe.
Even though our founding fathers made the Constitution and said that “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.” (Find Law: U.S Constitution.) They were right when they said this however that was in the olden days where people weren’t on the internet finding out how to get high off house hold supplies. Overall people need to know that we can’t have everything that they want, and many people should agree with student searches for those reasons. Like Matt Warren said “In order for our world too run properly today some people’s rights are going to be violated in order to keep everyone safe on this planet. It’s like making sure that someone doesn’t bring a bomb on the planes, it violates people privacy to be searched but at the same time its making sure that everyone will be safe.” This example is just like student searching because it will make sure that the students are safe, and have the ability to learn in a learning environment.
Lastly for my call to action I would like everyone to imagine and realize how much we will be doing if we start using student searches for the better of our education and lives in school. And that’s why I believe schools should have the ability to search students. As they have a good amount of reasonable cause and contraband that fits the intrusiveness of search.
Scalia, Antonin. "Random Drug Tests on Student-Athletes Do Not Violate the Right to Privacy." Opposing Viewpoints: Civil Liberties. Ed. Tamara L. Roleff. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Champlain Valley Union High School. 1 Apr. 2010
"Washington v. Chrisman." Great American Court Cases. Detroit: Gale Group, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Champlain Valley Union High School. 1 Apr. 2010
Scalia, Antonin. "Random Drug Tests on Student-Athletes Do Not Violate the Right to Privacy." Opposing Viewpoints: Civil Liberties. Ed. Tamara L. Roleff. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. Champlain Valley Union High School. 1 Apr. 2010
