Drug testing or personal freedoms
Should school officials be allowed to use student and undercover cops as informants within the school, mass suspicionless searches, random urine testing and tactics such as these to deter drug use among students? The answer is no, because these tactics invade personal freedoms. Yet the “Supreme Court has time and again rubber-stamped drug war tactics used against students. The Court has consistently upheld the power of school authorities to curb students’ freedoms in the name of saving them from drugs.” Hollister Gardner is a student from West Texas’s Tulia High School. He maintained an “A” average while serving as president of the National Honor Society, drum major in band and treasurer of Future Farmers of America. Gardner rebelled last year when he was informed that in order to keep participating in these extra-curricular activities that he would have to pass a drug test. Having never been involved with drugs, he was jaded at the implication that he was guilty until proven innocent. Gardner believed that the fourth amendment of the Bill of Rights protects United States citizens from such warrentless searches without reasonable suspicion. Gardner never signed his release form and whe
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Chatham Countys, James Actons, NORML Foundation, Supreme Court, School Board, Day OConnor, James Acton, PERSONAL FREEDOMS, Hale School, District Representing, drug testing, supreme court, fourth amendment, public safety, drug probe, fellow students, urine testing, tulia school, consent form, impairment testing,
Approximate Word count = 1424
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
