Drug testing in public schools

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

Becasue the drugs we are talking about are illegal...

And one of the tenets of being a conservative is enforcement of laws.. and punishment for offenders.. not turn the other cheek and say.. "Not my problem"

Why are the drugs illegal?

The government says it's because they're harmful. To who? The user who decides to do drugs?

If someone wants to harm themselves by doing drugs, let them.

Don't pass the cost of enforcing pointless laws down to me.

 

[clevalley]

I voted no. Kids do drugs.

Not every kid does drugs. Not every kid that does drugs is bad. Not every person who doesn't do drugs is good.

It is common nature though. The schools have more important things to be focusing on, like EDUCATING. It's not their job to be mommy and daddy. That's mommy and daddy's job.

Let me play Devils Advocate for a minute.

You know as well as I do kids are sneaky - heck, I was! Andy - yes you are right, but here is a real example pulled from my youth;

I went to school with this girl... to protect the innocent let's call her Jane...

Jane was in the Student Government Association, good grades, her parents thought she was the cleanest kid around, other parents thought Jane was the best! Jane played sports (year round) and had a full-scholarship to a REALLY nice college. Jane smoked pot like a raging forest fire and could party with the best!

Jane's Mom and Dad were active in church, as well as Jane. All the drug use happened while she was out and about with her friends on friday and Saturday night when Jane was not attending some function... you know, hanging out with her friends - all kids need to do this. It is part of life and how we gained out social skills with peers.

Jane committed suicide 3 months after we graduated... why? Who the hell knows, she is dead... to this day her mother and father do not have a clue what happened except Jane OD'ed

Point I am trying to make is her Mom and Dad were active in her life, but gave Jane the space she needed with her friends. Jane hid it very well... her friends knew she smoked pot at parties, but most kids did as well. Mom and Dad were good people, and were doing their job, but Jane had them snowed...

There were a LOT of kids in our school who were good kids, with good parents, went to church, active in sports but "experimented" with drugs. Some outgrew it, others did not... maybe if there was something like this the numbers would have been lower.

I see this as a viable way of lowering the use of drugs by juveniles just by the REAL threat of being tested in a non-discriminatory way.

 

[clevalley]

Why are the drugs illegal?

The government says it's because they're harmful. To who? The user who decides to do drugs?

If someone wants to harm themselves by doing drugs, let them.

Don't pass the cost of enforcing pointless laws down to me.

We are getting off topic but I do want to make a point... yes, the drugs are illegal - and buying illegal drugs (or illegal items) ultimately trickles back to some drug-lord or crime family or terrorist cell funding the other two. It is a vicous cycle that cannot be broken until something is erraticated. Again - this is a totally different post.

I am in agreement - if they want to do it, legalize it, regulate it, and tax it - that will cut down the above.

We already pay for pointless laws - our government is in desperate need of an overhaul!

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

Let me play Devils Advocate for a minute.

You know as well as I do kids are sneaky - heck, I was! Andy - yes you are right, but here is a real example pulled from my youth;

I went to school with this girl... to protect the innocent let's call her Jane...

Jane was in the Student Government Association, good grades, her parents thought she was the cleanest kid around, other parents thought Jane was the best! Jane played sports (year round) and had a full-scholarship to a REALLY nice college. Jane smoked pot like a raging forest fire and could party with the best!

Jane's Mom and Dad were active in church, as well as Jane. All the drug use happened while she was out and about with her friends on friday and Saturday night when Jane was not attending some function... you know, hanging out with her friends - all kids need to do this. It is part of life and how we gained out social skills with peers.

Jane committed suicide 3 months after we graduated... why? Who the hell knows, she is dead... to this day her mother and father do not have a clue what happened except Jane OD'ed

Point I am trying to make is her Mom and Dad were active in her life, but gave Jane the space she needed with her friends. Jane hid it very well... her friends knew she smoked pot at parties, but most kids did as well. Mom and Dad were good people, and were doing their job, but Jane had them snowed...

There were a LOT of kids in our school who were good kids, with good parents, went to church, active in sports but "experimented" with drugs. Some outgrew it, others did not... maybe if there was something like this the numbers would have been lower.

I see this as a viable way of lowering the use of drugs by juveniles just by the REAL threat of being tested in a non-discriminatory way.

Committing suicide is also illegal. The government should've prevented that. :

Chit happens. It's called the real world.

Do we know the drugs caused her to go and OD? Perhaps she couldn't handle the pressures of college. :shrug:

Sucks for 'Jane,' but it's not my job or the government's job to protect her from herself or anyone else from themselves.

Sorry.

 

[Christy]

why not? do you see it as an invasion of privacy or do you think it's a waste of money?

I think it is both. It disturbs me that so many people in this day and age embrace government intervention in almost every aspect of their lives. Where does it end? What is next? Mandatory pregnancy tests? How about STD tests for all kids prior to entering Middle School? They already (in some States) send notes home telling you that your kid is too fat. How about random home inspections to ensure your kid isn't hoarding guns to bring to school to shoot up the playground?

What purpose does any of it serve?

 

[vraiblonde]

What purpose does any of it serve?

If parents would pay more attention to their kids, the school wouldn't have to do it for them. I have no problem with drug-testing. Companies drug test, the military drug tests, so why not schools?

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

If parents would pay more attention to their kids, the school wouldn't have to do it for them. I have no problem with drug-testing. Companies drug test, the military drug tests, so why not schools?

Joining the military is a choice.

Not every company does drug tests. You have a choice where you apply for a job.

You do not have a choice when it comes to schools.

 

[vraiblonde]

Teacher should get one chance.. burn one, get a write up, and a warning.. burn two. G-Bye..

I agree with this.

 

[vraiblonde]

You do not have a choice when it comes to schools.

No, Andy, but you DO have a choice as to whether you do drugs or not

 

[Christy]

If parents would pay more attention to their kids, the school wouldn't have to do it for them. I have no problem with drug-testing. Companies drug test, the military drug tests, so why not schools?

But what is the point? And why should I have to pay for it? I'm sorry, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a drug test to know who the drug users are in school. What purpose does it serve by having it 'official'?

To me it's just another encroachment of a socialist government. It bothers me that so many people are totally okay with any of it. It shouldn't be the role of government to Nanny over any of us. If we continue to accept that type of busy bodying into our lives, it won't be far down the line where we'll all be getting tested for whatever the government deems inappropriate for us to consume. Legal or illegal. You've already seen that with cigarettes, and the new rage, trans fats. It's all just absurd and if we keep saying "I have no problem with this because it doesn't effect me" we're going to eventually start losing things that do effect us. JMO :shrug:

 

[Christy]

I agree with this.

I'm sorry, if I were a teacher the only means of survival would have to be massive quantities of mind altering drugs. Teacher's should be given a free pass for dealing with everyone's little demon seed day in and day out.

Again, JMO. :shrug:

 

[sux2b44]

Andy I totally see your point - but why should we continue to let the govt. regulate our lives any further. I am the one who gets the 10 seconds of fame when my son is on the football field and the tv passes him and he says "Hi mom." not Hi government!!!! It was me that got him there on that field by keeping him on the straight. By grounding him when he needed it, by listening when he needed it, crying when I needed it and laughing with him. I graduated in the 80's and most of my friends did drugs and were are they now???? Dead, on welfare, or still living with their parents with their kids. The only reason I say this not to catch kids but to warn kids against drugs. If they THINK they are going to be tested maybe this will stop the kid that will be the next OD victim and possibly make them think before they act. Taking it a step farther - maybe save a life??? Again, I totally agree with your opinion and see the opposite side of the argument - but can you now see me side as well????? ("-)

 

[sux2b44]

I'm sorry, if I were a teacher the only means of survival would have to be massive quantities of mind altering drugs. Teacher's should be given a free pass for dealing with everyone's little demon seed day in and day out.

Again, JMO. :shrug:

 

[clevalley]

Committing suicide is also illegal. The government should've prevented that. :

Chit happens. It's called the real world.

Do we know the drugs caused her to go and OD? Perhaps she couldn't handle the pressures of college. :shrug:

Sucks for 'Jane,' but it's not my job or the government's job to protect her from herself or anyone else from themselves.

Sorry.

Yes - suicide is illegal...

Yes - Shiat happens...

I can tell you Jane was depressed over an issue... it was before she left for college...

Yes, it does suck for Jane - and I show no sympathy for her, it is the cowards way out...

Don't be sorry... I was trying to show about parents not being involved with kids, and this is one instance (of many) that I personally know of where Sux2B44's poll might be a valid deterrent...

You know as well as I that will never happen in the Socialist Republic of Maryland!!!

 

[sux2b44]

Yes - suicide is illegal...

Yes - Shiat happens...

I can tell you Jane was depressed over an issue... it was before she left for college...

Yes, it does suck for Jane - and I show no empathy for her, it is the cowards way out...

Don't be sorry... I was trying to show about parents not being involved with kids, and this is one instance (of many) that I personally know of where Sux2B44's poll might be a valid deterrent...

You know as well as I that will never happen in the Socialist Republic of Maryland!!!

Socialist Republic of SMIB Land.

 

[This_person]

Driving recklessly or driving while speeding put other people in danger.

But, a drug accepting culture, while drugs are illegal, puts other people in danger, too. People do not act sensibly, they are dangerous. As are the people that sell the drugs.

Our jails are already overcrowded because we're locking people up for years because they smoke weed, because, you know weed's so harmful.

The point isn't that pot is so harmful. Heck, it's my personal belief it's LESS harmful than alcohol. But, one is legal and the other is not. It is pretty unlikely to be locked up for a joint every now and then, though, let's be honest. People get locked up for having large amounts of pot, generally for sale. This goes to personality trait - right or wrong, it's illegal. If you're the type to do this illegally, you're probably the type to do other things as well.

So, let's go spend more money to drug test everybody.

Randomly, why not? It can easily be shown to be dangerous - at least as dangerous as driving 65 in a 55 on a sunny summer Saturday afternoon. We randomly check that, why not pot? Coke? Heroin? Are these things less dangerous? How about driving sober on a Friday night after midnight? That's pretty safe, but I can be randomly checked for drinking just because of the time and location of driving. Why not randomly checked for narcotic use, too?

Okay, I don't mind if they drug test teachers. But, again, who's paying for it. They should start drug testing from the top, though, and not the bottom.

As I said to mAlice, I agree. But, it's not likely to happen since our "leaders" feel they're above they're own laws. So, why not start where we can (and, where it would make the most difference on a day to day basis in our lives) instead of waiting for the unlikely to occur?

Sure there is. It's called state and federal deficits.

Knowing they may be randomly checked will most likely limit use. Limited drug use can be shown to limit violent crime, and thus courts, police, and jail costs.

The deficits should be at worst neutrally effected, IMO.

 

[This_person]

But what is the point? And why should I have to pay for it? I'm sorry, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a drug test to know who the drug users are in school. What purpose does it serve by having it 'official'?

Innocent until proven guilty? :shrug:

To me it's just another encroachment of a socialist government. It bothers me that so many people are totally okay with any of it. It shouldn't be the role of government to Nanny over any of us. If we continue to accept that type of busy bodying into our lives, it won't be far down the line where we'll all be getting tested for whatever the government deems inappropriate for us to consume. Legal or illegal. You've already seen that with cigarettes, and the new rage, trans fats. It's all just absurd and if we keep saying "I have no problem with this because it doesn't effect me" we're going to eventually start losing things that do effect us. JMO :shrug:

Your slippery slope argument is actually a pretty good one, IMO. The cigarettes hurt others around the smoker, but the others have a choice to be around the smoker, too. The trans fats thing is absolutely absurd.

However, that doesn't mean ignore the laws. If it's a cost effective deterrant, I would still have to agree with it (since it is against the law, unlike the cigarettes and trans fats).

If we want to change the law, that's within the power of the people as well. Until that happens, I think this is a good deterrant.

 

[Christy]

If it's a cost effective deterrant

The most cost effective deterrent is to never reproduce. Nip it in the bud, abort all children before they have a chance to do drugs, not to mention it would completely eliminate the school budgetary problems.

Just a thought. :shrug:

 

[AndyMarquisLIVE]

But, a drug accepting culture, while drugs are illegal, puts other people in danger, too. People do not act sensibly, they are dangerous. As are the people that sell the drugs.

Drunk people also put people in danger.

BAN ALCOHOL!

The point isn't that pot is so harmful. Heck, it's my personal belief it's LESS harmful than alcohol. But, one is legal and the other is not. It is pretty unlikely to be locked up for a joint every now and then, though, let's be honest. People get locked up for having large amounts of pot, generally for sale. This goes to personality trait - right or wrong, it's illegal. If you're the type to do this illegally, you're probably the type to do other things as well.

I know people who have been locked up because they had possession of a joint. And, yes, they were charged with intent to distribute because they're going to make $100 for a joint, right?

Randomly, why not? It can easily be shown to be dangerous - at least as dangerous as driving 65 in a 55 on a sunny summer Saturday afternoon. We randomly check that, why not pot? Coke? Heroin? Are these things less dangerous? How about driving sober on a Friday night after midnight? That's pretty safe, but I can be randomly checked for drinking just because of the time and location of driving. Why not randomly checked for narcotic use, too?

To me, it's just more government and more government involvement. Parents need to step up and be parents. It's not my job to fund being some little punk's parent. If that's the case, I want custody.

As I said to mAlice, I agree. But, it's not likely to happen since our "leaders" feel they're above they're own laws. So, why not start where we can (and, where it would make the most difference on a day to day basis in our lives) instead of waiting for the unlikely to occur?

Because it'll never make it to the top. You know that. Our leaders should set an example. They prove they're not smoking weed or doing crack, then I will.

Knowing they may be randomly checked will most likely limit use. Limited drug use can be shown to limit violent crime, and thus courts, police, and jail costs.

The deficits should be at worst neutrally effected, IMO.

Yep, because drugs kill people.

Alcohol has also been proven to contribute to violent crime. If that was banned, we could cut back on courts, police enforcement and jail costs.

Oh wait, we tried that.

 

[clevalley]

The most cost effective deterrent is to never reproduce.

Where in the heck where you at ~12 1/2 years ago when I was leaving for Boston... you could have stopped me!