Argumentative Essay: Random Drug Testing For Athletes

School employees consistently tell students to never share their locker combo. They continually remind them to not take photos of other kids in school, and they constantly prompt the students to never share their passwords. Pupils though, find it hard to follow these proclamations. At the end of the day, all the rules seem like botherances, not solid or set in stone. Imagine this. It’s supervised study. Some teens are in the hall attempting to open their friend’s locker. With combination in hand, they unlock the locker and rifle through the contents. Then their friend discovers them there. The teens laugh at her and run away happily but she is riled up and angry. On the bus, while on the way home, the friend is attempting to do homework when a phone suddenly looms above the student, over the seat in front of them. The friend tries to block the camera but a flash captures her panicked face. The other kids giggle and laugh over the picture but the friend is not amused. Finally, at home, the friend opens her chromebook to find a boatload of emails from other kids in the
Acton, 515, the school did a random urinalysis drug testing. They justified their search by stating it was to make sure that drugs wouldn’t increase the risk of injury for athletes. One of the athletes refused to cooperate but the court ruled that random drug testing did not violate the reasonable search and seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment because it was for a good cause. In another case Commonwealth v. Cass, the school, Harborcreek High School, conducted a school locker search for drugs. Trained dogs were brought in to inspect the lockers. 18 lockers were searched but only one actually held contraband. Appellee, the student who had contraband in his locker, claimed violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment yet the court ruled that schools can search lockers because the lockers are property of the school; the students would be notified