<p>Our local public high school breathalyzes everyone at every dance…if there is a positive reading, the student is supposed to be given a second test about 30 minutes later. It’s really interesting though…no one has been caught in ages…because the kids who want to drink don’t bother going to the dance, they just get dressed up and have private parties. Sadly, our high school of about 800 students had 68 kids at prom last weekend. Most stayed less than an hour. Maybe the school should rethink even doing prom and find something else the kids would participate in instead that didn’t have the glamor of drinking/partying associated with it. I felt very badly for the parents who worked so hard on the prom. My son was at an out-of-town soccer tournament but said he would not have gone to either the prom or any of the private parties in any case.</p>
<p>We didn’t have breathalyzers at my prom but we did have our bags checked and were patted down on the way in. I didn’t mind having my clutch checked but a pat down, seriously? Obviously I didn’t have anything shoved in my dress!</p>
<p>“I would agree with this high school student. I guess the only ones who might not, are the ones who are drinking. Otherwise…why is this a big deal??”</p>
<p>The fact that high school students feel this way says to me that we are failing in teaching them civics. It’s a big deal because it further reduces our freedom from invasive searches by the government. Perhaps we’ve all gotten so used to being searched at the airport that we’ve forgotten that innocent people should be outraged at being searched, not complacent about it.</p>
<p>Obviously I didn’t have anything shoved in my dress!
yes I have seen pics of some dresses!
In those instances I think a visual check would be plenty.</p>
<p>How is a breathalyzer invasive?</p>
<p>It’s one thing to have to blow into a tube for a few moments to ensure that no one’s safety is endangered. It’s quite another to have the police bang down your door and demand to search your home without a warrant.</p>
<p>Besides, need I remind you all that schools (and school-sponsored functions) are exempt from the 4th amendment? If you don’t want to take the test or get searched, don’t go. No one’s forcing you in any way. THAT’S why most of us don’t have a problem.</p>
<p>I think the concern is that breathalzyers are not that accurate</p>
<p>also wouldnt it just encourage teens to use substances that arent tested for?</p>
<p>Yeah, no kidding - especially for a dance. Though these things aren’t as popular, MDMA, cocaine and other hard stimulants are often popular party/rave drugs, and if kids know that there’s breathalyzing going on who knows what they might decide to do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It constitutes a search of your person/property. The law says you can only have your person or property searched if there is reasonable cause to suspect that you have committed a crime that would warrant such a search as part of the investigation. </p>
<p>If there’s evidence to believe that someone has broken the law in regards to consuming alcohol (e.g. they are underage and have alcohol on their breath or appear drunk or have possession of an alcoholic beverage) then I see nothing wrong with given them a breathalyzer… but blanket testing is a violation of civil liberties in my mind (and the law’s too… unless such a policy was set in the ticket’s contract).</p>
<p>Well, I don’t know about your school, but every school around here uses the same contract. And they all say,</p>
<p>“You understand that you may, at any time during the prom, be issued a breathalyzer test by the Police Department at the discretion of the administration/police department.”</p>
<p>Like I said earlier, if you don’t like it, leave. They’re not FORCING you to take the test, and most schools make it clear that it’s a possibility long before you buy your ticket.</p>
<p>They’re COERCING you into taking the test by making you agree to it in order to get access to the prom. This may be legal, but it still represents an erosion of civil liberties, and worse, it trains our young people to think of their civil liberties as disposable.</p>
<p>Are you SERIOUS?</p>
<p>Do you really think school administrations sit around in dirty back rooms trying to figure out how to get us to give up our civil liberties?</p>
<p>It’s for safety reasons. If your son/daughter/best friend/whatever was killed in a drunk driving accident and the driver was either headed to or going from his/her senior prom, would you still be so against this?</p>
<p>It’s for safety. It’s not like they’re just trying to be invasive. I may not agree with everything my school does, but I happen to think this is a pretty good idea.</p>
<p>In fact, the only kids I knew who had problems with it were the ones who were planning on going to crazy parties (where alcohol was widely available) before prom.</p>
<p>Hunt - Thanks for explaining my feelings about the issue much more clearly than I could.
“It’s for safety reasons.” I really think it’s more of a CYA issue on their behalf.
“the only kids I knew who had problems with it were the ones who were planning on going to crazy parties” That’s the problem…why should the kids be so complacent about this examination. And a PAT-DOWN!! Egads!</p>
<p>I’ll say it again…if someone was killed in a drunk driving accident and the driver was either headed to or going from his/her senior prom, would you still be so against this?</p>
<p>As for the pat down…if someone pulled out a gun and shot several students at prom, can’t you just see the parents yelling, “They should’ve patted them down!!!”</p>
<p>The boys had pat downs at our prom, and the girls had to open our bags/purses/whatever we were carrying.</p>
<p>The number of prom-related incidences around here is very low…in fact, I can’t remember hearing about any in the last several years. Obviously the schools are doing something right.</p>
<p>It’s always for safety reasons. As Benjamin Franklin said, “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
The administrators probably really are trying to protect the students from harm, but in my opinion, they are neglecting their duty to teach the students American ideals.</p>
<p>“I’ll say it again…if someone was killed in a drunk driving accident and the driver was either headed to or going from his/her senior prom, would you still be so against this?”</p>
<p>Yes. I am against random searches of people when there is no evidence of any wrongdoing. In this case, I think it is reasonable, probably, to test people who appear to be intoxicated. I can just barely accept the searches in the airport, because of the dire consequences to hundreds of people if a terrorist gets a weapon on board, but I think that all these searches and surveillance are making us forget the importance of our civil liberties.</p>
<p>Would you support random strip searches of people by the police, with no suspicion of wrongdoing? Would you still be against it if somebody you know was killed by a person with a concealed weapon? Would you support random, unannounced searches of private homes? Would you still be against it if somebody was building a bomb in a home, somewhere?</p>
<p>Hunt-the examples you reference are not the same thing.</p>
<p>Schools, and school-sponsored or -sanctioned events, AGAIN, are exempt from the fourth amendment. The students (or the student’s parents) are choosing for them to be there. If they don’t want to subject to the search, they’re free to either leave or not come in the first place. </p>
<p>As to coercion…how is it coercion if they’re making it clear that it may occur, and you still choose to sign the document? Please.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, the frequency of rolling each number 2 and 12 will begin to approximate the normal distribution … I mean, it’s much easier to roll a 6, 7, 8 or 9 than it is to roll a 2,3, 11 or 12.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, that’s actually not true. I suggest you re-read your civics textbook again. Believe it or not, the Bill of Rights and our Constitution (including the 4th amendment) applies everywhere and to all US citizens within the US. There aren’t “the consitution dosen’t apply here” zones! ;-)</p>
<p>The constitution is, of course, open to interpretation by the courts and on this subject the issue is far from clarified. Although there has been some tendency for the courts to be more lenient in their burden of proof for schools in what constitutes “reasonable cause” for searches there have been cases where schools have lost “search” cases on the basis of the 4th amendment. </p>
<p>In regards to drug testing, a few years back the supreme court just barely (5-4) upheld the right of a school district to use drug testing on school athletes (but not the whole general school population) and the ruling indicated that they wouldn’t look favorably upon the testing of the general school population unless there was reasonable evidence to justify the search/testing. In their ruling for sports, they said that a student could expect to give up some privacy by participating because they were already subjected to medical exams, changing in public locker rooms, communal showers, etc. but I don’t see how that applies to a school prom. This seems like the sort of thing that the ACLU would likely take up. I don’t see a school district wining when it comes to the prom and random testing, but it’s yet to be testing by any significant court. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes actually I would. I would hope that the district took reasonable measures to prevent drinking and monitoring the event, but the above situation does not warrant removing the rights of those that have done nothing wrong. I could pose a long list of similar situations to you:</p>
<p>An unknown blond suspect was observed committing a murder last week. Should we arrest all bond citizens and subject them to DNA testing against evidence taken from the murder scene?</p>
<p>The police received a tip that a particular restaurant was a popular location for drug dealing. Should the police stop every customer that exists the location and search them and their car?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So does that mean your parents can’t search your room, under your bed, your car, without your permission?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Once you turn 18 (like most of the people at the prom) technically yes that’s correct… although they don’t have to let you live in their house either at that point.</p>
<p>Some parents are shocked to find out that when they phone up their kids college demanding to see a copy of their child’s academic records they’re told they can’t unless the child says it’s OK. But then again, most parents say “I’m paying the bills, you let me search your records.”</p>