U.S. Supreme Court wrong to permit random drug testing in public high schools
By Abe Silk and Jason K.

    The proposition of random drug testing at Hall has created controversy and outrage since it was first suggested. Undoubtedly, these reactions are not unique to our school- it is not a novel suggestion that drug use is widespread among American teens. When the popularity of drugs, especially within the cozy confines of lavish suburbia, is coupled with the danger level of the penalties associated with drugs, the firestorm of controversy created is filled with passion and anger. Various questions arise: is random drug testing fair in principle? Are things different when it comes to athletes?

Graphic/Zak Shapiro and Mark DeBonee

    Random drug testing in general is very obviously an invasion of privacy. Yes, there are teenagers who deserve to be searched, interrogated, or “randomly tested” if they have in some way given authorities probable cause. But the very foundation of our country’s judicial system has been presumed innocence. Why then, are we as students in actuality being presumed guilty? Surely we have not in any way tainted our own presumed innocence by enrolling in a public school.

    Random drug testing was found to be constitutional several months ago. Whether or not Hall decides to institute it, there are several things the Board of Eduation should keep in mind. First, drug use by teens has been on a steady decline for the past 20 years. According to the 2001 Time Almanac, in 1979, 13.7% of surveyed teens 12 years and older admitted to smoking marijuana on a regular basis. By 1996, that figure was lowered to 4.7%. Aside from cigarettes and alcohol— two “drugs” the drug tests likely wouldn’t be searching for—marijuana was the most popular drug by far, the second most popular was cocaine with 0.8%.

    If Time’s survey can be trusted, it proves that the government’s massive drug education campaign has had at least some impact. Why, when teen drug use is at an all-time low, is the Board of Education considering further penalties for drug use? Why wasn’t this addressed in the ’60’s or ’70’s when drug use was a greater issue? Do they really think that threatening athletes with drug tests will significantly lower drug use by athletes? Furthermore, don’t they know that athletes can just buy some detox and get right around their little tests?

    As if this weren’t enough, student-athletes are being unfairly discriminated against. Not only is the school overlooking drug tests for the rest of the student body not involved with athletics, but it also doesn’t require drug tests for coaches. New teachers are given a drug test their first year, but after that they aren’t tested at all. Why are student-athletes being subjected to the threat of drug testing while their coaches, who are supposed to be role models, are not? It simply doesn’t make any sense at all to have such a double standard in place.

    Lastly, why do they care quite so much? The policy of random questioning, in regard to the effort to prevent crimes and punish criminals, would be much easier to accept if the crimes in question were harmful to other people. The fact of the matter is that scientists aren’t even sure if marijuana is even harmful to the user. Why not punish student-athletes for taking a Tylenol or eating ice cream? There is the same amount of scientific data proving the harms of headache medicines or frozen snacks as there is of smoking cannabis. Some scientists even believe it to be helpful, both as a stress reducer and a pain reliever.

    The European Union is considering legalizing marijuana, while several counties in the United States have decriminalized marijuana growth and usage. Furthermore, the entire state of Nevada is putting forth a referendum in November to possibly legalize marijuana. Why, then, is our Board of Education considering invading student-athletes of their privacy and providing stiff punishments for marijuana usage?

    If they really want to curb drug use in this town they should provide more entertainment on the weekends and allow for a much less stressful environment in our town’s lovely award-winning schools. But wait: That would lower property taxes, and money is much more important than the mental well-being of our children. Right?