roger wrote:I don't know a good lawyer who would encourage you to forfeit any rights. Your school does. It also discourages participation, even among non-drug users. Does sounding like whining make either less true, or less negative? You don't like the answers, come up with your own, and quit whining.
It doesn't discourage participation in the least, unless there are THAT many drug users in EC programs.
Even hinting that this is an invasion of privacy is nonsense. If you wish to participate, you will sign your name to a document giving permission for the school to perform random drug tests upon you. The only reason you have to feel ill at ease with this procedure is if you will most likely be found guilty of substance abuse, in which case you need to get help anyway.
This is not a negative. This isn't random testing without warning. This is a fore-warned group that is accepting the stipulations the school has set.
roger wrote: Driving is presented as a privilage, not a right. It certainly isn't mandatory, and I concede to no one the right to search my car.
But by virtue of holding a NM driver's lic. you have conceded to either comply with a breathalizer or blood test should you be suspected of operating under the influence or forefit of your lic. if you don't.
And while I'm not a huge fan of these drug tests I disagree that anyone is losing any rights. The student is given a choice - you can either participate (with a requirement that you stay - and be able to demonstrate - drug free) or you don't participate. Welcome to the wonderful world of adults - we all have choices to make.
Yeah. Privacy's a joke. If you run it for the negative, you'll get slaughtered.
I did think of something for the neg though (FINALLY), and it sort of goes along with privacy. Schools mass drug test, right? So they come in groups. Kids have to tell the tester if they are on any medication that could make the test positive. This forces kids to admit in front of their peers that they depend on certain drugs, like Ritalyn (sp?), antipsychotics, antidepressants, etc. Maybe that kid didn't want anyone else at their school to know they where ADD or bipolar.
I guess you could run that. But the Aff could just as easily counter that this is a policy problem, easily rectified. Schools could begin testing separately. It's not a policy debate, so you can't argue it.
Does anyone see a way to extend that argument though?
Also for negative, you could argue that drug testing is inaccurate. But I'm not sure if that's true or not. It needs more research.
For Aff you can run safety, societal welfare, utilitarianism, and just about anything. Drugs make kids unpredictable, and sometimes violent, depending on the drug.
Shouldn't you only be tested for drugs if there is a reasonable suspicion?
Like in the breathalyzer test, they don't just pull you over randomly.
i have an awesome aff and neg!!!! and they have the same exact v and cr, too!
You from East Texas blaze? If not, do you think you could share?
I went to a meet on Saturday. It actually was more difficult to run the affirmative. There is a lot of evidence out there supporting the fact that drug testing does not deter drug usage. So no matter what you run for Aff, it's absolutely essential to be able to prove that it DOES deter drug usage.
New argument for negative. You can argue that drug testing is cool. It's beneficial to society, and deters drug use, etc. Just say the schools should test all kids. If your gonna do it, go all the way.
Yes, actually I am from east texas. I attend a school in Fort Worth and am going to the Burleson tournament this weekend then the Round Rock tournament on the weekend of the 28th. Are you going to either of those?
It's totally justified!
I'm currently in high school, and I'm in extra curricular activities...I know that my activities mean a lot to me, and I don't want any chance of screwing that up! So I don't do the drugs, or alcohol. I know that not all students are like me, so of course, there's more out there to worry about. But if my school wants to drug test those kids who are in extra curricular activities, I say let them! I don't have one single problem with it, and neither do any of my friends. The kids that do those drugs and drink alcohol, of course they have a problem with it, because their going to get caught. Which is exactly what needs to happen. This is an illegal thing, what those druggies and alkies are doing. Of course it needs to be stopped! I certainly don't want some kid all high on cocaine, or someone stumbling around the halls of my school, they could be extremely dangerous! Like I already said, this needs to happen to help enforce the laws. We NEED these drug tests to ensure the safety of the kids in our school.
Nah blaze. I'm a lot further east, a little more to the south. I'm about three miles from Louisiana. Good luck at your tournaments though.
I've got me a couple of questions...
What kind of questions does one make before the tournament?...
I usually know that I will bring up the "violation of rights" and "costly" arguments, should I pre-make these questions... Saw this done at a meet, and thought it was pretty interesting....
Do you have arguments on all types of values/criterion.. or just go with the flow once you're in the room, debating....?
Well, I've been working on my aff. case, and am unsure of how one will attempt to attack it, ... value = social contract.... criterion= safety... basically, In order for one to be "Safe" in school, one must give up certain liberties/rights... How would ya'll begin attacking this?.. .Thanx!!!... If ya'll need anything.. don't hesitate to ask!!
I know that if they did testing on the kids back in the mid to late 70's we would have all flunked and had no sports teams. All the athletes smoked pot. And we were still good athletes!
While you may not see school sponsored drug tests as negative, there are lots of people that share Phoenix's sentiment of privacy invasion. However, save educating, a school's primary responsibility is the safety of the students, and it can be easily argued that drugs are a danger. I see this as an indication of the state of our country; Yet another example of people trading their(and in this case their children's) liberties for the illusion of safety.
I agree with Phoenix. I see it as an invasion of privacy. IMO, the school should be faced with having to provide justifications for manditory drug-testing of extra-curricular activities.
They are the ones who need to provide sound evidence why drug-testing is the ONLY workable solution.
There are plenty of other measures which could be taken. Of course, this would require greater responsibility where it belongs.
It is difficult to help anyone with this case without knowing the specifics, but from the very bottom of my being I feel this is vile.
If a school is faced with a population of students so plagued by drugs in their extra-curricular activities that they consider drug-testing, there are more important things to be worrying about than whether an athlete is cheating by using drugs!
I am betting that there is more at stake with these 'extra-curricular' activities than mere sport. Scholarships, prestige, padding, whathaveyou.
That pretty much misses the whole point of having sports and extra-curriculars in the first place, I think.
Bottom line: You could argue this either way. It requires having all the available information and specifics though, and we simply can not go into all that here.
