Breathalyzer test required for Homecoming Dance - Page 4

zukiphile · September 7, 2011, 03:42 PM

If we are describing a principal who is testing for alcohol to get into a dance as a "totalitarian encroachment", I believe we have wandered into a pastiche of reasonable concerns about civil liberties.

Hitthespot · September 7, 2011, 04:24 PM

But the delima was always there. What else could it have been? In this country we are assumed innocent until proven guilty. So why should I have to take a test to prove I'm innocent. That in itself makes it very wrong. It seems so wrong to me that I can't believe the ones who are teaching our children can't see what their actually doing.

AND I agree, we have wondered into a hodge podge of reasonable concerns about civil liberties.

I say to you brotherin, he has seen the light.

hogdogs · September 7, 2011, 04:26 PM

What would cause this school system to suspect every child of committing a crime?

Ain't they ever learned to look for the signs of impairment as a way to determine who is "suspicious"?

Don't they know that he kids can get in sober and drink from hip flasks all night while in the gymnasium?

Brent

warrior poet · September 7, 2011, 04:58 PM

Well ofcourse they use this as a deterrent to keep the students from getting drunk and unruly and destructive... if a teacher were to try to physically restrain an unruly student someone would have the ACLU on speed-dial.

MLeake · September 7, 2011, 05:13 PM

When I was a student, this would have been a deterrent to my attendance.

Hmm, let's see.... how many disciplinary infractions did I have at my high school. Ummmm.... oh, yeah, none.

National Honor Society, check. Advanced Placement, check. Gifted classes, check. Wrestling team, check. Florida Academic Scholar, check. National Merit Scholar, check.

And I would have boycotted any event that would require me to submit to a breathalyzer, even though I very rarely drank, and never did at school functions or when driving.

I'd have been offended by the implication that I had to prove my "innocence" in order to attend. I'd have been angered by the arrogance of those who felt that, as a sixteen or seventeen year old, I should not expect any 4th Amendment protections. And I'd probably have found some way to make the administration feel my irritation - in the sense of letters to the editor, complaints to the ACLU, etc.

My parents, who were always active in the PTA (and who raised not only one kid who didn't get into trouble, and who was an achiever, but two - actually, my little sister is an associate VP at Rutgers these days....) would have raised a hue and cry over the breathalyzer plan, too.

And, FWIW, my mother was old school Sicilian - she was NOT the "my child can do no wrong" type. She was the "if they cause problems, let us know, and they will NOT be repeated" type. Somehow, none of our teachers ever needed to report anything to Mom.

When dealing with my godson, I never used threats, searches, etc. I'd just tell him what I expected of him, or, when possible, lead by example. His parents had the same approach. He's 19 now, attends WVU, and he opens doors at restaurants for old people and all that. He's a full-time student with a part-time job, attending on a student loan with no co-signer (plus a partial scholarship).

Again, kids will live up to your expectations, or else they will live down to them. Breathalyzers, zero tolerance policies, and their ilk are "feel-good" measures, instituted by the incompetent or lazy who do not want to actually put in the effort to motivate good behavior or to recognize the signs of impending trouble.

hogdogs · September 7, 2011, 05:16 PM

Quote:

if a teacher were to try to physically restrain an unruly student someone would have the ACLU on speed-dial.

Wouldn't said teacher have the cops on speed dial to handle the little law breaker? That is what cops are for after all...

And wouldn't said school have a "resource officer"? Code word for cop on premises... Unlike my disdain for private business operators who require I prepay for gas 'cuz some steal the gas, we are dealing with a school. And this school shouldn't treat them as if they are all drunkards.

Do they also go thru wallets and purses looking for counterfeit cash or weapons?

Brent

zukiphile · September 7, 2011, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotdogs

What would cause this school system to suspect every child of committing a crime?

Educating teens.

When I was that age I felt that every cop and teacher regarded me with suspicion. They were often correct.

hogdogs · September 7, 2011, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Educating teens.

When I was that age I felt that every cop and teacher regarded me with suspicion.

It sounds more like they are Indoctrinating teens not "educating" them. They are indoctrinating them to accept encroachment even without founded probable cause.

Brent

nathaniel · September 7, 2011, 07:27 PM

I graduated from HS in 2009. We had to blow into a "breathalizer"(it was more like a pass or fail device it showes no BAC on it just a red or green light) before we went into any school dance. The way I see it if you arent doing anything illegal you dont have to worry. If you dont want to blow into one dont go to the dance! Simple as that! Our school did it because 2 years before I graduated 4 kids got killed in a car accident while leaving the prom because they were drunk. The school board then adopted the new breathalizer policy. If you blow into it and fail your parents are called and you are sent home(no minor or other charges are filed). Seems to me some parents should be thanking the school board instead of freaking out about it. Yeah little Johnny might be an angel at home but how do you know he doesnt go over to bobby's house and drink it up before prom? The parents of the kids killed thought their kids didnt drink but they were proved wrong. They said they wished the school board had this policy in affect before their children were taken from them. Call it "infringement" or "a violation of personal rights" but mom and dad always called it "insurance" and so did I.

oneounceload · September 7, 2011, 07:50 PM

Quote:

My 17 year old son and I was talking last night and he said that everyone entering the high school for the homecoming dance was required to take a Breathalyer test. Well I laughed and said, "we'll get you high school kids straightened out yet." Obviously I thought he was kidding. Soon into our conversation I realized he was telling the truth, they really did have to take a breath test to enter the highschool dance.

Now I'm no lawyer or law expert by any means but this sounds like a civil rights violation to me. What next, urine sample for drugs? Blood Test for the Aids virus or hepititis?

It is NOT a mandatory attendance event - don't like the rules? Do not attend

hogdogs · September 7, 2011, 07:59 PM

Quote:

We had to blow into a "breathalizer"(it was more like a pass or fail device it showes no BAC on it just a red or green light) before we went into any school dance.

So a kid who thought he might get close to a hot chick and washed his mouth with scope ain't welcome at the dance? Or the kid who did a shot of Nyquil rather than stay home with a cough?

Quote:

The way I see it if you arent doing anything illegal you dont have to worry.

So the way I see it, you won't expect any rights regarding the 4th amendment cuz yer not doing anything wrong? These rights are for the person NOT doing anything wrong to avoid illegal search and seizure.

Quote:

If you dont want to blow into one dont go to the dance! Simple as that!

Or you can fight for the rights of others and go to the dance without blowin' in a tube.
So you won't mind getting pulled over every time you leave your property... field sobriety test and blow in the tube because you AIN'T doing any drinking?

Quote:

Our school did it because 2 years before I graduated 4 kids got killed in a car accident while leaving the prom because they were drunk.

And there is proof they arrived drunk? Drunk enuff to leave and get killed and no one was able to tell that these teens were drunk? Or did they possibly drink AT the prom or after which wouldn't have been stopped with the blow in the tube thingy?

Quote:

The school board then adopted the new breathalizer policy. If you blow into it and fail your parents are called and you are sent home(no minor or other charges are filed). Seems to me some parents should be thanking the school board instead of freaking out about it. Yeah little Johnny might be an angel at home but how do you know he doesnt go over to bobby's house and drink it up before prom?

Or after? My butt would be blistered if I got drunk at a school function... My parents never thanked anyone for violating our righs as kids... even when told we had no rights... they weren't buying that!

Quote:

The parents of the kids killed thought their kids didnt drink but they were proved wrong. They said they wished the school board had this policy in affect before their children were taken from them. Call it "infringement" or "a violation of personal rights" but mom and dad always called it "insurance" and so did I.

The parents who know not what their kids are up to might need these tactics but my parents had the whole child rearing thing handled on their own as it should be...

Brent

Hitthespot · September 7, 2011, 08:37 PM

Quote:

It is NOT a mandatory attendance event - don't like the rules? Do not attend

If I may, a quote from Toby Keith,

" When liberty's in jeapordy, I will always do what's right, "

Terminus009 · September 8, 2011, 09:03 AM

Thank you Mleake. I agree totally with your underlying philosophy. We are Americans and one thing that makes America the best place in the world to live is our right to succeed or fail and live with the consequences.

I lived in Canada for several years and was forced to endure what is euphemistically called "compliance checks." That is an action whereby police can (and do) stop people walking on sidewalks and really DO ask "ID please." They are checking for wants and warrants simply because (in my case I asked) one is wearing a Harley jacket outside at 3am.

I say live and let live and if a student gets unruly at a dance kick him or her out, maybe call the parents to pick up their kid, regardless of whether they were unruly due to booze or any other factor. Teach the ethic of consequence rather than mindless compliance with authority.

Our 2A came about specifically to resist authority gone bad. So did the 1st Amendment.

Better that kids learn about consequences than learn subservience.

Skadoosh · September 8, 2011, 09:36 AM

I remember when my old high school, without notice, put up metal detectors and a local LEO just inside the entrance doors .

The amount knives found outside on the campus grounds that first day was enough to completely fill a shoe box. The most concerning was that one gun was found in the bushes. Things have changed since I went there.

KyJim · September 8, 2011, 05:22 PM

Quote:

So a kid who thought he might get close to a hot chick and washed his mouth with scope ain't welcome at the dance? Or the kid who did a shot of Nyquil rather than stay home with a cough?

Oh, please!! Just wait a few minutes after the Scope and it won't matter. And Nyquil is 50 proof. if you take enough to flunk a PBT, you are intoxicated.

Quote:

So the way I see it, you won't expect any rights regarding the 4th amendment cuz yer not doing anything wrong? These rights are for the person NOT doing anything wrong to avoid illegal search and seizure.

But it's not against the Fourth Amendment. Lot's of cases out there on this sort of thing. Whine and cry about it all you want, it's not illegal no matter how much you don't like it.

Quote:

And there is proof they arrived drunk? Drunk enuff to leave and get killed and no one was able to tell that these teens were drunk? Or did they possibly drink AT the prom or after which wouldn't have been stopped with the blow in the tube thingy?

The school is simply doing what they can. They can control behavior by students at a school function to a certain degree. The fact they can't control behavior outside of school doesn't mean they should ignore safety inside the school.

Quote:

The parents who know not what their kids are up to might need these tactics but my parents had the whole child rearing thing handled on their own as it should be...

You must have had a miserable childhood/adolescent period since you got caught every time you did something wrong.

maestro pistolero · September 8, 2011, 05:41 PM

Why not have them tested upon leaving and before getting in the car instead? They could pass the test, then drink out of the flask in their pants.

Hitthespot · September 8, 2011, 05:49 PM

I have solved the problem. The technology now exsists (and has been used) to place braclets or a chip under the skin. We can do this to everyone at birth and now know everyplace everyone is at with the built in gps, what they have consumed, be it alcohol, drugs, or too much Star Bucks. Even if their having extra marital sex I'll bet. (it is illegal). The police can automatically get a radio signal you've drank too much and pick you up later.

MLeake · September 8, 2011, 05:56 PM

Seems quite a few of our members like the vestiges of a police state, except when it comes to gun control. I'll go further and say some folks here seem to want to live in Stepford.

Kreyzhorse · September 8, 2011, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Why do we accept the pre-employment drug screening our teenge child has to go through when they go to McDonalds,Krogers or Walmart to get a part-time job while still in school?

Sadly Shortwave, that right has already been chipped away so much that it's now the new norm. Diverging a bit off point, the Brady Campaign has really tried to chip away at our rights a little at a time. Just a small chip, add another and then another and finally you'll change the view of society so that what was once a right infringement is now socially acceptable. Getting drug tested to work at McDonalds is a perfect example.

JerryM · September 8, 2011, 07:26 PM

After reading many posts, I am more convinced of the wisdom and necessity of the test. Kids want to be like others and pretend they are adults, but they aren't. Most adults cannot handle alcohol, although all claim they can. Parents won't teach them so for such parties the schools should check for safety, and to keep order.

Kids should not be drinking at that age, but they do. The tests makes a lot of sense. Maybe there is some hope for the schools yet. And yes I could have passed the test, as I did not and do not drink. Neither did my buddies.

Jerry

mes227 · September 8, 2011, 07:35 PM

Quote:

My 17 year old son and I was talking last night and he said that everyone entering the high school for the homecoming dance was required to take a Breathalyer test. Well I laughed and said, "we'll get you high school kids straightened out yet." Obviously I thought he was kidding. Soon into our conversation I realized he was telling the truth, they really did have to take a breath test to enter the highschool dance.

Now I'm no lawyer or law expert by any means but this sounds like a civil rights violation to me. What next, urine sample for drugs? Blood Test for the Aids virus or hepititis

How is this different from requiring travelers to pass through metal detectors (full body scans, etc) at airports? They have probable cause because we are traveling? Of course not, and by any measure people at an airport are far less likely to be armed then teenagers at a dance are to be drunk. There is no Constitutional prohibition against search, only against unreasonable search. Asking high schoolers to blow doesn't strike me as unreasonable, nor does checking for guns before boarding an airplane.

Here's what the 4th Amendment says:
“ The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Notice the requirements for "describing the place....persons or things...." To publicly announce, in advance, that everyone one ("the persons") entering the dance ("the place") will be tested for alcohol ("the things") seems to comply with both the letter and intent of this amendment. No one is forcing either the high schoolers or travelers to be tested/screened. It is a condition for entry, but entry is completely voluntary.

Al Norris · September 8, 2011, 08:15 PM

Here's the problem, as I see it.

If you hold to the original public meaning of what the 1A or 2A meant back in times of the founding, then you also need to hold that same view of the 4A.

Quite simply, the 4A is dead, as most everything that is allowed today would have been unreasonable, and hence unlawful, back in the day....

shortwave · September 8, 2011, 08:33 PM

^^Hence the reason for my earlier post about Ben Franklin looking down on us and being....Speechless.

In Columbus,Ohio, just this morning, two highschool students, while at school got into a fight. The end result was that one student cut the others throat with a knife. All day long, parents have blasted the media about how this student got in the school with a knife in the first place.

It just makes me wonder how many of these same parents would be throwing a fit if the kids were forced to go through metal detectors as they entered the school.

ripnbst · September 8, 2011, 09:00 PM

Where I went to HS we had to get drug tested to drive to school with our own cars. We had to pay for a parking pass and driving to school was a "privilege". Drug testing was a must to participate in anything school related, choir, chess club, football, math club, anything.

These tests included alcohol.

kilimanjaro · September 8, 2011, 11:03 PM

Being intoxicated in public is a crime. Being a minor in possession is a crime. Driving while being intoxicated is a crime. Having passengers in your car while you drive it under the influence is a crime. And seeing 4 or 6 empty desks on Monday morning at the start of class, after a car gets wrapped around a telephone pole, is even worse.

The numbers of kids today who are out of control is staggering. It bears no relation at all with our rites of passage in our youth. Give your kid a cell camera and tell him to show you.

September 7, 2011, 03:42 PM	#76
zukiphile Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2005 Posts: 4,457	If we are describing a principal who is testing for alcohol to get into a dance as a "totalitarian encroachment", I believe we have wandered into a pastiche of reasonable concerns about civil liberties. __________________ http://www.npboards.com/index.php

September 7, 2011, 04:58 PM	#79
warrior poet Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2007 Location: Whereever Uncle Sam wants to put me Posts: 415	Well ofcourse they use this as a deterrent to keep the students from getting drunk and unruly and destructive... if a teacher were to try to physically restrain an unruly student someone would have the ACLU on speed-dial. __________________ Trigger control: The skillful manipulation of the trigger, which causes the weapon to fire, while maintaining sight alignment and sight picture.

September 8, 2011, 09:03 AM	#88
Terminus009 Member Join Date: July 6, 2011 Location: SoIL Posts: 71	Consequences Thank you Mleake. I agree totally with your underlying philosophy. We are Americans and one thing that makes America the best place in the world to live is our right to succeed or fail and live with the consequences. I lived in Canada for several years and was forced to endure what is euphemistically called "compliance checks." That is an action whereby police can (and do) stop people walking on sidewalks and really DO ask "ID please." They are checking for wants and warrants simply because (in my case I asked) one is wearing a Harley jacket outside at 3am. I say live and let live and if a student gets unruly at a dance kick him or her out, maybe call the parents to pick up their kid, regardless of whether they were unruly due to booze or any other factor. Teach the ethic of consequence rather than mindless compliance with authority. Our 2A came about specifically to resist authority gone bad. So did the 1st Amendment. Better that kids learn about consequences than learn subservience. __________________ ----- In Justice Robert H. Jackson's memorable words, "If there is any fixed star in our constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein."

September 8, 2011, 09:36 AM	#89
Skadoosh Senior Member Join Date: December 13, 2010 Location: Virginia Beach Posts: 2,016	I remember when my old high school, without notice, put up metal detectors and a local LEO just inside the entrance doors . The amount knives found outside on the campus grounds that first day was enough to completely fill a shoe box. The most concerning was that one gun was found in the bushes. Things have changed since I went there. __________________ NRA Life Member USN Retired

September 8, 2011, 07:26 PM	#95
JerryM Senior Member Join Date: April 4, 1999 Location: New Mexico Posts: 1,889	After reading many posts, I am more convinced of the wisdom and necessity of the test. Kids want to be like others and pretend they are adults, but they aren't. Most adults cannot handle alcohol, although all claim they can. Parents won't teach them so for such parties the schools should check for safety, and to keep order. Kids should not be drinking at that age, but they do. The tests makes a lot of sense. Maybe there is some hope for the schools yet. And yes I could have passed the test, as I did not and do not drink. Neither did my buddies. Jerry __________________ Ecclesiastes 12:13 ¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

September 7, 2011, 04:24 PM	#77
Hitthespot Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2010 Posts: 227	But the delima was always there. What else could it have been? In this country we are assumed innocent until proven guilty. So why should I have to take a test to prove I'm innocent. That in itself makes it very wrong. It seems so wrong to me that I can't believe the ones who are teaching our children can't see what their actually doing. AND I agree, we have wondered into a hodge podge of reasonable concerns about civil liberties. I say to you brotherin, he has seen the light.

September 7, 2011, 04:26 PM	#78
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	What would cause this school system to suspect every child of committing a crime? Ain't they ever learned to look for the signs of impairment as a way to determine who is "suspicious"? Don't they know that he kids can get in sober and drink from hip flasks all night while in the gymnasium? Brent

September 7, 2011, 05:13 PM	#80
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	When I was a student, this would have been a deterrent to my attendance. Hmm, let's see.... how many disciplinary infractions did I have at my high school. Ummmm.... oh, yeah, none. National Honor Society, check. Advanced Placement, check. Gifted classes, check. Wrestling team, check. Florida Academic Scholar, check. National Merit Scholar, check. And I would have boycotted any event that would require me to submit to a breathalyzer, even though I very rarely drank, and never did at school functions or when driving. I'd have been offended by the implication that I had to prove my "innocence" in order to attend. I'd have been angered by the arrogance of those who felt that, as a sixteen or seventeen year old, I should not expect any 4th Amendment protections. And I'd probably have found some way to make the administration feel my irritation - in the sense of letters to the editor, complaints to the ACLU, etc. My parents, who were always active in the PTA (and who raised not only one kid who didn't get into trouble, and who was an achiever, but two - actually, my little sister is an associate VP at Rutgers these days....) would have raised a hue and cry over the breathalyzer plan, too. And, FWIW, my mother was old school Sicilian - she was NOT the "my child can do no wrong" type. She was the "if they cause problems, let us know, and they will NOT be repeated" type. Somehow, none of our teachers ever needed to report anything to Mom. When dealing with my godson, I never used threats, searches, etc. I'd just tell him what I expected of him, or, when possible, lead by example. His parents had the same approach. He's 19 now, attends WVU, and he opens doors at restaurants for old people and all that. He's a full-time student with a part-time job, attending on a student loan with no co-signer (plus a partial scholarship). Again, kids will live up to your expectations, or else they will live down to them. Breathalyzers, zero tolerance policies, and their ilk are "feel-good" measures, instituted by the incompetent or lazy who do not want to actually put in the effort to motivate good behavior or to recognize the signs of impending trouble.

September 7, 2011, 07:27 PM	#84
nathaniel Senior Member Join Date: March 11, 2010 Location: North Dakota Posts: 600	I graduated from HS in 2009. We had to blow into a "breathalizer"(it was more like a pass or fail device it showes no BAC on it just a red or green light) before we went into any school dance. The way I see it if you arent doing anything illegal you dont have to worry. If you dont want to blow into one dont go to the dance! Simple as that! Our school did it because 2 years before I graduated 4 kids got killed in a car accident while leaving the prom because they were drunk. The school board then adopted the new breathalizer policy. If you blow into it and fail your parents are called and you are sent home(no minor or other charges are filed). Seems to me some parents should be thanking the school board instead of freaking out about it. Yeah little Johnny might be an angel at home but how do you know he doesnt go over to bobby's house and drink it up before prom? The parents of the kids killed thought their kids didnt drink but they were proved wrong. They said they wished the school board had this policy in affect before their children were taken from them. Call it "infringement" or "a violation of personal rights" but mom and dad always called it "insurance" and so did I.

September 8, 2011, 05:41 PM	#91
maestro pistolero Senior Member Join Date: August 16, 2007 Posts: 2,153	Why not have them tested upon leaving and before getting in the car instead? They could pass the test, then drink out of the flask in their pants.

September 8, 2011, 05:49 PM	#92
Hitthespot Senior Member Join Date: August 25, 2010 Posts: 227	I have solved the problem. The technology now exsists (and has been used) to place braclets or a chip under the skin. We can do this to everyone at birth and now know everyplace everyone is at with the built in gps, what they have consumed, be it alcohol, drugs, or too much Star Bucks. Even if their having extra marital sex I'll bet. (it is illegal). The police can automatically get a radio signal you've drank too much and pick you up later.

September 8, 2011, 05:56 PM	#93
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	Seems quite a few of our members like the vestiges of a police state, except when it comes to gun control. I'll go further and say some folks here seem to want to live in Stepford.

September 8, 2011, 08:15 PM	#97
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	Here's the problem, as I see it. If you hold to the original public meaning of what the 1A or 2A meant back in times of the founding, then you also need to hold that same view of the 4A. Quite simply, the 4A is dead, as most everything that is allowed today would have been unreasonable, and hence unlawful, back in the day....

September 8, 2011, 08:33 PM	#98
shortwave Senior Member Join Date: December 17, 2007 Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO Posts: 5,970	^^Hence the reason for my earlier post about Ben Franklin looking down on us and being....Speechless. In Columbus,Ohio, just this morning, two highschool students, while at school got into a fight. The end result was that one student cut the others throat with a knife. All day long, parents have blasted the media about how this student got in the school with a knife in the first place. It just makes me wonder how many of these same parents would be throwing a fit if the kids were forced to go through metal detectors as they entered the school.

September 8, 2011, 09:00 PM	#99
ripnbst Senior Member Join Date: November 24, 2010 Location: Spring, TX Posts: 1,552	Where I went to HS we had to get drug tested to drive to school with our own cars. We had to pay for a parking pass and driving to school was a "privilege". Drug testing was a must to participate in anything school related, choir, chess club, football, math club, anything. These tests included alcohol.

September 8, 2011, 11:03 PM	#100
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Being intoxicated in public is a crime. Being a minor in possession is a crime. Driving while being intoxicated is a crime. Having passengers in your car while you drive it under the influence is a crime. And seeing 4 or 6 empty desks on Monday morning at the start of class, after a car gets wrapped around a telephone pole, is even worse. The numbers of kids today who are out of control is staggering. It bears no relation at all with our rites of passage in our youth. Give your kid a cell camera and tell him to show you.