HS uses breathalyzers for students at football game (1 Viewer)

[Bucks]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Do you think courthouses should have metal detectors?

Good point, your school should have metal detectors or at least do body searches at the ticket gate. Think of the liability of students bringing in guns and knives.

If there was a history of guns being brought to school, of course I'd be happy that they had metal detectors. Would you still be against that?

Not against it where carrying is unlawful. Is there a history of actual liability costs to the school from students drinking before games?

 

[TheIronSheik]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

 

[Zow]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Do you think courthouses should have metal detectors?

Good point, your school should have metal detectors or at least do body searches at the ticket gate. Think of the liability of students bringing in guns and knives.

If there was a history of guns being brought to school, of course I'd be happy that they had metal detectors. Would you still be against that?

Not against it where carrying is unlawful. Is there a history of actual liability costs to the school from students drinking before games?

It's unlawful for people under the age of 21 to possess or consume alcohol.

 

[TheIronSheik]

No.

My bad. I got confused when you said "It is the tax-payer's property." Made me think you were talking about tax payer's property and the such.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

"You mean to tell me that you think it is OK for 14 year olds to be doing keg stands on the sidelines? You find it acceptable that minors are giving each other vodka enemas under the bleachers? I guess you have no problem with kindergarteners shooting smack too?"

 

[Bucks]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Less rights but not no rights. At least not yet.

 

[Bucks]

"You mean to tell me that you think it is OK for 14 year olds to be doing keg stands on the sidelines? You find it acceptable that minors are giving each other vodka enemas under the bleachers? I guess you have no problem with kindergarteners shooting smack too?"

How do breathalyzers at the gate prevent any of this?

 

[pollardsvision]

"You mean to tell me that you think it is OK for 14 year olds to be doing keg stands on the sidelines? You find it acceptable that minors are giving each other vodka enemas under the bleachers? I guess you have no problem with kindergarteners shooting smack too?"

I read that in Joe Dirt at the "fireworks" stand voice.

http://youtu.be/suvJai5IC6c?t=1m14s

 

[NCCommish]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Do you think courthouses should have metal detectors?

You mean the place where people who have been arrested for assault, murder, domestic abuse, etc. are forced to come to be punished? You really want to compare those security needs with the issue of a few kids drinking before a high school football game?

But it's an intrusive search on public property. Doesn't that enrage you? Why should you be subject to search just because of a few bad apples?

No it is a search on federal or state property. Just like in an airport.

 

[NCCommish]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

Maybe Zow didn't read the 1985 Supreme Court opinion in New Jersey versus TLO. Maybe he should. For the first time the Supreme said the 4th amendment does apply to students with some minor scaleback. As far as I know this is still the controlling opinion if not I am sure Zow will correct me.

The Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches”applies to searches of public school students conducted by school officials. The legality of a search of astudent depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.

The decision provides two tests. Reasonableness which is part of the scaleback as it is a lesser standard than probable cause. And it requires a scope that is reasonable as related to the circumstance. This has resulted in drug testing for athletes being approved but has mixed results in other areas where mass searches or test are done. So it is not at all clear that if a student sued over the breathalyser that they wouldn't win. And further it is certainly clear that students do have 4th amendment rights.

 

[Fennis]

No. It's to make sure they don't drink on school property during a school event. Seems pretty simple to me.

sounds like they should test them after the game

 

[Sinn Fein]

No. It's to make sure they don't drink on school property during a school event. Seems pretty simple to me.

sounds like they should test them after the game

Or make them do a strip search entering the game.

 

[roadkill1292]

I'm wif NCC of course. Eff these effing searches.

 

[NCCommish]

I'm wif NCC of course. Eff these effing searches.

efin a

 

[Zow]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

Maybe Zow didn't read the 1985 Supreme Court opinion in New Jersey versus TLO. Maybe he should. For the first time the Supreme said the 4th amendment does apply to students with some minor scaleback. As far as I know this is still the controlling opinion if not I am sure Zow will correct me.

The Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches”applies to searches of public school students conducted by school officials. The legality of a search of astudent depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.

The decision provides two tests. Reasonableness which is part of the scaleback as it is a lesser standard than probable cause. And it requires a scope that is reasonable as related to the circumstance. This has resulted in drug testing for athletes being approved but has mixed results in other areas where mass searches or test are done. So it is not at all clear that if a student sued over the breathalyser that they wouldn't win. And further it is certainly clear that students do have 4th amendment rights.

I'll do some research. I think there was a later case specifically involving searches of lockers that significantly cut down any privacy interests for a student, but admittedly I haven't looked at this issue in several years. Where do I send the bill?

 

[pollardsvision]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

Maybe Zow didn't read the 1985 Supreme Court opinion in New Jersey versus TLO. Maybe he should. For the first time the Supreme said the 4th amendment does apply to students with some minor scaleback. As far as I know this is still the controlling opinion if not I am sure Zow will correct me.

The Fourth Amendments prohibition of unreasonable searchesapplies to searches of public school students conducted by school officials. The legality of a search of astudent depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.

The decision provides two tests. Reasonableness which is part of the scaleback as it is a lesser standard than probable cause. And it requires a scope that is reasonable as related to the circumstance. This has resulted in drug testing for athletes being approved but has mixed results in other areas where mass searches or test are done. So it is not at all clear that if a student sued over the breathalyser that they wouldn't win. And further it is certainly clear that students do have 4th amendment rights.

I'll do some research. I think there was a later case specifically involving searches of lockers that significantly cut down any privacy interests for a student, but admittedly I haven't looked at this issue in several years. Where do I send the bill?

Sheik's school district. They've got plenty of money to burn

 

[TheIronSheik]

No. It's to make sure they don't drink on school property during a school event. Seems pretty simple to me.

sounds like they should test them after the game

The point is to prevent it.

 

[NCCommish]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

Maybe Zow didn't read the 1985 Supreme Court opinion in New Jersey versus TLO. Maybe he should. For the first time the Supreme said the 4th amendment does apply to students with some minor scaleback. As far as I know this is still the controlling opinion if not I am sure Zow will correct me.

The Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches”applies to searches of public school students conducted by school officials. The legality of a search of astudent depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.

The decision provides two tests. Reasonableness which is part of the scaleback as it is a lesser standard than probable cause. And it requires a scope that is reasonable as related to the circumstance. This has resulted in drug testing for athletes being approved but has mixed results in other areas where mass searches or test are done. So it is not at all clear that if a student sued over the breathalyser that they wouldn't win. And further it is certainly clear that students do have 4th amendment rights.

I'll do some research. I think there was a later case specifically involving searches of lockers that significantly cut down any privacy interests for a student, but admittedly I haven't looked at this issue in several years. Where do I send the bill?

Why to Joe of course. And locker searches have been hit or miss in court. Sometimes the schools win sometimes they lose based on my reading.

 

[parasaurolophus]

How does it appear to be working? Are there any stats to back up a decrease in underage drinking due to this?

I feel like I've stated this about a dozen times, but it's not meant to stop kids from drinking. It's meant to stop kids from drinking and then going on school property to a school event. Considering there were no incidents Friday, I'd say it seems to be working. So the stats would be that there used to be some. Now there were none. That's math even I can do.

So we tested every student with no regards for guilt or innocence not even the appearance of guilt and you think that is the example to set for kids to stop a few from drinking? I think it's on the parents to be involved enough to keep their teenagers from being drunks. I think if a kid shows up drunk it's pretty obvious and can be dealt with. I think teaching kids the state has the right to intrusively test you because they want to is a really bad thing.

How is it intrusive? They are going on to the school's property. It's not like they're coming to their houses and checking to see if they drank.

I am against that state doing warrantless, suspicionless searches which is what this kind of thing amounts to. Just a stupid overreach affecting a lot of people because of the conduct of a few. You're good with it and it's your kid so all good. I think it sends the wrong message and teaches the wrong lesson..

Jesus christ. This is no different than a metal detector. Don't be such a drama queen.

 

[Insein]

Man, it's the same bull#### they tried to pull in my day. If it ain't that breathalyzer, there's some other choice they're gonna try and make for you. You gotta do what Iron Shiek wants to do man. Let me tell you this, the older you do get the more rules they're gonna try to get you to follow. You just gotta keep livin' man, L-I-V-I-N.

Dude that's a quote from "Dazed and Confused". If you're going to rip stuff off you should give proper credit.

 

[Insein]

Anyway, it was probably something where they caught wind of some kids talking about showing up drunk or kids have shown up to previous games drunk. Put out the idle threat and have them at the game but they wouldn't breathalyze everyone.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Anyway, it was probably something where they caught wind of some kids talking about showing up drunk or kids have shown up to previous games drunk. Put out the idle threat and have them at the game but they wouldn't breathalyze everyone.

Yeah, it should be pointed out that they do not do this at every game. In fact, I believe it's been in the handbook for several years now that they could do it, but this is either the first or second time they've done it.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

 

[TheIronSheik]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

Maybe after they identify all the kids that drink they can make them wear a special badge or patch on their clothes.

 

[TheIronSheik]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

Maybe after they identify all the kids that drink they can make them wear a special badge or patch on their clothes.

I think there was a store just selling some of those. Probably can get them cheap. Great argument, BTW.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

Maybe after they identify all the kids that drink they can make them wear a special badge or patch on their clothes.

I think there was a store just selling some of those. Probably can get them cheap. Great argument, BTW. :thumbmup:

Didn't realize you were such a fan of Hitler.

 

[TheIronSheik]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

Maybe after they identify all the kids that drink they can make them wear a special badge or patch on their clothes.

I think there was a store just selling some of those. Probably can get them cheap. Great argument, BTW. :thumbmup:

Didn't realize you were such a fan of Hitler.

Huge fan. You act like he was a bad guy or something.

 

[Insein]

You know who would really like this policy?

Hitler.

Hitler hated American football. Fact.

Maybe after they identify all the kids that drink they can make them wear a special badge or patch on their clothes.

I think there was a store just selling some of those. Probably can get them cheap. Great argument, BTW. :thumbmup:

Didn't realize you were such a fan of Hitler.

Huge fan. You act like he was a bad guy or something.

He always kept the trains running on time.

 

[Zow]

I'm with NCCommish. This is public school. The constitution should matter. Show some probable cause first. The liability card gets so overplayed as the defacto defense to so many knee jerk policies. Spend the energy changing laws so the school isn't exposed to such liability, if they in fact actually are.

Reminds me of the time I needed a tire repair out in the middle of no where. The young repair tech rolls my tire to me to show me a cut in the sidewall and says I can't repair this because we can't be held reliable.

Constitutionally, students in a public school setting pretty much have no rights to privacy.

Wait. So you're saying that the founding fathers didn't say kids could get drunk and go to football games without being hassled to prove they're sober? Guess I was drunk the day they went over that in school.

Maybe Zow didn't read the 1985 Supreme Court opinion in New Jersey versus TLO. Maybe he should. For the first time the Supreme said the 4th amendment does apply to students with some minor scaleback. As far as I know this is still the controlling opinion if not I am sure Zow will correct me.

The Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of “unreasonable searches”applies to searches of public school students conducted by school officials. The legality of a search of astudent depends on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search.

The decision provides two tests. Reasonableness which is part of the scaleback as it is a lesser standard than probable cause. And it requires a scope that is reasonable as related to the circumstance. This has resulted in drug testing for athletes being approved but has mixed results in other areas where mass searches or test are done. So it is not at all clear that if a student sued over the breathalyser that they wouldn't win. And further it is certainly clear that students do have 4th amendment rights.

I'll do some research. I think there was a later case specifically involving searches of lockers that significantly cut down any privacy interests for a student, but admittedly I haven't looked at this issue in several years. Where do I send the bill?

Why to Joe of course. And locker searches have been hit or miss in court. Sometimes the schools win sometimes they lose based on my reading.

It appears that NJ case is still good law. Students do have some privacy rights, although those rights do not have the same protections that an adult would have under normal circumstances (i.e. the burden on school officials to search a student is less than probable cause and really just has to be reasonable under the circumstances).

 

[-fish-]

we always waited until after the games to get loaded.

damn kids today.