osullivan8E

First, we are talking specifically about the US, and even if it were to happen in the US, the school had reasonable suspicion for the search. All they wanted to do at the end of the day, is to make sure everyone in the learning environment was safe.

Closing Statement:

in conclusion, schools should be able to conduct student searches, in order to prevent any potential dangers, and ensure the welfare of anyone in the environment.

Student property consists of a locker, and this is not considered student's property, this is the school's owned property. So technically this is not a violation of their "privacy".

I see where you're coming from, but the school obviously strip searched for a reason, and they did what they did, to ensure the students' safety. If they would've just asked the student, without taking and measures, then the student could've easily gotten out of the problem, and been proved innocent, when they were really not.

I see where you're coming from, but there must be a reason behind the strip searching, of students. They could've been hiding some dangerous weapon or object, that could put the other people in the environment, in danger. The suspicion made was reasonable, and they had a right to do that, because they didn't want her to use the ibuprofen, as a drug.

There are some cases where the suspicion is reasonable, and they have a good reason behind what they are doing. The students could have been doing something wrong, and putting others in danger. So, the school has to take safety measures, to make sure that everyone's welfare is ensured. Also, we are talking about the US, not Canada. An example of reasonable suspicion, is: The fact that the search of all but one student in a class fails to reveal allegedly stolen property gives school officials reasonable suspicion to search that student (DesRoches v. Caprio, 1998). This may trigger the officials’ reasonable suspicion, because if everyone was searched and proven innocent, then it is obvious and highly likely that the one student who was not searched, is guilty of this. If the students were allowed to choose whether they wanted to be searched or not, then students that didn't give their consent to be searched could more than likely be hiding something, and/or are guilty of something.

Argument 1:

Maintains the safety of the students attending the school, (if you or your belongings seem suspicious) to prevent any dangers. The searches can be conducted if there is reasonable suspicion, and a good reasoning behind each search made. An example of this, is ‘An anonymous phone call advising an administrator that a student will be bringing drugs to school, coupled with the student's reputation as a drug dealer, creates reasonable suspicion to search the student's pockets and book bag’ (State of New Hampshire v. Drake, 1995). This suspicion caused them to make an unlawful search, on the student, to make sure they didn’t carry any drugs. The search made was reasonable; the principal receiving a phone call informing him that one of the students will be bringing in drugs.