Locker Searches In Schools

Personally I think it is a violation of the law in some cases. Schools do have the permission to search the lockers though because of the fact that it is their property they’ve funded it but there has been some situations with faculty searching your pockets and backpacks or even making you take off your clothing. Now the pocket and backpack check is something that they can do when you enter the building but not at random times. They have to have probable cause which means they need a reason to search you meaning the person who is conducting the search or a witness visibly see you with something you’re not supposed to have, or smell a use of drugs or alcohol.

I did a survey and 50% of my class said that teachers shouldn’t search kids lockers and the other 50% said that they should be able to search them. I asked them why? Most of my classmates said that they should because they might have drugs or weapons, and i agree with that, but what if they had had a valid reason for the drugs or weapon. Example: A kid is walking and a guy walks up to him and tells him to bring him weed or he will hurt him. Then the next day he brings weapon because he's scared and the teachers search his locker and he gets in

Although students should know not to take others belongings, items are still being stolen.According to Amanda Boyarshinov, she says that students are still taking others things without their permission.Regardless of the age people will always take other stuff that does not belong to them.This is important because people work to pay for there thinks that just get taken from them.In addition to Amanda Boyarshinov, Hugh Richard Williams stats that lockers can help reduce the amount of theft that happened at school.This show that lockers would be beneficial to help student keep their belongings safe.This is important because many people overlook this when choosing to get rid of lockers.This is one ways school lockers benefit students and families

. In Pros and Cons of School Locker Searches, it states that, " Misplaced Focus: searching lockers can imply to students that they aren't trustworthy. It can ruin the school's attempt to build school community trust and respect." In Article 3 ( Pros and Cons of School Locker Searches- Synonym), it states, " School locker searches also consume valuable time for administrators, security guards, and teacher who conduct them. Student also lose their learning time because of this issue." In addition, Article 3 states, " Because students may keep personal items in their lockers, such as photographs and personal letters, even a search with the best intentions can appear to be a major breach of trust by teachers and administrators, causing a rift between the student body and faculty." Some people may argue that locker searches can keep children safe. It "protects them." But how can locker searches protect the children unless they think something's up. If the children act normal and they have a gun in their backpack, then how does this help keep them safe- if no one's suspicious of

If schools didn’t have to ability to perform random searches, those who bring banded objects to school will know that they could just hide it in their lockers without having to worry. Although when random searches are be conducted it will make students think twice about bring such things to school. When students are given a locker, most schools will have the students sign a policy, which will include something notifying that random searches may be conducted. Schools are not conducting the searches to just go through student belongings but to show they are doing them, which they are hoping will deter the students from bring contrabands to school. For the students who still bring things to school, and get caught make an example for others. That if you bring things that don’t belong, eventually you will be caught. Though by doing the searches, schools also hope eventually students will give up trying and just stop bringing things, which will also save everybody

Unreasonable searches are to be prohibited in middle schools. Since the reasons for Redding being search was at the request of the principal. Wilson, he was the main person discussed. The nurse and secretary were acting as agents for Wilson in order to perform the search that he was unable to do because he was male. The school’s rules for the suspicions of illicit drugs were modified to adjust to how it should be handled by school officials. The reasonable standard of suspicion and probable cause has an implicit bearing on the reliable knowledge of what is known and discovered. The rules of the school do strictly prohibited the use of nonmedical use, possession, or sale of any drug on the school grounds. The majority feels that the manner in which she was searched was unjust and that it should have been more proof before they proceeded to perform a strip search of the student. The search of the backpack and outer clothes could be expected because of reasonable suspicion of concealing drugs, but the strip search was unnecessary because her clothes did not have pockets and they did not have the right or enough proof to proceed with the strip search in the manner that they did. The Court has adopted a different standard for searches involving an intrusion into the human

Rains, B. (2009). Testing Student Athletes for Drugs is Appropriate. In C. Watkins, Sports and Athletes (pp. 192-196). Detroit: Greenhaven Press.

It cannot be disputed that schools often have to place the privacy of one student, below the overall need to secure the safety of a student body as a whole. If students know that their belongings can be searched, it will discourage them from committing illegal activities at school.

In a public school, it was determined that a person can always refuse a search, there is need for reasonable suspicion for a search, as opposed to probable cause and the exclusionary rule does not apply. In TLO, the initial suspicion to search TLO’s purse was justified due to the suspicion that she had been smoking in the bathroom. The majority opinion, written by Byron R. White, stated, “Under ordinary circumstances, a search of a student by a teacher or other school official will be ‘justified at its inception’ when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either law or the rules of the school.” The Court ruled in favor of the school because there was a reason to believe that the defendant had broken a school rule prohibiting smoking in the restrooms. This clarification by the Court holds that even students in a public school are protected by

No case has been brought to the Supreme Court level regarding metal detectors used to search students. In the case, People v. Pruitt , the Illinois appellate court held that searching students entering a school with a metal detector required no individual suspicion. The use of metal detectors should be communicated to all students and parents before implementation.

Now addressing the complete disrespect and breach of privacy when it comes to school lockers. Lockers aren’t ever really safe, it’s true. If wanted/required a security guard can easily unlock your locker at any point in time during a school day. And you might be thinking: “Okay? So what, they’re just kids” well newsflash, kids have rights too. K-12, the upper echelons of the education system sometimes out right accuse these poor students of harboring drugs and other unlawful paraphernalia within their lockers, and takes upon themselves to undergo what they call “a locker search”, or in other words. “Breach of privacy example number 3”.

T.L.O. case “...school officials do not have to meet the same standards as police officers when conducting searches” (New Jersey v. T.L.O.). The T.L.O. case was just one of the cases concerning schools and there were many others, including the Safford Unified School District v. Redding case. This case specifically concerned searching for drugs in schools. The Court ruled in this case, “...no indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity or any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying these pills in her underwear. Given these deficiencies, we conclude that the search was unreasonable. T.L.O. directed school officials to limit the intrusiveness of a search in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction” (Safford Unified School District v. Redding). Basically, if there is no disturbance in the school day, then there should be a search procedure with a warrant. However, if there is a disturbance in the school day, the school should not be required to get a search

But it does not restrict all searches. For example, courts have ruled that school officials may search school lockers and require that students who participate in extracurricular activities undergo random drug testing" ("Annenberg Classroom," 2006). This amendment gives people a right to privacy. This amendment can be bypassed by police if they have a reasonable cause to search, which is typically when people feel like their rights are being

In the final outcome the High Court stated that the school would not need a court order for them to search anyone’s property in the school if they have reasonable justification when a person is on school grounds, because some of the right may be lessened in favor of the overall well-being of the school and the students in the school. When you send your children to school I believe that we expect that the school is taking their part in making sure that there’s nothing illegal or dangerous in the school, so with that being said the search of someone’s property is justified.

The primary advantage of locker searches is their effectiveness. Finding contraband material such as stolen property, drugs or weapons in a student's locker is an easy way to establish guilt and