The Instigator
BrandenStorjohann
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should there be random locker searches in schools?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
BrandenStorjohann
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/12/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,588 times Debate No: 28117
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)

 

BrandenStorjohann

Pro

I am for random locker searches because the lockers are in the school and it is their property, but it is unnecessary for students to search through other students' lockers. I believe that the teachers are the only ones that can search them only if they get permission to, but they shouldn't search them unless they are suspicious about that person. The reason they would be suspicious would be because of weapons, drugs, or alcohol. So, I want to know what you guys think, should there be random searches or not?
RationalMadman

Con

Many students are in VERY dangerous criminal gangs. What if a teacher had to expel a student for what they found? He could be dead the next day. In some neighbourhoods this i a VERY bad idea.

"Ignorance is bliss." -Ancient Proverb
Debate Round No. 1
BrandenStorjohann

Pro

A student who tells a teacher could be anybody and the person that got caught wouldn't even know. Someone could see a weapon or alcohol in their bag or locker and tell a teacher. So a "criminal". Not likely. Sure if someone has a criminal record of a gun then I believe that teachers are allowed to do random locker searching.
RationalMadman

Con

But that is putting teachers' lives at risk.
Debate Round No. 2
BrandenStorjohann

Pro

No, it's not. If they found a weapon then they would have a cop come down to the school and have a little chat with that person.
RationalMadman

Con

Many students are in VERY dangerous criminal gangs. What if a teacher had to expel a student for what they found? He could be dead the next day. In some neighbourhoods this is a VERY bad idea.

"Ignorance is bliss." -Ancient Proverb
Debate Round No. 3
BrandenStorjohann

Pro

Um you just said that... Your gonna lose this debate unless you say something different. I've made my point.
RationalMadman

Con

ANd I've made mine.
Debate Round No. 4
BrandenStorjohann

Pro

There are a lot of students that have complaints about teachers searching their lockers. I don"t think that it"s a problem if they do search the lockers because someone could bring drugs to school or someone could bring a weapon and hide it in their lockers. Someone could steel something from somebody else and hide it in their locker and so the teachers check for that like they always have. Mostly bigger schools have to go through metal detectors because of all the students there and don"t want any problems in the school. Now some students have a problem with teachers searching their lockers because it is their privacy and don"t want anyone searching through their things. Even other students go through lockers just for the fun of it to see if they can find anything that nobody else was suppose to see. I believe that schools should have the right to search students" lockers because they are in the school and it is their property.

"Searching students" lockers would be an utter invasion of privacy. The point of having a locker is more than having a place to store your stuff. A locker also gives you the freedom to keep certain things hidden"(Elaine Yu Yee-nee par.1). You can have personal items in your locker like diaries, love letters, and photographs. If someone finds those, then students" could make fun of that person. Schools do have the right to search the lockers, but it shouldn"t be whenever they please, they should have a reason to. Teachers sometimes ask if they can search it if they are suspicious about something. If a student has a weapon or drugs, I don"t think that they will put it in their lockers but you never know, if they do then they can get caught by a friend or someone around their locker unless you are really smart and keep cool. "Giving schools the right to search lockers would not help catch offender, but it would certainly create an environment in which students would be embarrassed to have their belongings revealed in public for no good reason"(par. 2).

Students think that their lockers are personal property. They wouldn"t agree with the schools search lockers. It is the schools lockers so they do have a right to, your just using them. To make things fair, I think that teachers should search the lockers during classes so they won"t embarrass them in front of everybody. "Schools should have the right to inspect lockers, but they should only do so when there is a good reason for it. Students with nothing to hide have nothing to worry about"(Ronald Ling Pak-ki par.1). I"m pretty sure that every student that has had their locker searched felt uncomfortable because it"s your things that they are going through and they think that it isn"t fair because they are only searching your locker and nobody else"s. Well they aren"t suspicious about the other students, just the one that looks suspicious.

Schools can search lockers if they think that someone is acting different. "Locker searches are a practical way of trying to keep schools safe"( Keller par 1). There has been a problem with people saying that locker searching violates The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S. All the schools need is a reasonable suspicion of a student. If a teacher suspects a student having drugs, alcohol, or a weapon and they turn out clean, that teacher cannot search anymore lockers, but if a teacher finds anything then they can continue searching because they will most likely find something if they are suspicious of a student. "There could be security guards in the school"(par. 3).

If a school has many problems with drugs, they can have students take random drug tests but if you are taking medicine that makes the drug test positive you can bring papers that show what is in it. If schools really want to go that far. Some schools actually have metal detectors set up on every entrance because of students bringing weapons to school. If a student brings something bad, then if the teachers want they can search through it when everyone is around to see. If they do that, then maybe that will embarrass that student and maybe they won"t bring anything bad to the school again. That shows discipline to the students.

Lockers are school property. Students are merely allowed to use them as they do with sports equipment, library books, and computers. Lockers can be taken back without notice, for example if they are vandalized. Students are or should be told that schools have the right to search their lockers; it is a part of being in a school community where you have to accept its rules and responsibilities.
RationalMadman

Con

As a socialist I agree with you on something: The right to privacy is an inferior issue in comparison to the issue of security.

As a person who has read up and seen neighbourhoods so rough that wrong time wrong place and you're dead.

In such places I would definitely not at all advice such a policy. The world isn't always civilised. In some neighbourhoods there are big gangs whose members have kids at school. Far more brutal than the 'mafia'. If you are a teacher at a school in such a neighbourhood it would definitely be stupid to ever bother prosecuting them. The police are run by the mafia, the mafia will kill you. Alternatively the kids may be in a juvenile gang who beat up your child or beat your, yourself, up on your way home (Or egg your car and toilet-paper your house that night). To force teachers to have to search lockers, to force them to have to lie to the principal to save their life, and possibly get fired if it is found they lied, is immoral and cruel.

In many neighbourhoods kids only fear a cop. There is nothing terrifying about a giver of knowledge whose job is simply to assist you to get an A* to the best of their teaching ability. They are not always given authority, what with caning and spanking having been made illegal. Expelling the student won't help the safety of the teacher who was forced to accuse them.

You failed to refute this point and this your policy is very inefficient at ensuring teacher safety outside of school.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by HelloPeoples 4 years ago
HelloPeoples
grammar and spelling by pro was horrible. *shudder*
Posted by wolfx128 4 years ago
wolfx128
This wasn't even a debate, there was really no counter argument from Con. Honestly, this can not even be thought of as an argument of the true issues that come from random locker searches.
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
ok then. so just forget the undebateable resolution.
Posted by Heineken 4 years ago
Heineken
Con was very lazy, making unwarranted arguments by failing to prove how they applied to the burden.

Pro established in round one that the School owned the lockers and reserved the right to inspect them without any reason except crime control.

Con then established the incredibly unreasonable premise that MANY students are in Gangs and that they would be killed by the Gang if they got busted in school.
Pro remarked that the process can be anonymous and should utilize police involvement.
Con then proceeded to copy and paste his entire round two argument.

Pro then extended his argument into the final round, maintaining the school's right to search it's own property. Con then conceded that privacy was not an issue and proceeded to recycle the argument of danger by gang retaliation, despite the fact that Pro's initial counter-arguments of "Anonymity and Police Involvement" remained unchallenged.

I will grant Conduct to Pro, because Con had no sportsmanship, resorting to "cut and paste" arguments and lazy answers. Absolutely no effort by Con.

Terrible debate.
Posted by Heineken 4 years ago
Heineken
Reduce the voting period to three days and fix your resolution.

"I believe that the teachers are the only ones that can search them only if they get permission to, but they shouldn't search them unless they are suspicious about that person. The reason they would be suspicious would be because of weapons, drugs, or alcohol."

That's not a random locker search. Random would be "Searched without cause, picked by without bias."
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by danmhood 4 years ago
danmhood
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not properly refute Pro's arguments and argued rather lazily.
Vote Placed by DebaterAgent 4 years ago
DebaterAgent
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: poor debate by both. honestly... waste of time reading this debate
Vote Placed by TigerTime 4 years ago
TigerTime
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: con didn't really take this seriously until maybe the last round, so I'm giving pro conduct.
Vote Placed by t-man 4 years ago
t-man
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con argued very lazily
Vote Placed by YYW 4 years ago
YYW
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: How interesting. Pro's arguments appeared to be more like arguments than Con's, although I'm pretty sure Con was trolling. This was entertaining though "The police are run by the mafia, the mafia will kill you."
Vote Placed by Heineken 4 years ago
Heineken
BrandenStorjohannRationalMadmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD