The Instigator
Adley104
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Grovenshar
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Why schools should regularly check kids school bags and lockers.

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 2 votes the winner is...
Grovenshar
Voting Style: Judge Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/11/2016 Category: People
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 473 times Debate No: 89526
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

Adley104

Pro

Why I think teacher and schools should regularly check student school bags and locker is: The students don't own the lockers, so the teachers have the right to look inside their students locker with permission from their boss. If a student has drugs and wants to sell them, you HAVE the right to go inside their bags or lockers and check if they don't have any drugs or weapons they can use. Why I think they should look through kids school bags and lockers is because if I have kids and some other kid tries to sell them drugs, I would want them to tell me and I will go to thee school and ask if they can do regularly searches through kids bag and lockers because I want my kids to be safe and I know other parents would like to see their kid be safe. Schools should do this because they are always talking about the safety of the students, THIS IS PART OF THEIR SAFETY! If kids died or get addicted to drugs, that their fault for failing to keep their students safe from harm's way. So going through you students school bag and lockers is a very good way to keep your students safe. That way I think schools should go through kids locker and I hope you choose this side.
Grovenshar

Con

I don't think that schools should regularly check bags or lockers. There are three reasons why I believe this.

Reason 1: Privacy
Every student has a right to maintain their own personal privacy. Unwarranted search and seizure of any property, especially performed by a non-officer, is unconstitutional. While schools do own lockers, they do not own the bags of their students. Therefore, to search the bags is an invasion of privacy and is actively harming the students.

Reason 2: Practicality
When looking at the world through a pragmatic lens, I don't see any feasible way to implement these searches efficiently. If every student were to have their bag thoroughly checked on a regular schedule, not only will this take colossal amounts of time and a larger workforce, the checks can be easily circumvented by not bringing drugs to school that day.

Before we condemn the idea, let's see if random checks are a feasible option. To be honest, random checks can only go wrong. Students will be racially profiled. This will lead to the actually harmful students being able to go on without notice.

Reason 3: This is the Job of the Parents
When it comes down to it, a school has one responsibility: to teach their students. A school should not be held accountable for any unprovoked actions of the students. However, a parent should be responsible for not raising their children properly. Shifting this burden to schools only further splits the gap between parent and child. In many, many studies, it has come to light that active parent involvement in the life of their children decreases the likelihood of students committing crimes. Therefore, shifting the burden from parents to schools actively decreases the safety of students, rather than increasing it.
Debate Round No. 1
Adley104

Pro

Hey Con,
If you ever get married and have kids, don't you want your kids to be safe from weapons and drugs?
Tell me.
Grovenshar

Con

I'd love for them to be safe, but this really won't do that. Besides the fact that this is theoretically impossible and, therefore, the point is moot, it will invade the privacy of students and further remove parent from child. This should never be reality. You might get a few drug busts, and that'd be it. Kids are smart. If you give them a system to crack, they will crack it. Don't give them a system to crack, you are a parent. It is your responsibility to tell them no. It is your responsibility to monitor them. Otherwise, this just leads to students developing unhealthy habits that flourish after they graduate from public school. This will not keep kids safe. This will only delay the inevitable end, but make that end worse.
Debate Round No. 2
Adley104

Pro

But how are you going to protect your child. do you want their school to be shot up and one of your kids died or your kids come home smoking crack. yea i know kids can crack a system but that doesnt matter kid need to be safe from any harm
Grovenshar

Con

I answered the question. The school will still be unsafe. Besides, the parent should be enforcing this. It's an opportunity to be helpful that will be far better than a school trying to take that role. To keep kids the most safe that can be kept, they must be given personal reasons to make good decisions. Having these rules imposed by seemingly inhuman authorities only leads to resentment and rebellion.

Keep in mind, this also violates the rights of these children. To do so is unconstitutional. In order to avoid setting a precedent for ignoring the constitution, we must avoid these checks.

However, the entire point is moot. These searches are impossible to administer. Even if my other arguments collapse, which they won't, my opponent has to demonstrate this as false, otherwise there is no point.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: lannan13// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con makes several arguments in this debate and Con's entire case has been dropped. His privacy and feasibilitiy carried the most weight in this debate as it showed that even though this policy would be enacted, the amount of feasibility would not be worth it and would cause more issues then it would solve under the situation. Since Pro had dropped these points, not to mention Con's entire Case, I have no choice, but to give the argument points, as well as the debate, to Con.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter is required to reference specific arguments made by each side. This vote explains why Con's arguments are strengthened by drops, but doesn't compare those points to anything Pro stated.
************************************************************************
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Judges are: lannan13, Blade-of-Truth, whiteflame, bladerunner060, Ragnar, ShadowKingStudios
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Adley104GrovensharTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con makes several arguments in this debate and Con's entire case has been dropped. The argument surrounding the "Parent's Responsibility" was a key argument as it help show that it redirected the responsiblity blame that it should be the parents job to better teach their children and in doing so, it would prevent the issue. This is the only argument that Pro refutes, his responses are not relating to the parents themselves, but generalizes the issue. Con's response is still on the parents education on drugs since it's the only argument given, Con wins this contention. His privacy and feasibilitiy carried the most weight in this debate as it showed that even though this policy would be enacted, the amount of feasibility would not be worth it and would cause more issues then it would solve under the situation. Since Pro had dropped these points, not to mention Con's entire Case, I have no choice, but to give the argument points, as well as the debate, to Con.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Adley104GrovensharTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: It boils down to practicality, with pro asserting fear tactics to try to gain support for his infeasible notion. In greater detail: Pro decided to drop the following arguments: Privacy, Practicality, and "This is the Job of the Parents." Opting to instead point out what a wondrous Red Herring he had. Note to con: "Even if my other arguments collapse," under scrutiny they might have (might), but even if any judge disagreed with any of your points, they are still uncontested. Your opponent offered Fish instead of rebuttal.