RSS   Twitter   Sign inLogin or Sign-up

User Posts

School: Sioux Central

Class: Olson:APLC
Grade: 11th

4th Amendment

Written by olsonaplc-1a7

School: Sioux Central
Class: Olson:APLC
Grade: 11th

The Fourth Amendment should not allow for the searching of a phone unless there is probable cause. There is also a difference in searching a students bag and searches a students phone. Searching a students bag should only be done if there is probable reasoning for it or the school has a good idea or hints that some student has something illegal on them. A phone is a personal piece of information and I believe that before going straight to searching someones phone that the school should have hard proof that its being done. Phones have personal information on them and most of the information the people with the phone do not want anyone to read it. If the person whose phone they are searching has done nothing wrong then what will happen after that? Another thing is if the school suspects a kid of selling drugs or doing drugs then the school should contact police or the kids parents before going straight to searching their phone or cars. The school should be a place for just strictly education and not for seeing how many kids they can bust with the law. If the selling of the drugs and doing of the drugs affects the school and goes on during school hours thats the only way I feel the school should get involved. In order for the police to be able to come into your house they need a warrant to be able to search your house so the school should need the same warrant to search your phone and or car. I also think that in the Unified School District #1 v. Redding case that they shouldn’t have been able to search a thirteen year old just for ibuprofen. Ibuprofen is not an illegal drug it just might be against school policy to carry it but its not as bad as what she could have been carrying. If someone is suspected of carrying illegal drugs then the school should call that person down to the office and call a policeman and their parents. That way the parents are there for the kid and also the police will be able to do a search and not violate any rights as long as the parents are okay with it. Things that schools do sometimes are having random drug searches in the school with drug dogs. What our school does for this is let the drug dogs go by everyone locker and every kid must put their school bag out in the hallway. Then the drug dogs also go outside of the school and around the parking lot to all of the kids vehicles. If the dogs smell anything or sense anything unusual then I think the school has the probable cause that they need to search the bags, lockers, or cars. This can be good for the school because it will help remove the illegal drugs and clean up the school. By doing this the school wont have to worry about the 4th amendment rights or privacy rights.

BRI

This post has been awarded the
Bill of Rights Institute Badge (300 points)

Harlan Institute Feedback: Great post!


Rehberg v. Paulk olsonaplc

Written by olsonaplc-1a7

School: Sioux Central
Class: Olson:APLC
Grade: 11th

No one should have natural immunity in court if they are the ones that are guilty. If this was the way it was then this case probably wouldn’t be such a big deal. Even if it would happen to be the president of the United States and he commits a crime they should not receive natural immunity just because of who they are. A lot of times you see this happening with celebrities. The celebrities could commit the same crime a normal person would commit but instead the normal person gets a harsh penalty that they deserve and the celebrity gets off easy. In this case if they lied about false crimes just to get the other one in trouble I think this is wrong and natural immunity should not cover for what they did. Someone should look into the natural immunity thing and see if there is anyway they could change it for the better.

rehberg

This post has been awarded the
Rehberg v. Paulk Badge (200 points)

Harlan Institute Feedback: Congratulations!


Medical Professionals

Written by olsonaplc-1a7

School: Sioux Central
Class: Olson:APLC
Grade: 11th

Medical Professions should be the ones to do the strip searches because they are trained to do it. If a prison guard does them they might not know exactly what they are doing and wont be able to identify as many problems. If a trained doctor would be the one to search the inmates they would not only be able to check for illness better but also be able to relieve them of objects in a better way. The doctor that would preform the searches should be trained highly in that certain area so they are sure what they are doing. When the doctor does the search instead of a prison guard it could help prevent multiple strip searches. Albert Florence was a victim of the multiple strip searches when he was moved from one prison to another. If the search was done by a medical professional it might have helped prevent this from happening.

patient-care

This post has been awarded the
Patient Care Badge (50 points)

Harlan Institute Feedback: What prevents medical professionals, under duress from corrections officers from performing abusive strip searches? Is it their oath or is it something more?