Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 96
  1. #1
    Thailand Expat
    William's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    19-05-2013 @ 06:37 AM
    Location
    In jail
    Posts
    5,822

    Is random drug testing an infringement of our civil liberties?

    I was somewhat alarmed to read the following article in today's Times (of London). It could be a very slippery slope indeed:


    Teenagers to face random drug testing at all schools

    By Alexandra Blair, Education Correspondent
    RANDOM drug-testing is set to be rolled out to all secondary schools in England as part of a crackdown on drug use among pupils.
    From September, schoolchildren in Kent will be tested with mouth swabs for drugs, including cannabis, cocaine and heroin.
    NI_MPU('middle');The move follows a pilot scheme at The Abbey School in Faversham that was said to have transformed the behaviour of pupils, as well as their results.

    Peter Walker, the school’s former head teacher, said: “We had our best set of exam results in the school’s history. There was less disruption in the classroom, less incidents in the playground or on the way to school.”
    Mr Walker, who has been appointed as an adviser to help schools throughout England to implement the scheme, said that 86 per cent of parents at his 960-pupil school had signed up to the programme in January 2005. No pupil was forced to take part, but if they refused, their parents were called in. The school had also pledged to expel no one, unless they were involved in drug dealing.
    Over the year, 600 random drug tests were carried out on pupils aged between 11 and 18. One child tested positive for cannabis. Mr Walker said that one of the main benefits had been to encourage pupils to say no to drugs .

    “We found that children now had a way of saying no which was acceptable to their peer group. Very quickly a lot of children said they’d not try drugs, because knowing their luck they’d be the next to be tested,” he said.

    The Abbey is a non-selective specialist school for business and enterprise whose catchment area includes the second most deprived council ward in the county. Having previously reached a high of 30 per cent of pupils achieving five A* to C GCSE grades, 41 per cent of its pupils achieved the same grades last year.

    Heads at 103 secondaries will be asked to join the Kent scheme. It will not be compulsory, but the schools will be assessed by Neil McKegeney, a professor at the centre for drugs misuse at Glasgow University, to see if Abbey’s results are replicated.
    “If it’s properly evaluated in a positive way, it will clearly be a model to be rolled out across the United Kingdom,” said Mr Walker, who was appointed as the Government’s ambassador for random drug-testing after retiring as Abbey’s head two months ago.

    A Department of Health report recently disclosed that one in every 50 schoolchildren claimed to have taken cocaine and 12 per cent said that they had smoked cannabis. Overall, 19 per cent said that they had taken illegal drugs — up from 11 per cent in 1998.
    Yesterday advisors to the Department for Education and Skills said that they would support all schools adopting the same approach, in consultation with parents. Alan Johnson, the new Education Secretary, said: “Mr Walker’s drive and commitment is impressive. A A key factor was peer pressure by the kids against taking drugs.
    “I am determined schools should have all the support they need to tackle this issue.”
    The DFES said it hoped that research alongside the Kent pilot would establish whether there was a direct link between random testing and behaviour, attendance and academic achievement. However, it emphasised that random drug-testing would not be mandatory and it would be up to every individual head teacher to adopt it “if they feel it’s right for them”.
    Last night Martin Ward, deputy general-secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said that at present few head teachers carried out random drug-testing, because of the fears of infringing human rights and jeopardising relations between pupils and staff. “I suspect many more will take it up happily enough if they’re part of a general trend, but I’m sure a number will be reluctant to do so,” he said. “It’s not something many school leaders want to adopt because clearly to some degree there’s an infringement of privacy and it does tend to change relations between the school and pupils to a degree.”

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...204492,00.html

  2. #2
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    59,983
    yes it does.....

    but we get that here in Thailadn also at nightclubs usually, but a mate of mine was asked to piss in a bottle in his own home! !! - they did the entire appartment block!

    WTF!?

    happening all over the world really!

    2. they teachers not fuckn police - innit that their job! ?

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    aging one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    22,637
    God damn its terrible. What happened to freedom?

  4. #4
    Thailand Expat
    William's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    19-05-2013 @ 06:37 AM
    Location
    In jail
    Posts
    5,822
    I think if I were a teacher I would simply refuse to comply. But the concern would be whether or not I could then be fired.

  5. #5
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    59,983
    exactly!

    its voluntary - but we'll call your parents if u dont do it!

  6. #6
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    Although I do not like many of th ethings htat the present government in the UK has done and in particualr the erosion of civil libertis that have taken place, this is a move that I support.

    “We found that children now had a way of saying no which was acceptable to their peer group. Very quickly a lot of children said they’d not try drugs, because knowing their luck they’d be the next to be tested,” he said.
    Children are under enormous peer group pressure and any move that enables them to resist the need to be part of the group by using drugs has to be a good thing.
    Lord, deliver us from e-mail.

  7. #7
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    27-11-2006 @ 09:00 AM
    Posts
    2,894
    I think that most people in the West don't much believe in freedom and liberty anymore. They are much more concerned with safety and security.

  8. #8
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    ^ The question of whether or not we are being conned into giving up freedom in exchange for safety is worthy of a seperate thread.

  9. #9
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,025
    This further step of eroding civil liberties in the UK is very worrying, this is not the country I chose to live in 20 odd years ago any more.

    Also the article doesn't say what would be the consequence of testing positive. Criminalising schoolkids who may puff on a spliff due to peer pressure or out of curiousity wouldn't be a sensible thing, would it?

  10. #10
    Whopping Member
    benbaaa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    06-06-2017 @ 03:52 PM
    Location
    In the comfy chair
    Posts
    5,549
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal
    whether or not we are being conned
    Yeah, and it is a con, inspired by our governments and fully supported by the mainstream media. Wasn't it in Bowling for Columbine that Michael Moore found out that while street crime had dropped like a stone, reporting of violent crimes had rocketed on TV making everyone even more scared...
    The sleep of reason brings forth monsters.

  11. #11
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by stroller
    Criminalising schoolkids who may puff on a spliff due to peer pressure or out of curiousity wouldn't be a sensible thing, would it?
    I don't think that anyone is prosecuted in the UK for possession of small amounts of cannabis if it is considered to be for their own use.

    I am more interested in the deterrent factor and the support that it gives children to be able to resist peer pressure.

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    27-11-2006 @ 09:00 AM
    Posts
    2,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal
    ^ The question of whether or not we are being conned into giving up freedom in exchange for safety is worthy of a seperate thread.
    Too scary for me. When I listen to the arguments voiced by the right on this issue it just makes me cringe.

    --
    Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

  13. #13
    Thailand Expat
    William's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    19-05-2013 @ 06:37 AM
    Location
    In jail
    Posts
    5,822
    Some very clever people on this forum - that's for sure.

    I'm particularly interested with the notion of giving up liberties for security, as they would seem to imply some sort of 1984-esq type lifestyle.

    OTH, I understand that the UK is now considered thecCocaine capital of Europe (I have no idea if that is true as I have not been there is many years) and so Dougal's comments have some weight.

    Still, I'm not sure I like the trend of where this could go.

  14. #14
    I'm in Jail
    Butterfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-06-2021 @ 11:13 PM
    Posts
    39,832
    I don't see how sacrificing freedom for security will automatically yield greater security. I think this is just a silly flare. It just doesn't happen. The mechanics in sacrificing freedom for security is not linear.

    It could be argue that a society obsessively focusing on greater security would collapse onto itself because of this unbearable duty.
    Last edited by Butterfly; 31-05-2006 at 07:44 PM.

  15. #15
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by William
    they would seem to imply some sort of 1984-esq type lifestyle.
    I think that we are a long way down the road to 1984 -

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

    see this article on the police DNA database.

    Note at the bottom the suggestion that all babies should have their DNA recorded at birth.

  16. #16
    Thailand Expat
    William's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    19-05-2013 @ 06:37 AM
    Location
    In jail
    Posts
    5,822
    ^thanks Dougal. Now that truly is worrying...

  17. #17
    Thailand Expat
    William's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Online
    19-05-2013 @ 06:37 AM
    Location
    In jail
    Posts
    5,822
    Butterfly, I agree with a lot of what you are saying. Plus there is a perception of crime, even where there may actually be no crime.

  18. #18
    Khun Marmite
    RDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    19-03-2016 @ 06:03 PM
    Location
    ราไวย์, ภูเก็ต
    Posts
    3,165
    Quote Originally Posted by William
    Some very clever people on this forum - that's for sure.

    I'm particularly interested with the notion of giving up liberties for security, as they would seem to imply some sort of 1984-esq type lifestyle.

    OTH, I understand that the UK is now considered the cocaine capital of Europe (I have no idea if that is true as I have not been there is many years) and so Dougal's comments have some weight.

    Still, I'm not sure I like the trend of where this could go.
    It's the worry about "the thin end of the wedge". But it seems to me not a high price to pay - in terms of "freedom" - to get a marked change in kids school performance.

    It's also a case of "if you've nothing to hide, why not?"

    "The wisdom of the wise and the experience of the ages are perpetuated by quotations." - Benjamin Disraeli

  19. #19
    Khun Marmite
    RDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    19-03-2016 @ 06:03 PM
    Location
    ราไวย์, ภูเก็ต
    Posts
    3,165
    Quote Originally Posted by William
    ^thanks Dougal. Now that truly is worrying...
    Again, I don't see a problem here. I wouldn't care if the whole world's DNA profile were put on a database.

    If you've nothing to hide, what's the problem?

    My only worry about DNA testing, is its accuracy. I saw a long time ago a program about a tribe in the Amazon that was DNA tested. This tribe was cut off from civilisation for centuries. Then their DNA was compared to other people's DNA in Europe, and a "match" was found, showing that the idea that a DNA sample "proves" the identity to 1 in several millions is actually 1 in a few thousand.

  20. #20
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    27-11-2006 @ 09:00 AM
    Posts
    2,894
    Quote Originally Posted by RDN
    If you've nothing to hide, what's the problem?
    This is the kind of thinking that scares me to death.

    The sad thing is that a very bright guy like RDN doesn't even see how awful it is.

    Sorry, I'm out of the "Issues" forum. Much too dangerous for an absolutist political radical like me.

    Adios.

  21. #21
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by RDN
    But it seems to me not a high price to pay - in terms of "freedom" - to get a marked change in kids school performance.
    Aside from what has already been printed above, I believe that at a school that removed crisps and fizzy drinks from their school meal menu also reported much better performance during the afternoons due to improved attitude and focus.

    The whole area of the factors that produce productivity improvements is highly questionable.

  22. #22
    I am in Jail
    stroller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-03-2019 @ 09:53 AM
    Location
    out of range
    Posts
    23,025
    ^
    ^
    The wedge isn't so thin anymore...

    And yeah, if you have nothing to hide...why don't you let the police go through all your personal belongings in your house on a regular basis? - it would only be crime-prevention, it's the criminals who'd object to this.

  23. #23
    Dis-member
    Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    18-03-2024 @ 07:17 AM
    Location
    Head Rock
    Posts
    3,507
    Quote Originally Posted by RDN
    Again, I don't see a problem here. I wouldn't care if the whole world's DNA profile were put on a database. If you've nothing to hide, what's the problem?
    The argument that the innocent have nothing to fear is often used to justify measures.

    But consider the possible consequences. With such knowledge suppose I were to say that I could genetically identify potential psycopaths or thieves. Would you welcome the police paying special attention to you because your DNA had identified you as a possible future murderer, or maybe your neighbours could be warned that people with your DNA profile had an abnormally high incidence of rape crime.

  24. #24
    I'm in Jail
    Butterfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    12-06-2021 @ 11:13 PM
    Posts
    39,832
    Quote Originally Posted by RDN
    If you've nothing to hide, what's the problem?
    And this is when you fall into the trap. Errors in database, data mining and you would soon find out the hard way that this innocent little comment could cost you your life. If you justify this approach, don't be surprised if you become the first victim of it.

    This is not the justification for invasion of privacy. Why not have TV cameras in your home then ? you have nothing to hide, don't you ?

  25. #25
    Khun Marmite
    RDN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Last Online
    19-03-2016 @ 06:03 PM
    Location
    ราไวย์, ภูเก็ต
    Posts
    3,165
    Quote Originally Posted by buadhai
    Quote Originally Posted by RDN
    If you've nothing to hide, what's the problem?
    This is the kind of thinking that scares me to death.

    The sad thing is that a very bright guy like RDN doesn't even see how awful it is....
    Please explain!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal
    The whole area of the factors that produce productivity improvements is highly questionable.
    So you're disputing what was in the original report?

    Quote Originally Posted by stroller
    ...why don't you let the police go through all your personal belongings in your house on a regular basis? - it would only be crime-prevention, it's the criminals who'd object to this.
    "Personal" is exactly that. Now you're being silly.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal
    The argument that the innocent have nothing to fear is often used to justify measures.
    Probably because a lot of people think that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal
    ....suppose I were to say that I could genetically identify potential psycopaths or thieves. Would you welcome the police paying special attention to you because your DNA had identified you as a possible future murderer, or maybe your neighbours could be warned that people with your DNA profile had an abnormally high incidence of rape crime.
    Science fiction rubbish. Can we stay in the realms of reality please?

    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly
    Errors in database, data mining and you would soon find out the hard way that this innocent little comment could cost you your life. If you justify this approach, don't be surprised if you become the first victim of it.
    So you think that because this system has to be flawed, it's best not to consider it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Butterfly
    This is not the justification for invasion of privacy. Why not have TV cameras in your home then ? you have nothing to hide, don't you ?
    Getting silly again.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •