No direct links to individual letters, they are all on the same page. It's the second letter down, concerning a random search for drugs at Abington Heights Middle School.

http://www.scrantontimes.com/article...381327_let.txt


Editor: In response to my letter regarding the invasive and possibly illegal search conducted at Abington Heights Middle School, Lourdes Schaffroth and Mary Luchansky flatly responded (Your Opinion, Feb. 23) that they advocate random drug testing for children, both at home and in schools.

While their desire to provide “safety and security” is understandable, this type of reasoning is commonly used to excuse unconstitutional invasions of privacy, and it is quite flawed.

First, we must make the obvious distinction between what goes on in the private home versus the public square. It is their prerogative to invade their child’s privacy at home. But that is not the issue.

The search at school, and its inherent invasion of privacy, are the issue. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that the Fourth Amendment applies to searches conducted by school officials based on “reasonable suspicion.”

The court states in its decision, “Determining the reasonableness of any search involves a two-fold inquiry. First, one must consider whether the action was justified at its inception. Second, one must determine whether the search as actually conducted was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.”

To date, the “reasonable suspicion” school district officials used to justify their search at its inception has not been made public.

Why not?

The logical conclusions drawn from the course of action that Ms. Schaffroth and Ms. Luchansky suggest, and that the school administration has pursued, are dangerous to everyone who values their individual rights. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”

And in truth, what guarantee of complete security can we ever have in life? As we continue to acquiesce and allow more and more invasions of our privacy, and after all of the invasive searches, drug tests, wiretaps, and domestic spying programs are completed, what guarantee do we have that we will be delivered from the fear that scared us into giving up our rights in the first place? None.

We cannot relinquish our hard-won rights to the desire for a feeling of safety and security.

JIM D. KOBRYNICH

SCRANTON


Here are the links to the original articles which led to the letter.
http://www.scrantontimes.com/article...1018678113.txt

http://www.scrantontimes.com/article...72125_top8.txt