Some of these comments crack me up! Personally, I wonder if the school administrators ever check the last stall (farthest from the door) in the bathrooms; that's where everybody used to hide the cans of beer when I was in high school.

NO DRUGS FOUND!!! Great!!! I thought for sure they would have stuck gold at parker.. kids now days must be packing the stuff in coffee beans to throw off the dogs!!!

JohnDoe: Here's the quote from this forum: " this indiscriminate sniffing is unacceptable."

I disagree with the premise that the only folks with concerns about these efforts are offenders. I believe that a right-thinking American concerned with the Constitution might reasonably question the sniffs at first glance. I also think that those same people would understand once they consider the non-intrusive nature of the practices and what the Courts have set out as guidelines. Discussion is good. Everyone (at least most) can learn from talking things through.

For once, Hannah and I are on the same page! I encourage parents to make a small investment in home drug test kits. They are $30 at the large chain-store pharmacy. I would guess that other pharmacies sell them also, and I know they're available on the internet.

Not only do I support the police departments and schools for doing random drug searches, I think parents should also do them. Search your kids rooms, cars, school bags and everything else and know what your kids are doing and who they are doing it with. And yes, I do search my child's EVERYTHING! I'm his mother and it's my responsibility to teach him what's right or wrong and that there will be consequences for his misbehavior and rewards/praise for correct choices and actions.

another: omg you saw an elementary teacher smoking pot?? wow. what happened?? did they go crazy?? it must have been the first time they smoked it cuz regular use makes you lazy an no good to society, and he certainly wouldnt have retained the mental power to teach kids. guess what?? i saw an elementary teacher, a high school calculus teacher, a high school spanish teacher all get drunk and act the fool. thats ok cuz its legal right??

how much money do they spend on these searches?? finding lots of drugs arent they. wouldnt it make more sense to use that dough and send officer friendly and someone without a badge to go in and talk with kids about the real world of alcohol and drug use??

Doe
.
I am not the authority I simply stated my opinion.
.
I am guessing if the teaching staff in Janesville has a possession, use or selling issue it would be reported by several sources. I pay pretty close attention and haven't seen or heard anything.
.
At the same time, by paying close attention I have seen in the gazette several students expelled for possesion with or without intent to delivery just this school year.
.
My conclusion, students have given JPD and administration a reason to search them, staff has not.

It's probably a good idea to search all people and personal belongings in all public places, not just the schools. We could search people randomly on city transit, in parks and all public property. I'm sure the taxpayers who think paying to search school children's parking lots is great wouldn't have a problem with that because it is protecting us against all those evil doers.Maybe we could start a citizens brigade to jack people up we suspect of smelling like patchouli. Once all the public spots are shored up we can start with privately owned facilities then work on renters and home owners. If the idea is to have the police protect our children from a few bad seeds you can't have them stop at searching the school.

These searches are worthless when the students are told by some (or one) teacher(s) that "they are doing a drug search, make sure that you don't have anything to worry about". This is a matter of fact. This word spreads like wild fire throughout the school and kinda defeats the "random"ness. There is a major drug problem at both schools, but neither school wants the bad publicity associated with it. It makes parenting that much more of a challenge when you do not have the full cooperation of the schools. Please note that I said it makes it more challenging, but not impossible.

copperguy..."That same poster has said here that we shouldn't work to remove drugs from schools"...is that a quote? or a paraphrase?
Provide some context please.

"the teaching staff in Janesville hasn't given the police or administration a reason to believe possession, use or selling of illegal drugs is an issue.
.
Students, on the other hand, have. Several students at the middle and high school this year have been disciplined for possession w/or/w/out intent to deliver.
.
The teaching staff of the Janesville School District is filled with top quality, highly educated professionals. Might some have an issue with illegal drugs...I have no clue but if they represent our society the answer is yes. That said...have they demonstrated a need to be searched, NO.

whythink...what makes you believe you are the definitive authority on this issue?

It's because of the some attitudes reflected here that drugs are a problem. It's not just hardcore drugs like heroin or cocaine that cause problems. And the problem isn't just students.

I have personally witnessed an elementary school teacher in Janesville smoking pot.

Skidds has a point. Enforcing rules and not adhering to them is hypocrisy. Everyone can see right through it. You can't say that it's more ok for a more mature person than it is for a younger person. I think it's worse for someone in authority to commit the same crime. Because of their role, they should be held to a higher standard of accountability.

bennetonf1
May 27, 2009 at 12:47 p.m.
I wonder if they sniffed the teachers parking lot as well...
.
Bellagio_Bound
May 27, 2009 at 12:46 p.m.
I agree on the need for the searches. However, why stop at the "students" parking lot? I feel that the teachers lot should be searched as well. Especially after the Walworth teacher and all her crack and stuff.
.
Simple answer, the teaching staff in Janesville hasn't given the police or administration a reason to believe possession, use or selling of illegal drugs is an issue.
.
Students, on the other hand, have. Several students at the middle and high school this year have been disciplined for possession w/or/w/out intent to deliver.
.
The teaching staff of the Janesville School District is filled with top quality, highly educated professionals. Might some have an issue with illegal drugs...I have no clue but if they represent our society the answer is yes. That said...have they demonstrated a need to be searched, NO.
.
Students have lost the right to be respected as young adults by some, again I believe the minority, of their behavior.
.
Teachers, to date, as far as we know, have not.
.
Plus, remember, their is a difference between a student and a teacher. Different roles, responsibilities, maturity level, and earned respect by everyone but a couple dumba**es on this blog.

This should be done a couple times a month, in all High and Middle schools searching for Drugs inside and out and periodic drug testing.

skiddz: I thought this discussion was about the drug sniffing dogs, not your attempts at impersonating Gomer Pyle and running after the police yelling CITIZEN'S ARREST! You have way too much time on your hands if you are conducting all these "stake-outs" Maybe your next ticket should be for stalking?

I assume the parking lot is school property right? Not public property? So the school has every right to "sniff out" drugs? correct me if Im wrong

shiddz: Ya nailed me man. My Greatgrandkids will want to read this one..HAHAHAHA

Ordinarily, I wouldn't address this sort of comment. But, there is one point that I will make just because I hear it frequently...

On-duty police officers and delivery drivers who make a certain frequency of stops (I thinks it's six stops within a mile), are not covered by the mandatory seatbelt law. Officers who do not wear seat belts are not "getting away with breaking the law," because they are exempted.

Does anyone know how to report a officer for breaking the law? I watched a cop take a right turn with out a blinker and not come to a complete stop when he was pulling out of a driveway. Those are both tickets that I have gotten and I just would want to make sure the cop got a ticket like I did. Fair is fair right? Oh and at 11 o'clock on saturday night I watched the cop that goes threw eastpoint parking lot (female officer) drive around with no seatbelt.. How do we report these? YOU CAN"T which sucks... But what I did do was drive up next to the officer at the milwaukee/write intersection and kinly told the officer to put her seatbelt on so she wouldn't get pulled over and get a ticket like I would... She just gave me a dirty look, checked my plates, and drove off... hahahaha so people how do we report these type of events? I have just put a video camera in my car so I can record the cops next time I see them and post the links on here so you can see also. Just trying to make a fair world here

gpawcat - Just a little common sense reminder for you.
-
-Wearing your seatbelt is a law
-Having your radio up too loud is a noise violation. (You're exaggerating by saying leave it off completely)
-Drinking or doing drugs while driving is illegal
-Having a drivers license is a law
-Having insurance SHOULD BE a law.
-Having to take a breath test is only going to screw you if you've been drinking which is against the law.
-Being stupid is not against the law, but SHOULD BE.

On another forum, one of the posters here wrote, "We have to make sure that the streets and our homes are safe places for children."

That same poster has said here that we shouldn't work to remove drugs from schools.

Hmmm.........

gpawcat - How is that in comparison to this story? Are they going to take away the kids lockers?

Illinois used these same arguments 20 years ago for safety stops. Now they have progressed to vehicle confiscation. As one assistant states attorney says "It's free money for your department". Keep your seatbelt on, the radio off, less than 10 cartoons of cig in the trunk, no drugs or alcohol, have proof of insurance and license, and submit to a breath test. Do all the above and you might keep your vehicle, unless it's a high value car with no lien like a Cadillac Escalade or Audi. After all, your innocent, right. Depends on what type car your driving.

Guess what, biggirl? Have you traveled via commercial airline recently? There, you and your personal belongings...even your body will be searched via xray, metal detectors, etc.. Does that mean one doesn't have a right to privacy? Absolutely not. Are you being treated as a criminal? Hardly.

Teaching children that we are a society of laws does not equate them with criminals. Demanding that people live within the law does not teach one that they have no rights. The Constitution guarantees rights, and the Courts have set out guidelines for the protection of those rights. The Court has specifically stated that things in public places are not protected by the Fourth Amendment right to privacy.

The Courts frequently rule that one or another police officer or policy/procedure creates a Constitutional violation. This is not one of those situations.

biggirl - you said "just accept that you have no rights."
-
Some should just accept that they have no brains. Hmmmmmm.

There is "plain view doctrine" and drug-sniffing dogs are different legal, uh, animals. This article about the 2005 Caballes decision sums up current thinking nicely:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...
.
This is the case itself with Illinois and U.S. Supreme Court decisions:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...
.
Note that there was specific concern about patrolling of parking lots. Justice Ginsburg, in her dissent, wrote "Today's decision ... clears the way for suspicionless, dog-accompanied drug sweeps of parked cars along sidewalks and in parking lots." I'm not so sure that a school parking lot is the same as a public parking lot, but it bears consideration. Justice Souter also wrote in his own dissent, "The infallible dog ... is a creature of legal fiction." In other words, even with a trained drug-sniffing dog, there can never be certainty that they are reacting to contraband, making probable cause for a hand search dubious.
.
Additionally, the Savanna Redding school strip-search case is under consideration by the present court, and its ruling may provide some guidance regarding the extent of school drug enforcement overall.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/...
.
The Supreme Court has generally sided with school districts in the past, and the conservative composition of the present Roberts court is likely to do the same. The current standard is one of "reasonableness" set forth by New Jersey v. T.L.O.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/200903...

Hey biggirl I bet if you went to Craig and asked all the students who has a problem with this.. Who is going to raise their hand??? I bet all the ones that raise their hands that have a problem are someone that has USED, Uses, or sells the drugs... So ya like I am really going to be fighting for the right of a drug user.... Think alittle before you talk

biggirl - Once again, a big surprise that you would respond to an article talking about law enforcement this way. Big surprise.

Biggirl if it goes your way then my rights get taken away. Cause I have the right to send my kid to a school that is drug free!!! Sorry that a bigirl like yourself can't raise a drug free kid. The only people that have a problem with stuff like this are the users, and the ones that have something to hid...

I agree with Copperguy. Nobody want's to take responsibility for their own actions anymore.. Its always the cops fault for pulling me over, when you were the one not wearing a seatbelt or speeding...

How outrageous to treat our youngsters as criminals. If they have a tip on some individual, they should be able to search his or her locker, but this indiscriminate sniffing is unacceptable. Given the increase in the police state and the rise of prisons, we're preparing our kids young to be good prisoners. Just accept that you have no rights, that you have no right to privacy, and don't make a fuss. It's all for your own good.

If a car is parked in a public place and I casually glance in the window and see a bindle of cocaine, would ANYONE say that is not grounds for action?

If I am running radar and pick up a vehicle driving 20 MPH over the limit, can ANYONE say that is not cause for a stop-and-cite?

There is no difference here. The dogs are doing a walk-around free air sniff of vehicles that are parked in a public area. How can ANYONE claim that is an invasion of privacy?

mmof3 - Your child didn't feel disrespected because he's intelligent.

Thank you JPD and JSD!
I have a student at Craig, and he did not feel "disrespected" or "entraped" or "violated". Why?...because he did not have any drugs!!!
My tax money helped pay for those parking lots and that building. As part owner I say Search Away!

the jpd must have been disapointed in the results.

For those of you against all of this, might I remind you were talking about kids here. Yes, those that are 18 are adults and guess what, having drugs at school regardless of your age is illegal. As would be alcohol regardless if you're of age or not. It's school property. I find it alarming that some of you feel the law enforcement are infringing on kids lives because some of them may be doing things they shouldn't be which in return is effecting everyone. If there's students there that follow the rules and are headed down the right path, they have nothing to worry about. If the dog walks by them and keeps going, they can laugh and say too bad for the idiots that aren't as smart and are going to get caught. Thinking these kids have the right to do whatever they want is not how it works and some of you must be real young by your comments because it was a hell of a lot different back in the day.
Now a days, kids have way to much freedom and that's because of idiotic parents that don't know discipline and don't realize that when they're in the hands of the school, the school is in charge. Get over it and grow up.

Way to go JPD! I hope the kids didn't know ahead of time but since they didn't find anything they probably did. Come on, before you all start with the comments, we all know that they do bring stuff. I know because my kid got into drugs AT SCHOOL!!! That's where they first did it! I say if you have something to hide then you should get caught!! I wish my kid would have!!!

Because we have learned that there are educators that get there fix throughout the day. They sometimes may go as far as distribution to the students. Sad, sad society!

I wonder if they sniffed the teachers parking lot as well...

I agree on the need for the searches. However, why stop at the "students" parking lot? I feel that the teachers lot should be searched as well. Especially after the Walworth teacher and all her crack and stuff.

gpawcat
May 27, 2009 at 11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal The police are creating an atmosphere of us against them. Why should kids respect the law when the law enforcers don't respect them. Janesville police need to apologize to every student that did keep the law.
.
.
I believe a small percentage of the students are creating this atmosphere by bring drugs into the schools.
.
The police and administration have no other option but to react.
.
The students, not the police have created the prison like atmosphere. Those few students need to apologize and the students not involved need to stand up and take back THEIR school.
.
Until the "good" kids willing to follow the drug laws while at school fight back law enforcement and administration have to be the "bad guys."

Hmmm ... I wonder if this is why I saw an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the streets surrounding Craig this morning. My guess is that the info got leaked, and all the "smart kids" did what they had to do.

What some of you are forgetting is that it is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to bring drugs, alcohol, guns, etc. onto school property - kids, parents, teachers....The car is parked on school property. If they have any of the above in their car they broke the law.

Besides breaking the property law -- drugs are ILLEGAL no matter where you are - school, walmart, home, church. PERIOD.

I think their should be an incentive for kids,or anyone to turn these scum bags in,or just wanting to rid this town of the lowest of low life's. We should've had fences like mexico years ago,to keep these pushers out,& slugs to our community.

The police are creating an atmosphere of us against them. Why should kids respect the law when the law enforcers don't respect them. Janesville police need to apologize to every student that did keep the law.

Having the right doesn't necessarily make it right.

PASTE : : Entrapment is enticing someone to do something they would not normally or do not want to do. Searches for drugs that students already have on them or in their car is legal

This is a good example of the definition of entrapment... and it's EXACTLY what police do when they send out messages to men on the internet and entice them into meeting.. Aka child enticement = ENTRAPMENT

if they were searching for guns in the cars parked outside none of you would be screaming entrapment, or illegal search!!!, drugs are illegal period, all you 60s hippies deal with it. If the car is parked on school property and there is a zero tolerance policy in effect, which it is, they have all the legal right to have the dogs search for drugs.

Too bad the dogs can't hit on crap smell when people are full of it. I don't necessarily condone using drugs but there's a lot worse things kids could be doing than smoking dope. Dogs should be trained to sniff out stupidity and waste of taxpayer money. Maybe strip searches would be of some value seeing as how they aren't finding anything in the parking lot.

Thank you, janesvillean.

Cars on a street or in a parking lot are in a public place. There can be no expectation of privacy in a public place. Same if you're walking down a public sidewalk...a canine officer can walk up and "sniff." If the dog hits, then the handling officer has probable cause for a search. A dog sniff is not intrusive. As long as you are not unreasonably detained, it's fair game.

With the huge percentage of students smoking pot at the high schools I am amazed that the dogs don't come up with anything. I have heard that the kids sometimes know its coming and keep it out of their cars and lockers and on themselves because the dogs don't have access to the students.

I'm all for searching the lockers but I think searching the cars crosses a line. After all, you can't come search my house without a warrant. Why is my car (my personal property) any different?

No, this has nothing to do with entrapment. That's when the police encourage you to commit a crime. This is within the bounds of a legal search, as the Supreme Court has ruled that there is only a limited expectation of privacy for a personal vehicle, and drug scent extends beyond the vehicle itself.
.
In any event the purpose here is more to create a deterrent.

i wonder if those drug dogs can smell alcohol in the trunk of a car??

Entrapment is enticing someone to do something they would not normally or do not want to do. Searches for drugs that students already have on them or in their car is legal.

More police state action at the public prison for indoctrination.

I'm all for kids not doing drugs in school,but isn't this entrapment?