In United States public K-12 schools, the probable cause standard ought to apply to searches of stud

I affirm the following resolution that states Resolved: In United States public K-12 schools, the probable cause standard ought to apply to searches of students. We offer the following terms: public school- a school supported by government funds probable cause-reasonable grounds (for making a search, pressing a charge, etc ought-used to indicate duty or correctness C1-The Law The Fourth Amendment states The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. This amendment clearly forbids any extent of the govenment's ability to conduct unreasonable seizures. It is absolutely neccisary that the government possess a warrant. If the government is allowed the power to conduct seizures whenever it can, than our government will surely turn into a government similar to Russia. This is a significant disadvantage that con would support. Con is incapable of propounding the notion that students are not citizens. Students are citizens which also conveys the notion that it is indispensible for them to adhere to governmental law. This also entitles students to the same rights as a citizen. One of those rights are the fourth amendment. The burden is on con to prove that constitutional amendments forbade these rights to minors in public schools. It is also absolutely neccisary that Con rebuke Tinker vs Des Moines. Tinker vs Des Moines settled the case on whether rights could apply to minors. Jon F. Tinker set forth the notion that his rights were ebing supressed. Tinker was suspended from school, because he protested the vietnam war. He deemed this to be an abrogation of his rights. Many people would agree with this claim in the status quo. The judges also agreed, and stated that minors are also entitled to the same rights as adults. If the judge agrees with Con's world view, than that would essentially be claiming that the judge agrees with abrogating the work our founding fathers risked their lives for. This would abrogate the notion that there could be a country where free people would not adhere to the precepts established by a totalitarian regime. C2-Advantages of Adherence A significant portion of the American population also can inquire on what the advantages are to adhering to laws established 200 years ago. After all, slavery was at one point legal in America. But, the horrors of slavery can never be equated to an amendment that deters the notion of a totalatarian regime implemented in America. Is it not true that the ideal for a public school is to bestow the best education possible towards its students? Is it not true that the ideal for a public school is to be set forth each perspective upon life equally. This does not occur. This contention will explicate the various examples in life where teachers will assert precepts a significant portion of our population would depricate. Examples: Last month, students at Friendswood Junior High in Houston were required to attend an Islamic Awareness presentation during class time allotted for physical education. According to the students, they were taught to proclaim "Adam Noah, and Jesus are prophets", and that "There is only one god, and his name is Allah". Parents were not notified by the faculty. It became indispensible for the faculty to write a formal apology due to the abundance of reprimandments from parents. Earlir this year at Lake Brantley High School in Seminole County, Fla, speakers from the Academy for Learning Islam gave a presentation to students about supposed cultural diversity that essentialy explicated the Quran. After an abundancy of reprimandments from the parents and subsequent investigation, the school distric apologized for the inappropriate presentation, admitting that it violated the law. The school made a formal apology, and promised that this would never occur. As reported by the Cabinet Press, a school project last year at Amherst Middle School transformed "the quiant colonial town of Amherst N.H., into a Saudi Aabian Bedouin tent community." Males and Femals were segregated, and Arabian precepts were being embraced. According to the Guardian, a profusion of Calofornia counties are being subject to Atheistic concepts. How is this evidence relivant towards the case? It vindicates the notion that public schools are susceptable to biases when concerning religion and personal views people possess passionate views on. We live in a country where each perspective should be bestowed an equal amount of time. This is what the federal government advocates for. In Con's world, schools would be granted the privledge of removing sacred religious items due to the prospects of the item representing certain complications. Do we really want to live in a world where students are persecuted for what they believe in? Do we really want to live in a world where Athiests deem it unacceptable for your child to have a Bible in his or her possession? Do we really want to live in a world where Muslim administered schools possess the right to confiscate your child's Bible? Do Muslims want to live in a world where there Qurans are confiscated by Christians? Do Athiests want to live in a world where their secular doctrines are confiscated? The fourth amendment was implemented for a reason. This reason still applies to our world right now. Sources: http://cases.laws.com... https://en.wikipedia.org...