DRUGS IN SCHOOLS

Dear Sir,

I just finished reading Stuart Hayward's article in today's Bermuda
Sun, on "drug-sniffing dogs in schools" and I found him to be a bit
contradicting at times.

To say that the issue is not one of clear right or wrong is sitting on
the fence. If we have students bringing drugs to school, how can the
issue not be clear? The student who had drugs at Mount Saint Agnes was
not the first student to bring drugs to school, and that student will
not be the last one.

We live in a completely different society to what was when he and I
went to school. We are now dealing with students who have a completely
different mindset. I don't ever remember a student bringing a
cigarette to school, let alone drugs =85 and if students are bringing
drugs to school, yes, by all means have drug-sniffing dogs doing
random searches at schools. Have we forgotten that these are the halls
of learning for our leaders of tomorrow, and that they should be drug
free? I frankly can't see how you can lose with random searches. I
don't see any student bringing drugs to school when he or she does not
have a clue when there is going to be a random search. It would be
suicidal!

I disagree with Mr. Hayward when he brings in the fear factor of the
civil rights movements when dogs were set upon the civil rights
activists, or that having drug-sniffing dogs in schools might reawaken
too many painful memories with the image of leash-tugging dogs
searching among children and their belongings. I think that is a bit
dramatic, as these civil rights incidents took place 40 or 50 years
ago, and I am sure that 99 percent (or any) of these students are
emotionally tied to the civil rights movements or what happened back
them. When I say that we should have drug-sniffing dogs in the
schools, I am not talking about a 200-pound snarling, leash-tugging,
German Shepherd, like the ones Mr. Hayward was depicting. I am talking
about a cute little drug-sniffing dog that I saw on a TV programme
some time back about drug-sniffing dogs at Miami Airport, and they
were using a very small cute dog. This is the type of dog that they
could use in the schools. A cute, friendly little dog that that is
non-threatening, and can get the job done. We have joined the rest of
the world, and obviously, the rules have changed. We are no longer the
"Isle of rest"=85we have become the "Isle of unrest!"

I agree with Mr. Hayward when he says that the PLP would do well to be
less dogmatic about its position and that we need more flexibility
from Government leaders, also, by the PLP adopting a rigidly defensive
stance when there is no clearly definable reason, is neither
constructive, nor, useful.

As we know, drugs are in every corner of our society, so to eliminate
the problem, I say use whatever means necessary, and if it means
drug-sniffing dogs, then so be it! After the terrifying issue with Dr.
Brockenbrough at the hospital, I would think that any person who has
other people's lives in their hands, should be randomly drug tested as
you never know who is using drugs.

Mr. Editor, I still wonder why the PLP MPs never consented to a random
drug test as the opposition did. If I were a sitting MP, I would take
a text in a minute. What was that saying? Lead by example?

Pat Ferguson

Warwick