WHAT ABOUT THE RIGHT TO DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS, SAFE HIGHWAYS?

Checkpoints are intended to deter drunk driving, not to harass people
and violate their rights.

Regarding the guest opinion from Hope Cunningham of Middletown, who
felt "stripped of her rights" when stopped at a sobriety checkpoint.

Checkpoints are intended to deter drunk driving, not to harass people
and violate their rights. They are conducted in areas where
statistics show a high number of DUIs or accidents. Thousands of
motorists are stopped every year in these checkpoints and they are
normally grateful that the police are doing their best to keep the
roads safe.

If a driver hasn't been drinking, a checkpoint will take up about one
minute. Operating a motor vehicle is a privilege, not a right. If
time is so precious that one can't tolerate some inconvenience from
time to time, then hand in the license and walk.

Now Cunningham is taking her bleeding heart to the drug dog search
forum. The sad part is, she's using her daughter as an excuse. If she
wants to teach her daughter anything, perhaps she should start with
respect and obedience - two things she may know little about judging
from the way she turned her back on the school board and broke their
grievance protocol.

Drug dogs are the least-intrusive way to conduct a search. Students
are in their classroom while they are conducted, so how does this
affect them? If a student has nothing to hide, he or she has no
reason to fear these searches, and the majority of students welcome
them. Students' rights? What about the right to learn in a drug-free
environment!

If a drug dog finds one bag of dope or prevents students from
bringing it on school grounds, it might prevent just one overdose or
drug- related tragedy. If it can save just one student's life then it
is worth it.

Instead of sitting around crying about our rights, why don't we sit
our children down and explain to them that a little inconvenience can
prevent a lifetime of sadness?

Richard Johns Bensalem