Responding to msg by [log in to unmask] (Rick Figard) on
 
>The way I see it, if you don't take drugs then why
>worry about it?  If you do  take drugs then shame on
>you.
 
I think you have forgotten that the constitution (of the United
States) protects individuals against unreasonable searches and
seizures.  Without a court order, based upon a convincing
probablity that a crime has been comitted, no government agency
has the right to invade your private quarters, which has been
interpreted to include an individual's body.
 
This means that if there is reasonable suspicion that a person
has been using drugs, a court order can force a test; but if an
individual is not under the cloud of reasonable suspicion, than
any random testing (i.e. testing that includes a person not
under suspicion) on the part of a government agency should
certainly be held to be unconstitutional.
 
It may seem to you to be an unreasonable demend, that people
not be subjected to random testing, especially given the social
good that must follow any reduction in overall drug use.  But
it is important to remember that erosions of protections tend
to escalate, and one protection lost leads to another.  I
believe it is far better to err on the side permissiveness than
to tilt to the other extreme.  Another factor: in our society
just being tested carries with it its own stigma.  Certainly it
is unreasonable to brand innocent persons with the suspicion
that they may be drug users or members of a population
suspected of being drug users.  Given that there are many
innocuous substances that produce positive results, I believe
there is just cause to prohibit drug testing.
 
Some people may say that drug use creates a social admosphere
that promotes unethical behavior (such as theft) in a museum,
and for that reason random testing will improve general museum
security.  Without denying that this may be so, I ask, do you
want to create a workplace environment in which most workers
(predernaturally honest) work under a cloud of suspicion,
believing that the administation thinks that they cannot be
trusted?  The harmful effects of such a policy surely will
outweigh the benefits.
 
If you compile statistics on museum crime, I'd be surprised if
you could conclude that drug use was a major contributing
factor.  Greed and avarice certainly are the main causes of
museum crime; perhaps there should be random greed tests?
 
In sum, I believe that the oppression that follows testing, the
nearly certain unconstitutional nature of the practice, the
uncertainty of its accuracy all combine to make it a policy
that will be counter productive.  I will grant however, that
any policy or threat that would tend to undermine the
intellectual, humanistic and philosophic underpinning of our
egalitarian society will seem attractive to those who for many
reasons feel that they cannot partake in or appreciate the
benefits of our cultural institutions.  Let's make sure that as
we strive to protect our precious cultural institutions, we
don't begin a process that will eventually lead to their
destruction.
______________________________________
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont, NY 10538
[log in to unmask]