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]