Slashdot Mirror


School Admins Demand Access to Students' Cellphones

Reverberant writes "School administrators in Framingham MA have implemented a policy allowing them to not only confiscate cell phones, but also to search through students' cell phone data as part of their anti drug/violence efforts. Students claim that the policy is an invasion of their privacy."

36 of 836 comments (clear)

  1. Kids these days... by NexFlamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What these kids don't understand is that simply by attending the school they lose the majority of their rights. Since they are minors, the school becomes their de facto guardian while they are there, and thusly, it has power that supercedes their rights.

    1. Re:Kids these days... by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Guess again, counselor. You don't "lose" your rights because they're violated.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Kids these days... by Umbral+Blot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That might be legal, but is it right?

    3. Re:Kids these days... by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What these kids don't understand is that simply by attending the school they lose the majority of their rights.

      What better way to indoctrinate the adults of tomorrow? They won't miss what they never had.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    4. Re:Kids these days... by Sigma+7 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      What these kids don't understand is that simply by attending the school they lose the majority of their rights. Since they are minors, the school becomes their de facto guardian while they are there, and thusly, it has power that supercedes their rights.


      FYI, some of those kids in high-school are at or above the age of 18. Adults of sound mind do not have a legal guardian.

      Also, some cell phones are in the name of the student's parents. In this case, the student just has to keep it in "locked" mode, and tell the school to obtain the unlock code from the owner of the cell phone.

      The school claims it "is to improve security and stop the sale of drugs and stolen goods." The cell phone checking does absolutly nothing to prevent (or handle) these incidents since there is no record of numbers that are about to be called. In addition, the school does not have the investigative power to identify these items in question - this is handled by the police and they require a search warrent.

    5. Re:Kids these days... by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I'm starting to feel old...

      When I was a kid, we didn't have cellphones and certainly not in the classroom. If we wanted to "secretly communicate", we wrote little notes, and passed them on. If the teacher intercepted one, well.. I couldn't claim my privacy was being violated. You just could get "negative credits". (a system where teachers could give you these "credits", 10 of these credits ment wednessdayafternoon obligated study.) for distrupting the class. Ha, even carrying cigarettes would be reason to be expelled for 3 days... If they had a suspicion, they would have reason to search your jacket.

      Many people send their kids to school, trusting that school to take care of the wellbeing of these kids. And more and more as a pseudo-parent. If the school doesn't get the rights to somehow have an influence on (to not allow them to do just whatever they feel like doing) them. I believe that's a requirement for the all the other students and the student itself. In the case of the cigarettes; if your -caring- parents suspect you have been smoking, they'll search your stuff. Kids would love it if their parents only could search their stuff with a warrant, but things shouldn't work that way. In the time you're at school, they are expected to take over that function in a limited amount. If they screw up in the -caring- parents eye's they will have to argumentate why they just "didn't care about it" towards these parents. The oppinion of the child should matter not, as it's an individual but it's not yet an adult.

      Well I sortof agree you shouldn't do the drugsearches by the school by installing a "big brother" system. But on the other hand, these kids can stop using their phones during class or turn them off and that might be the conclusion if that school doesn't get a way to monitor the traffic, because most likely they feel out of control of the things going on in that school and want to get back a hold on the problem. When I went to public school, drugs were found by running drugsdogs through some classes occasionally, I believe that's a bit more effective then snooping your 1000+ students but it doesn't leave much of a good impression.

      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    6. Re:Kids these days... by mariox19 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You beat me to it, because I think this is the most important point of the whole issue.

      Part of the purpose of school, and in raising kids in general, is to socialize them: meaning, to raise them so that they will be able to live in society. I am not for minors having the full-fledged rights of adults; but, we have to remember that how we raise them will affect what kind of adults they turn out to be. For kids, school is, to a great degree, society. The society we create for them in school is the society they will learn to live with.

      When kids have to show ID at every turn, live out their day under the surveillance of security cameras, surrender their personal belongings on the whim of any authority figure, so on and so forth, it is far more likely that the great mass of them will grow up to be the kind of adults that will submit to an overbearing authority that allows them few rights.

      It's one thing when this kind of policy is instituted in a private school. I still think it's a bad idea; but, the parents sent the kid there and had a choice as to where to send him. But, if we are talking about a government school (though, the euphamism in the US is "public" school), this presents, in my opinion, a serious threat to our future. Public schools in the US hold a near monopoly in education; and though I am not going to accuse the government of a concious conspiracy to indoctrinate the youth of america with anti-liberal ideas, the results, if such policies become widespread, will be no different.

      To my mind, adults act as the custodians for the rights of kids: releasing various rights to kids as they become able to handle them responsibly. I'm all for adults being in charge; but any responsible adult realizes the grave responsibility he has towards the kids with which he has been given charge, and weilds that power in the service of raising kids to be responsible adults jealous of their liberty, rather than cowed wretches with no backbone in the face of authority.

      Kids deserve respect above all; and this needs to trump the illiberal policies instituted under the cover of promoting "safe schools."

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    7. Re:Kids these days... by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      er... the STUDENTS agree to go to school? Ever hear of a little thing called compulsory attendance? It's more like the law agrees FOR them

    8. Re:Kids these days... by jdbartlett · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Frankly, an unwarranted cavity search performed on a minor without the express permission of a legal de jure guardian is tantamount to child molestation.

      Schools have few more "rights" than babysitters.

    9. Re:Kids these days... by DavidTC · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But on the other hand, these kids can stop using their phones during class or turn them off and that might be the conclusion if that school doesn't get a way to monitor the traffic, because most likely they feel out of control of the things going on in that school and want to get back a hold on the problem.

      Erm, you didn't actually read the article. No one said anything about 'monitoring' cell phones, which, incidentally, would be illegal for anyone to do without a warrant. We're talking about searching cell phones.

      And no school or even college allows the operatation of cell phones during class. Not even, in theory, to send text messages. No one has a problem with that. Cell phone use should be restricted to out of class times, and it would be fine to restrict it to breaks only or even before/after school. No one has any constitutional problem with restrictions on cell phones, although for safety reasons students should be allowed to have them outside of the school day, at the very least.

      The problem is that this school feels they can search cell phones that happen to be on campus. Not 'used during class', not even 'in use', merely located on campus. And by 'search', we mean 'Go through the memory of', not 'flip open to see if something is sitting inside it', FYI.

      The previous excuses for searching lockers and bookbags were 'weapons and drugs'. You rather obviously can't have a weapon or drugs stored inside your cell phone. Even if they are searching for evidence of drugs, the original searches were allowed, with a warrant, under 'safety'...it's the same reason a cop can search you when you're arrested...drugs physically located at schools are dangerous, in theory, so they claimed, so they can search for them.

      Well, this really shows what the whole motivation for that thing was about.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    10. Re:Kids these days... by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Every single person on this planet has the same rights. It's just that their local government may not recognize them.

      I'm amazed that you can speak with such certainty over an arbitrary human construct.

    11. Re:Kids these days... by Aaron+England · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Student's "don't shed their constituiotnal rights... at the schoolhouse gate."
      - Tinker v. Des Moines

    12. Re:Kids these days... by mariox19 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a New York State certified teacher of social studies. Currently, I work as a per-diem substitute. I'm in high schools and middle schools almost every day.

      I do know what teachers put up with from students, parents, and government. All three groups can be real bastards. That doesn't change anything I've said. I think my posting was quite reasonable: I said that adults should be the ones in charge, but noted that in the hands of some adults, this authority could be abused, and that the results are hurtful to kids and detrimental to a free society.

      Give me a break.

      --

      quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    13. Re:Kids these days... by Tweekster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Interesting point, the parent owns the cellphone, the child cannot therefore give consent to have the phone searched by school officials. The parent just needs to claim THEIR privacy was invaded and the school has a new problem.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    14. Re:Kids these days... by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Beyond the rights of the student...

      I gave my cell phone to my teen so that I could contact them when I need to.

      It's my rights that I'm concerned with here.

      While it is true that schools have in loco parentis powers those powers do NOT supersede my rights, authority, and responsibility as a parent.

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
    15. Re:Kids these days... by Frobnicator · · Score: 5, Insightful
      From TFA:
      School officials reserve the right to look through the cell phone when they suspect a student has drugs or stolen goods, according to Principal Michael Welch. ... The rule complies with federal law, which says a school can conduct searches when there is "reasonable suspicion" that a student has contraband.
      As for your other statement...

      If you need to get in touch with your kid, there is an established procedure for that: Contact the office. It may take a few minutes longer, but it won't end up disturbing the entire class while your kid figures out that it is his phone, digs it out of the bag, and starts chatting in the middle of a test or lecture.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    16. Re:Kids these days... by eosp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mods, it's insightful, not funny.

    17. Re:Kids these days... by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Student's "don't shed their constituiotnal rights... at the schoolhouse gate."

      Kids don't have any rights in the first place, constitutional or otherwise. How could they, when they have neither representatives nor guns nor any other way to defend them ?

      Generally speaking, you have rights either because you can take them through force or through goodwill of others. Since kids have no ability to use significant force, they only have the rights that the rest of us graciously give them out of the goodness of our hearts - not bloody much, in other words.

      It is horrible to be small and weak in a human society; this is simply another proof of that.

      Oh, and I'm sure that everyone who posts about school being within their rights to do this is going to complain, in ten or fifteen years, how these very same kids, now grown up, won't resist the government trampling their rights but simply bend over and take it since resisting will only make it worse.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. Invasion of privacy? by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, it certainly is. Kids, if any person demands to examine the contents of your cell phone, tell him to get a warrant. Call your parents, call the local press, and call a lawyer.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Invasion of privacy? by Wiseleo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A public school is a government institution.

      You do not give up that right. My opinion is that your rights are protected stronger precisely because it's a government institution, which is squarely under the jurisdiction of the Constitution.

      The Constitution does not contain age limits on the Bill of Rights, if I recall. I'd demand that the school call the police and obtain a search warrant. "So you want to look through my phone, and probably also my e-mail on this computer? Please, call the police and have them get a warrant. And that warrant must have my name on it. If you choose to ignore this request and access my data without a warrant, I'll consider your actions as unauthorized access of my computer systems, which is a federal felony and call the police immediately myself. This device is a Windows Mobile 5.0 computer system where my data is stored on an encrypted volume so that law will apply. Additionally, the school district will be sued by my family's attorney. Do you wish to continue with your line of inquiry now?"

      --
      Leonid S. Knyshov
      Find me on Quora :)
    2. Re:Invasion of privacy? by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That, really, is the whole thing.

      See, schools don't have due process. So if you refuse to do something the school doesn't have legal authority to do, they will let you get away with it. And label you a 'bad kid'.

      And from then on, you're screwed. A legal locker check every day? Yup. Parents getting called in for some pretend reason? Check. Getting hauled in because your Marilyn Manson t-shirt has a skull on it, and 'images of death' are against the dress code? Check. Getting in trouble because you said 'crap' when other people around you seem to get away with saying 'fuck'? Check.

      I have called for 'due process' for some time in schools, and not because I think kids deserve a lot more rights than they have (Although searching cell phone memory is outrageous.), but because justice is enforced solely against 'bad kids', and they are often 'bad kids' solely because they don't do whatever authority says. I ended up a 'bad kid' a few times, which would be hilarious if you knew me, but managed to avoid the fate because my mother was a teacher in the same school system and I managed to avoid any rulebreaking, even the rules everyone ignored.

      So I say, let's make the justice system in school official. Whatever they're got, right now, let's make it official, with appeals and whatever standards of evidences currently exist. And, most importantly, a trial for disputed charges.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  3. There's always something you can do. by Mikachu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't agree with the principle, I mean I certainly believe it's an invasion of privacy. But there's still always a way around it. It's pretty simple: password protect your phone. I think all cell phones have it nowadays.

    1. Re:There's always something you can do. by davidsyes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're missing the point. Suppose that the State (state AND federal) government/s decide they are in league with MA. Now, suppose the act of locking the phone is "impeding with Justice/execution of state security laws". Now, the student can be suspended, or worse.

      Now, when will this happen to police officers, paramedics, state and federal contractors?

      Were I a parent or guardian, not only would my charge/ward/child keep their phone locked, they'd have it holstered in a combination-access belt that would be so difficult to remove that the school would give up or be charged with assault. Or, the clothing would be the phone- in which case removing it or attempting to access a data port would lead to nearly disrobing or excessively touching the kid. And, no, I'd NOT allow the school to order my kid to swap garments.

      Even worse of an implication is that if schools can rifle through student's phones and they DO find something interesting, what next? Do they have the right to archive that information? Call contacts in the lists? Turn it over to the police? Then what? Do the police have powers to start their own virtual "Friendster/Copster" of students? If Blast-a-chussets starts this slippery slope, then every state could do it or be ordered to. This could be a backdoor attempt by this wicked administration to angle in on youth and catalog them from cradle to grave.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  4. Children forced to use encryption? by MarkByers · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who exactly needs a cellphone at school?

    Noone needs a cellphone. Humanity survived before we even invented them. We don't need cars either. We survived without cars. You're missing the point though.

    Creating technology is a good thing and why we shouldn't we take advantage of it? It can be useful, fun or just interesting. If people want cellphones for whatever reason, why not? I can think of many reasons why having a cellphone is better than not having one. I don't see why people should have to justify it though. If someone else wants a cellphone they should be allowed to ahve one as long as they aren't breaking any laws, or in this case, school rules (such as turning them off during the classes).

    The real question is are school administrators allowed to reading their pupils diaries? What if their diary is stored on their cellphone? Should we give up all our privacy for the 'thinkofthechildren' and 'terrorism' projects?

    I say no. It's annoying that we are forced to use encryption to protect ourselves from our own authorities, but if that is what is required, so be it.

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  5. Re:Bad Laws? by bhima · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am nearly 48 years old and I don't give a rat's ass about what some kid can or can not carry inside school grounds.

    But I *do* think that current privacy laws were enacted in bad faith and they are used in bad faith.
    And it is that very vagueness that allows their manipulation.

    As fars as children, cell phones, and privacy... If the school permits someone to carry a device within school grounds and they want to look at the contents of that device, they can go get a warrant... or they can go fuck themselves.

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  6. Re:Quick question. by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I meant if I had it tucked into my belt (yes stupid way to carry a gun), or in a holster, you know I'd get the 3rd degree.

    It's sad for you that you live in a country which has stupidly decided to endanger its citizens by denying your right to self-defense, but your attempt to rationalize one violation of rights with an example of another violation of rights (that you seem to think is just fine and dandy) doesn't support your position.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  7. It's quite simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The kids just enter names like 'pot dealer' with the principles home number. They text threatening things to their friends in jest, all pre-agreed between parties. They enter 'Osama bin laden' with the number of their local FBI field office. They text each other about fictional big-time drug deals and terrorist plots. They overload the system with so much false information that the entire exercise becomes pointless and a huge administrative burden.

    The staff should give the pupils full access to their mobile phones as a gesture of good will, you never can be sure what those pesky teachers get up to in their personal lives.

  8. Re:I'm a teacher by Walkiry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >There was a time when you got CANED for even breathing out of turn.

    And there was also a time when 'niggers' couldn't sit in the same place in a bus as the whites. What's your goddamn point? That because kids were regularly abused in the past in schools, they should be thankful that trampling their privacy is the worst they get?

    School doesn't allow cell phone in the premises? Then the teachers take the phones. There's a whole world of difference between that and messing with the contents.

    --
    ---- Take the Space Quiz!
  9. Re:Quick question. by dfenstrate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    By your logic I should be able to carry a gun around downtown, after all I want to, and it doesn't disrupt anybody, and it's "nobody else's goddamned business"

    Maybe you already know this, but hey, I'll point it out to be sure.

    You can do that in 2/3 of the United States.

    Bloodshed does not ensue.

    Why are you take issue with inanimate objects? Wether it's a gun or a cell phone or a car or a baseball bat, the object does nothing on it's own. He or she that posseses and uses it- makes all the difference in the world.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  10. Not only the children, parents lose rights too by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One thing that has been common among "progressive schools" is that parents lose many of their rights governing the activities of their children once they cross the threshold of the school. For a society which likes to admonish parents for not holding their children accountable, discipling them, many think its okay for schools to usurp the parents choices. If you diminish the values of parents the children will lose respect for those values and you get the problem you claim you were trying to avoid.

    In many areas of the country the schools have been too invasive into families and worse they are nearly immune to correction. This is just another symptom of failing schools. When on the downward spiral you make damn sure all those who can criticize you fear you in one way or another. An "unusual" mark on a child - automatic suspicion of child abuse. Too thin, child abuse. Too fat, child abuse. DFACs should know!!! Bad grades, must be from a bad home environment; again child abuse!

    Want absurd? One guy at work mentioned that a neighbor got a letter from the school's counselor. Seems the kid didn't like what he did or did not get in his lunch his mom sent him to school with. The school actually wrote a letter suggesting that the parents aceed to their child's wishes or give him money to buy a school lunch or snacks!!!

    Too many of the schools are run by arrogant self style intellectuals. Another person at work recently moved so his wife could teach in a new school district all to get out from overbearing peers whose views of how children and parents should be handled came close to being unethical. There are many good teachers and administrators but too many are cowed by those who know the system and use it againts "non-conforming teachers", students, and even parents.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  11. The ends justify the means by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The message we're sending to young people is the ends justify the means. Just like wiretapping millions of Americans justified by the war on terror. There is no bottom to either slope.

    Guess I'm a little surprised how little value freedom has in America these days.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  12. It has to work both ways by Revolver4ever · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I went to Brooklyn Technical High School in New York and it was PLAGUED with scandals. Sexual abuse, underage sex, corrupt principal, teachers stalking kids, etc. You can read about our principal here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn_Technical_Hi gh_School. Just scroll to the bottom for "Lee McCaskill controversy".

    Now I'm all for schools trying to keep drugs and weapons out of schools. But when the school administration itself is playing dirty, who can you trust? What if a pervert of a teacher accuses a girl of selling drugs and looks at her cell phone?

    If a school wants cell phone access for safety, then students (or at least the PTA) should have the same rights. I want to know that my principal is not spending school money to build a house. I want to know that my math teacher is not buying underage kid porn somewhere. I want to know that my dean is not in anger management classes. And so on. Seems extreme and strange for us to have this information right? Well that's the same way students feel when you take their cell phones and look through them.

    --
    If O2 is good, O3 must be 1.5 times better!
  13. Re:What a shocker by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are there any lawyers in the audience that can comment on whether a school can legally strip a student of the right to defend him or herself from physical violence? So far as I'm concerned, if I'm attacked I will use whatever means at my disposal to remove the threat. Period. I think any other creature on this planet would do the same. Even an amoeba will fight back.

    Personally, I'd rather be suspended (or expelled) than suffer serious injury: some bullies don't know when to quit. Matter of fact, I used to get the shit kicked out of me quite regularly in grade school, until my ex-Marine uncle taught me some self-defense. Oh sure, I still got the shit kicked out of me but at least I had the satisfaction of causing some damage, and it took more of them. Now, given a choice, I'll avoid a fight on principle. However, sometimes I wasn't given the option, and in those cases I fought back: on principle.

    If nothing else, I managed to restore my self-respect, and if you don't think that's important you probably don't have any. Self-respect is especially important to someone that is being bullied. The whole point of being a bully is to build up your own self-respect at the expense of someone else's, a kind of mental vampirism. The psychological damage caused by bullying is significant and long-lasting, and school administrators that deal with bullying by futher victimizing the recipients need to learn what food stamps are all about.

    Telling a child that he can't defend himself from a bully is insane, pacifist bullshit more suited to a hippie commune than a school where, I have to say ... KIDS FIGHT. They do, because there's always those few that are violence-prone, and unless the school is prepared to completely excise those bad apples from the student body they have no good reason to punish any other student for fighting back. Generally speaking, schools won't get rid of the complete assholes because they, of course, have "rights". You would think that the kids they beat up would have the "right" to a terror-free school day, but apparently that's not a priority.

    This is obviously just for the convenience of the administration who would rather not deal with the subtleties of why someone was beaten to a bloody pulp. That's unfortunate, because it is an awareness of just those details that can prevent further violence. So, let's take a kid that's already having a hard time, tell him "when you're attacked, don't even think about throwing a punch", and then when he's lying on the ground bruised and miserable we'll suspend his ass for fighting. That's one sensitive administration you have there: what I would take away from that would be "no, we're not on your side, we don't understand right from wrong, really we're on the side of the bullies that are terrorizing you so don't even think of turning to us for help."

    That is probably not the message they think they're sending, but actions speak louder than words.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  14. Re:STUDENTS agree to go to school? by jridley · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Art and music may not (MAY not) result in you getting X% more paycheck, but there are things that are "useful" and "important" that are not related to a paycheck.

    I consider the time I spent in music in high school and college to have been very useful to me, though I don't think they've earned me a dime. I could have easily given up a couple of years of calculus and it wouldn't have affected me at all, including pay or play, but I wouldn't want to have not had my music classes.

    If you want to talk about useless, let's get rid of sports. It's insane how much money is cranked into sports. I don't have much problem with phys ed, but seeing schools that don't have enough teachers or classrooms, but they have a million-dollar football field really bugs me. Though I suppose to the people involved with those, they're important as well.

  15. What is wrong with mandatory drug testing? by falconwolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What is right about drug testing? What is wrong about letting people do what they want as long as they aren't harming anyone else?

    Teaching for tests is better than not teaching, and, frankly, arts and music aren't very useful.

    Teaching for thinking and the opportunities education opens up is even better, teaching for tests doesn't teach to think. Arts and music aren't "useful"? Try and ask the RIAA and the MPAA if they think the arts aren't useful. The members of these organizations make billions of dollars as do some artists, admittedly not all but some do. Knowing the arts also leads to more creativity and not just in the arts but also in the sciences. Art also enriches culture. Art is very much useful!

    Falcon
  16. Re:What a shocker by pi_rules · · Score: 3, Insightful

    However, if you get caught by security guards driving on their golf carts patrolling the student parking lot, they will search your car.

    Here's some advice that will serve you the rest of your life: Never let anybody search your vehicle or home unless they have a warrant. You have a choice. You don't think you do, but it's there. You can always just leave. Exit the premises. If they wish to continue their harassment then they'll need to find a cop and a judge to sign off on a warrant to search your car off premises.

    If they want to search it the next day do the same: Unlock the car, get in, and leave.

    There is nothing they can do, short of visiting violence upon you, to keep you under their control. If they do initiate violence upon you, well, let's address that now.

    There is also another degredation of rights where I go to, pertaining to violence. If someone walks up to you and flat out punches you for no reason, you cannot do anything.

    I'm 26 and this was pretty much the policy in our schools too when I went. Ignore it. If somebody attacks you knock their block off. Fight, and fight dirty. Got a book in your hands? Throw it at them -- when they duck or try and dodge it make contact. Use your surroundings. Floors are usually quite hard objects -- especially school hallways. Get 'em on the ground, get on top, and smash their freaking head into it. See if you can get a friendly high school wrestler to show you a few things -- like how to run a "double leg ride" and a "power half."

    Fight not to avenge, but to stop the threat.

    Sounds a bit extreme, I know, but I presume you're between 16 and 18 years old. The manner in which you act now will take a long time to shake out of your head, if it is ever possible.

    You're becoming an adult, and it's time to act like one. Adults should not submit to random searches by rent-a-cop, or even actual police without a warrant. Adults should not submit to violence visited upon them by thugs on the street.

    Sometimes this means making tough choices. Don't want to be searched? Don't leave campus. If you still decide to leave campus and somebody wants to search your car and you're not too keen on that idea just leave.

    If somebody commits an act of violence upon you you have to make a decision: Shall I presume that the attack will not immediately further and risk being beaten into a bloody pulp, possibly resulting in serious injury? Or should I defend myself and risk suspension?

    Hospital beds suck a lot worse (and cost a lot more) than a suspension. While the suspension can be pretty much guaranteed it is far easier to weather.

    In parting I'd like to make one final observation based upon my conjecture. I presume that you're between the age of 16 and 18 years old given that you can leave campus during school. Further, because this is Slashdot I'm going to presume that you are male. Consider this:

    You are at a time in your life when you are the most likely to resist authority. It comes with the age. You're also at a time in your life when there's as much testosterone flowing through your body as ever before which makes you the most prone to violent actions. If you are conditioned to accept authoritarian control of your life (searching your private property) and further conditioned to accept that violence visited upon you should be met with no resistance then it is going to be one Hell of a battle to get out of that mindset later on in life.

    If you don't stand up for your human rights at this juncture in your life because you're afraid of a suspension or a mark in your school record it will be infinately harder to do it when you've got a good job, a wife, and a family to feed on the line.