The Case Of The Sniffing Dog

To the Editor:

Thank you Tracy Fiore for your very informative and forthright letter to the editor (August 11, 2006) in regard to the “Sniffing Dog.” It is quite surprising and unbelievable to read some of the other letters to the editor. “Blame the others but not me.” “Why should we let this kind of activity be overlooked and worry if we are offending some of the trustworthy kids?” “The kids should be thankful and welcome intervention to this serious problem.” These are some of the quotes.

I think it is quite inappropriate and unkind to put the onus solely on the Newtown High School students. First surveillance cameras were installed, then the administrators were armed with walkie-talkies (I saw this in a movie once where the principal was dealing in drugs). Next the doors were locked at the schools and now we have the “Sniffing Dog.” What do you suppose will follow; perhaps metal detectors and then security guards to patrol the hallways? The Fourth Amendment aside, are we arriving at a “stalag” environment in our high school? Is this as yet Newtown or is it Brooklyn?

Inasmuch as drugs are not solely a student problem but a societal and community one, why not have a show of leadership and good faith not only to the students but also to the parents by having the “Sniffing Dog,” the Fourth Amendment aside, take a casual stroll throughout all of the Newtown public facilities. Let us all participate in trying to solve this most serious problem.

God Bless America.

Leonard F. Perrini

18 Split Rock Road, Newtown                           September 13, 2006