There’s no time like college for experimentation— at least that’s what I’ve always heard. These are the years students encounter binge drinking, high libidos and recreational drug use. While this behavior certainly shouldn’t be encouraged, it should be expected to a point. Few of the parents of our generation, attending college in the ’80s, ’70s, and even the ’60s, can admit with a straight face they never once puffed on some marijuana or spent every weeknight studying in lieu of keg-ridden frat parties.

Columbia, as a “dry” campus, has a policy that threatens termination from the college if students, staff and faculty are caught using or in possession of illegal drugs or alcohol on the campus or at campus events, even on the first offense. This is a reasonable reactionary consequence to students who are unable to follow the rules and are clearly being irresponsible with their behavior.

A technical college in Missouri, however, introduced a more proactive approach. Linn State, a two-year college with approximately 1,200 students, required all students to be tested for 11 different drugs before school even started. Students who tested positive would then have 45 days to “get clean” and be tested again while students initially testing negative would be free to go on and do what they like for the next 45 days. Unlike Columbia, where the same rules apply to students, staff and faculty, Linn State only required the testing of students.

This seemed to me to be a completely unnecessary action. Unless prompted by inappropriate behavior or a history of substance use, the college has no business immediately questioning the actions of students.

I’m not alone in this thought. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on Sept. 14 against Linn State on behalf of six students confused and distressed by the policy. The ACLU deemed the drug testing was “suspicionless” and violated the students’ Fourth Amendment rights.

The strangest thing was the lack of precedent for the procedure. This is a school that has had little to no problems with drugs in the past and as representatives from the ACLU mentioned, not even high schools have such strict policies.

Until drugs become an apparent problem among the majority of a school, extreme measures should not be taken because an administration essentially distrusts its students. If such rules were adopted, faculty and staff should be held to the same “clean” standards as students.

I dare to say that if colleges across the country ever adopted such policies as Linn State attempted, college enrollment nationwide would decrease. Instead of intense precautionary measures, colleges should have firm disciplinary actions in place and trust that students who really want their college degree will avoid behavior keeping them from it.