Confused about Teenage Privacy

Drug testing in high schools is something that I do not have a firm opinion on. I always feel like I go back and forth between being for it and against it. I think I feel this way because I am torn in the middle of the two arguments. On one hand I think drugs are terrible. No good can come from using them; they endanger your life and the lives of others. Drugs cloud your judgment and change who you are.  My close friend almost died from using drugs. I am a anti-drug. On the other hand I am an athlete. I am involved in school sports. I think that it is very invasive to drug test. I do not want to give a urine sample to my school. I believe that is something only done at the doctor’s office. We need a certain level of privacy. I go to school to learn and be involved in activities. My parents are the ones who should be concerned with drugs or alcohol.  My teachers and coaches are not my parents. It really isn’t their business. I personally have nothing to hide, I would pass a drug test, but I can’t help feeling on the fence about it.  I see valid reasoning from both sides. In the case of Board of Education v. Earls, I find it hard to decide where I fit in, with the majority or dissenting opinion. Two high school girls were smoking in the school restroom. When the girls were being questioned T.L.O. claimed that she did not smoke. The vice principal went into T.L.O’s purse and found cigarettes and cigarette rolling papers. The rolling papers made the vice principal suspicious about involvement with marijuana so he continued his search and found “ a small amount of marijuana, a pipe, empty plastic bags, a significant amount of money in one-dollar bills, a list of students who owed T.L.O. money, and letters implicating T.L.O. in dealing marijuana.” T.L. O. then admitted to selling marijuana on campus. The majority opinion ruled “ We hold today that school officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority.”  I do not agree with this opinion. It is such an invasion of privacy to have anything on you searched at school without a warrant. I do not think this ruling should have come out of this case because it does not apply.  Being able to search students without warning is not the same as searching a student who is accused of smoking. There has to be reason behind the search. I believe there should be a warrant. This topic is provocative because it is something that can happen to me. I am a high school student involved in high school activities. These court decisions impact my life. These rulings could cause my possessions to be searched and myself have to submit to drug testing. 
Like I said before I have mixed feelings. Even though I do not think that the unwarranted searches should be allowed I do think that the drug-sniffing dogs should be. If people want to engage in drugs that is their own private personal decision. But school is no place for drugs.  Having drug-sniffing dogs is scary. I would not want one of those dogs start to sniff my possessions and bark. I imagine it would be very frightening. The fear of being caught and the fear of the dogs is enough to keep students from bringing drugs to school. That is the main goal. Students may use drugs outside of school but that is not the schools issue. If the drugs are not at and not being distributed at school the school should have no problem. I know from the article “Drug-Sniffing Dogs Patrol More Schools” in the New York Times, that this method is successful. “ Dogs have searched the school twice since January, and no narcotics have been found,” The dogs are not invading students privacy. They are only finding things that are not allowed. When a teacher searches a students belongings they may find no drugs but other personal and private items. That is why unwarranted searches are invasions of privacy and drug-sniffing dogs are not.