Author Topic: Drug Tests (Read 2088 times)

nodlenor · « **on:** February 11, 2010, 02:47:08 AM »

We reciently had a congressman in our state introduce a bill to require welfairites to take drug tests, also the bill would have required our senators and represenitives to do the same. Needless to say it didn't get very far. I was just wondering what everyones thoughts are on this subject. Personally I feel we shouldn't be paying for the drug habits of individuals that are too lazy to work. I worked for the state for 25 years and we were required to take drug tests why not everyone else.

skarke · « **Reply #1 on:** February 11, 2010, 02:52:20 AM »

Yes, I support this. I also support mandatory work or job training to receive benefits, unless the recipient is disabled or suffering from serious mental illness (Schizophrenia, Bipolar disorder with functional abilitiy reduced by half).

powderman · « **Reply #2 on:** February 11, 2010, 03:57:33 AM »

I see no reason drug tests shouldn't be made mandatory for welfare and elected officials. Some on welfare truly need help and may be under drs care with needed meds, those would be excluded. HEH, I'd imagine a lot of empty chairs if congress critters had to do this. POWDERMAN.

Bigeasy · « **Reply #3 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:26:52 AM »

My opinion? Mandatory drug testing in just about any setting can lead down that slippery slope...... OK for welfare, then how about for pistol permits? Not just CDL's, but all drivers lisc.? Maybe mandatory testing before you receive your first Social Security check? About 1/3 of all folks have tried pot, are you one of them? That's not even considering the harder drugs, or prescription mistakes that happen during wide spread testing. Not saying drug use is OK, but do you really want the Gvt. involved in testing you? How about random home searches, you know, just to be safe? Just food for thought...

Larry

beerbelly · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:37:32 AM »

I am ok with that . I can pass a drug test any time. If you can't to bad!
Beerbelly

slim rem 7 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:43:02 AM »

big easy.. i aggree .. although i thought that mabe 90 percent had tried pot at sometime in thier life..
if they would own the truth.. jmo slim

guzzijohn · « **Reply #6 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:45:37 AM »

A little while back there was a thread concerning the use of DNA testing that has caused the release of quite a few from jail. There were quite a few responses saying you can't trust the labs, etc. Why would you then trust the labs to do accurate drug testing? Either you perform your job or you don't, what you do off the job is your business. I remember some years back reading about an air traffic controller that had been on the job for 26 years and had never even taken a sick day and tested positive for cocaine. Normally this was an on the spot firing. His supervisor and his supervisor's supervisor went to bat for him however and the investigation revealed that the urine samples had been switched. How many lab mistakes have ruined careers?
GliderJohn

guzzijohn · « **Reply #7 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:47:40 AM »

Sorry about signing off with a handle I use on another forum.
GuzziJohn

Brett · « **Reply #8 on:** February 11, 2010, 04:54:56 AM »

Quote from: nodlenor on February 11, 2010, 02:47:08 AM

We reciently had a congressman in our state introduce a bill to require welfairites to take drug tests, also the bill would have required our senators and represenitives to do the same. Needless to say it didn't get very far. I was just wondering what everyones thoughts are on this subject. Personally I feel we shouldn't be paying for the drug habits of individuals that are too lazy to work. I worked for the state for 25 years and we were required to take drug tests why not everyone else.

Agree 1000%. If I have to pee in a cup to keep my job I don't see why congressmen or welfare recipients shouldn't have to do the same in order to keep getting their checks.

The same goes for health care. If the proposed health care reforms are so good then our government officials and union employees should have no problem getting on board with it also.

Bigeasy wrote:
"My opinion? Mandatory drug testing in just about any setting can lead down that slippery slope...... OK for welfare, then how about for pistol permits? Not just CDL's, but all drivers lisc.? Maybe mandatory testing before you receive your first Social Security check? About 1/3 of all folks have tried pot, are you one of them? That's not even considering the harder drugs, or prescription mistakes that happen during wide spread testing. Just food for thought...

Larry"

Personally I have no problem with drug testing for any of the above. If your on legally prescribed med's further more sophisticated follow up test along with help from your physician can sort that out and don't tell me they can't. Do you really want someone hooked on crack carrying a gun or driving on the same roads that your family travel?

rex6666 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 11, 2010, 05:31:28 AM »

Good idea i would vote for it.
Yea i tried some pot 40 years ago, don't think that will show up.
Just cause you tried it don't mean you have to stay on it
I would think it might put some folks back to work "if they inforced it"

45-70.gov · « **Reply #10 on:** February 11, 2010, 05:12:38 PM »

can the test for tobacco too??

agreed about the slippery slope

2nd amentment might protect us

to use the public high ways
REQUIRE A YEARLY DRUG CARD JUST LIKE I NEED AT WORK

GREAT IDEA BIG

Squib · « **Reply #11 on:** February 11, 2010, 06:38:12 PM »

I'm also NOT in favor- because it would be turned around on people who are NOT a menace or leeching

va disability checks might require wounded vets to get pee'd every month (got shot in war but took some pills as a civilian so lost the va benefits)
legitimately retired people who paid in on social security (grandpa has glaucoma or terminal cancer, wants to feel good on the way out)

welfare should just stop, period. while it sounds like a good idea to scrutinize those people (welfare bums, eternal dependents) because we KNOW they're not gonna pass, it'll get turned around on everyone sooner or later (sooner). remember that people driving and carrying can do that without a license, let alone a drug-free body. big easy was right guys. my opinion- what america needs is the death penalty, the natural one: people that aren't going to support themselves starve to death.

GH1 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 12, 2010, 01:41:56 AM »

I'd vote for it in a heartbeat, especially if it applied to elected officials.
GH1

billy_56081 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 12, 2010, 01:45:55 AM »

Test them and the politicians too. I take random test for work.

gypsyman · « **Reply #14 on:** February 12, 2010, 01:49:17 AM »

We've already started to slide down the slippery slope. The have police checks around our area for drunk drivers every so often. Doesn't sound right, but, tell that to a person that lost someone to a drunk driver. Seems that the only ones not ''sliding'' down that slope, are the ones that should be checked. gypsyman

45-70.gov · « **Reply #15 on:** February 12, 2010, 03:23:04 AM »

Quote from: Squib on February 11, 2010, 06:38:12 PM

I'm also NOT in favor- because it would be turned around on people who are NOT a menace or leeching

va disability checks might require wounded vets to get pee'd every month (got shot in war but took some pills as a civilian so lost the va benefits)
legitimately retired people who paid in on social security (grandpa has glaucoma or terminal cancer, wants to feel good on the way out)

welfare should just stop, period. while it sounds like a good idea to scrutinize those people (welfare bums, eternal dependents) because we KNOW they're not gonna pass, it'll get turned around on everyone sooner or later (sooner). remember that people driving and carrying can do that without a license, let alone a drug-free body. big easy was right guys. my opinion- what america needs is the death penalty, the natural one: people that aren't going to support themselves starve to death.

you didn't account for the absence of logic

i say let them starve to but it aint going to happen
the democrats need their vote too bad

wareagleguy · « **Reply #16 on:** February 12, 2010, 03:44:42 AM »

The willingness of some here to relinquish liberty is scary. Why not just move to Russia and leave the rest of us alone?

splicer · « **Reply #17 on:** February 12, 2010, 03:56:20 AM »

I agree with wareagle,drug testing is unconstitutional.It also doesnt work.I work in the communications industry and we have random and preemployment drug tests.Its a waste of money and easy to get around.What I do on MY time is no mans business.Pot is harmless,Alcohol has caused more misery in this world than Drugs.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #18 on:** February 12, 2010, 04:06:04 AM »

Quote from: splicer on February 12, 2010, 03:56:20 AM

I agree with wareagle,drug testing is unconstitutional.It also doesnt work.I work in the communications industry and we have random and preemployment drug tests.Its a waste of money and easy to get around.What I do on MY time is no mans business.Pot is harmless,Alcohol has caused more misery in this world than Drugs.

exactly....that why we need to test for alcohol too

we are not talking MANDATORY TESTING

just voluntary testing before you get my money
[or on the road i helped pay for]

i also think before you get welfare you must prove your sterile
so your non-functioning set of genes is terminated with you
non-functioning is determined by the fact you need welfare

billy_56081 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 12, 2010, 04:10:07 AM »

I have to agree with 45-70. And where is this prohibited in the Constitution? I see no ammendment that says you have a right to welfare. Can someone please enlighten me?

wareagleguy · « **Reply #20 on:** February 12, 2010, 04:21:50 AM »

Let us not beat around the bush. Would it not be cheaper to just shoot all that is on welfare?

Sounds like sour grapes here. I know some are using the system and these people should be punished. Just because someone has found themselfs on welfare should not mean a loss of liberty. Just work on getting rid of the people that are using the system.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #21 on:** February 12, 2010, 04:30:12 AM »

Quote from: wareagleguy on February 12, 2010, 04:21:50 AM

Let us not beat around the bush. Would it not be cheaper to just shoot all that is on welfare?

Sounds like sour grapes here. I know some are using the system and these people should be punished. Just because someone has found themselfs on welfare should not mean a loss of liberty. Just work on getting rid of the people that are using the system.

NOW YOU TALKING

what happened for the last few millinium??

those who could not or would not provide for their families
were taken out of the gene pool.....[natural selection]

now drug addiction is an inherited trait [i know it runs in my family]
so test them for drugs and let them and their off spring die out

actually i am not for shooting the maggots
but to coin a phrase

live and let die

magooch · « **Reply #22 on:** February 12, 2010, 04:59:21 AM »

I have never taken an illegal drug in my life and I would be offended if my employer wanted me to take a test. Fortunately they never asked me to take a test. They would require it if a person had an accident, or if your behavior was suspect. That seemed reasonable enough to me.

I believe those existing on the taxpayer's dime should certainly have to be tested, but what if they test positive? I would be okay with shooting them on the spot if the test could be certified, but we all know that isn't ever going to happen. So what do you do--withhold the check? Then what?

The better course would be to have an alternate plan where the real bums would have to go to a supervised work center, which would be far removed from the rest of society. Man what a can of worms that would be.

beerbelly · « **Reply #23 on:** February 12, 2010, 05:19:37 AM »

It looks to me like we have several drug users on here. Oh I know it's only recreational use!

No I do not care wether you use or not. I do care if I have to pay for it or work next to you.
I could care less if you kill your self, but I do care if you kill me!
Beerbelly

Siskiyou · « **Reply #24 on:** February 12, 2010, 05:25:09 AM »

Young extended family member got his Class B drivers license recently. The company he works for sent a truck, and a foreman with him for the testing. Good company support and it shows the kid is interested in advancement. A Class B driver is drugged tested at least twice a year. The company because of insurance requirements conducts additional test during the year to keep premiums down.

Drivers are important to the company and to become a foreman you have to have a Class B license.

The kid gains in another way. If the company has layoffs drivers are shield by none drivers in the lay-off order. The kid says there are none drivers who stay in the category because of the mandatory drug testing. They claim they want to use weed on the weekends. But you have to wonder about the income they a depriving their families of. A driver makes more money per hour, he is the first to get a call if OT is available, and he has additional job security.

It is my opinion that they are not limiting it to the weekends; even the good ones will cross the line.

In my primary job I was subject to drug testing, no big deal. It was a bigger deal for those who were not subject to testing. Early in my retirement I went to work as a driver for a company that required testing for their drivers. No big deal, they pulled me over for drug and alcohol testing a number of times and I had the paper work to show that I tested clean. I always thought that would work for me in the case of an accident. I had documentation of being drug/alcohol free numerous times. Where is the other driver’s documentation?

The kid has applied for a LEO job; he has passed the written test, and is now subject to a long background investigation. I believe a history of clean drug tests will play in his favor.

bilmac · « **Reply #25 on:** February 12, 2010, 06:03:40 AM »

There is always the possibility of an erroneous result. Even a poppy seed bun can make you test pos. If you make the rules hard, it could ruin good careers, if you make them soft, they won't do the job.

Just put the lazy couch potatoes to work

gypsyman · « **Reply #26 on:** February 12, 2010, 06:25:04 AM »

The ability to drive is a privledge, not a right. And, as a person who partakes of adult beverage's, I know my limitations. Getting all houched up and driving, and possibly hurting or killing someone, should be controlled. And, as far as I'm concerned, getting money/welfare/food stamps from the govt. is a privledge, not a right. Don't you dare come into my house and tell me how much to drink. But, if I'm on a public highway, different story. Rights and privledge's, 2 different entities. gypsyman

wareagleguy · « **Reply #27 on:** February 12, 2010, 06:35:28 AM »

Guys,
Testing costs money. Money paid by an employer. You think employees in Mexico get tested. Crap like testing and other expenses is why jobs are being exported. An employer can ask to a test for your job but Uncle Sam asking is another issue all together.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #28 on:** February 12, 2010, 07:32:05 AM »

I read this and see testing as some here are OK with being a little less free . Using testing to right a screwed up welfare sustem is stupid . Same in spades for elected officals . Ok what do you do with a person on welfare on drugs ? switch them to jail ? a recovery program ? where is the money savings .
Ya'll want to fix this problem ? get out and vote DON"T LEAVE IT TO ONE MORE LAW . The tool to right America is the voting machine but we have to use it . Its like loosing weight , it took years to gain and it will take time to loose it . Same for this country , it will take election after election to bring about change we want .

beerbelly · « **Reply #29 on:** February 12, 2010, 09:06:40 AM »

I read this and see testing as some here are OK with being a little less free

Drug testing is here! A great many people must submit to a drug testing to keep their job. Truck drivers, pilots and many others. If they must be tested to earn there money, I sure a hell think welfare folks should have to be tested to get their's. After all the guy being tested is paying for their sorry butts.
If they fell the test kick them off welfare! Why should we pay for their habit?