Author Topic: Drug testing for welfare. (Read 4136 times)

ironglow · « **Reply #60 on:** February 02, 2012, 12:19:34 PM »

From Rick;
" Another of us missing the point. Look hard and show me where in the federal Constitution or state Constitution anywhere it says anything about what we are legally allowed to consume in any way."
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Many illegal, immoral or crippling trhings are not specifically mentioned in our constitution. Notice; it doesn't say anything about sticking a pencil in your eye or drinking strychnine..they figured adults knew better ! Why ? Well; those who penned our constitution were primarily Christian men who possessed great intelligence and they assumed a modicum of intelligence and morality by general citizens, so they saw no need for such redundant silliness.

John Adams summed it up quite well when he said;

" Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other".

lakota · « **Reply #61 on:** February 02, 2012, 12:31:26 PM »

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/207697-house-gop-seeks-to-bar-use-of-welfare-funds-at-strip-clubs

I guess this is a violation of a welfare recipient's rights too? After all lap dances and gambling are all guaranteed by the Constitution, right?

clum sum · « **Reply #62 on:** February 02, 2012, 12:51:16 PM »

I have a CDL and I was tested for drugs and alcohol many times, as a condition of employment. I would like to see everyone who are paid with My taxes be it the POTUS or the guy working in the ditch in front of My house be tested and if positive to lose their job, no questions asked.

mechanic · « **Reply #63 on:** February 02, 2012, 12:56:28 PM »

The constitution was written to protect the people from the government. It's only role is to limit government.

Civil law is written to protect us from each other. Sometimes it may be hard to reconcile the two.

One man's rights end when they limit mine. I can't drive drunk, not because it's unconstitutional, but because I have placed someone else's life and property in jeopardy, and thus circumvented their rights.

The problem now is that we have groups of people who think they have "rights' to what someone else has earned, and have no responsiblility attached to their supposed rights.

The constitution does not give anyone a right to someone else's property.

No one has a constitutional right to anything other than to do whats best for themself, without circumventing the rights of others.

For a man to take my money that I sweated for, and buy something that is morally wrong, as well as illegal in the first place makes a mockery of the law.

Those who support others supposed "rights" to health care, a home, food, or anything else that such a one has not labored for, or at best socialists, and certainly don't represent the majority of this great land.

Ben

powderman · « **Reply #64 on:** February 02, 2012, 02:39:33 PM »

Quote

For a man to take my money that I sweated for, and buy something that is morally wrong, as well as illegal in the first place makes a mockery of the law.

MECHANIC. Good post Sir. POWDERMAN.

ironglow · « **Reply #65 on:** February 02, 2012, 03:07:04 PM »

Quote from: powderman on February 02, 2012, 02:39:33 PM

Quote
For a man to take my money that I sweated for, and buy something that is morally wrong, as well as illegal in the first place makes a mockery of the law.

MECHANIC. Good post Sir. POWDERMAN.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
DITTO !!

spitpatch · « **Reply #66 on:** February 02, 2012, 03:38:28 PM »

Ben, That sumed it up perfectly.....spitpatch

turk762 · « **Reply #67 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:47:08 AM »

Very well said mechanic, exactly what I was thinking just couldnt spit it out.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #68 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:58:08 AM »

Quote from: turk762 on February 03, 2012, 02:47:08 AM

Very well said mechanic, exactly what I was thinking just couldnt spit it out.

yep !

but that proves the fed govt has no right to supply wealfare checks.

magooch · « **Reply #69 on:** February 03, 2012, 03:00:24 AM »

Bull's-eye--Mechanic.

rickt300 · « **Reply #70 on:** February 03, 2012, 05:46:21 AM »

Once again I am not advocating drug use. I am advocating the respect for our civil rights. Civil law is supposed to be based on the Constitution. Employers setting themselves up as a form of government is wrong, decreeing drug testing is saying we are all guilty before proven innocent. Who do you think pays for all this drug testing? My personal pique about drug testing began as this episode, I took my drug test and turned in my prescriptions as requested. The idiot that did the drug testing delayed my starting a very good job because he said the test proved I was using Darvocette which was one of the prescription drugs a doctor prescribed and that I had turned in to him. The company decided I was an illegal drug user and hired someone else in the interim 2 weeks it took the testing company to rectify it's mistake. If you drive drunk go to jail. Is there a test for those of us who don't drive drunk that will benefit anyone but the drug testing companies? What about a testing company that is willing to falsify your test results at the whim of the company so they can fire you for whatever reason? I am amazed at the short sighted mind set of so many. It is interesting to see how many of you are willing to sacrifice your rights for no reason you have caused, to be willing to be considered a alchoholic or drug user without probable cause. If you have an accident I see no reason not to be tested as then there is probable cause. A mockery of the law? Politicians make laws, many are sold out to special interests (possibly drug testing companies but many others) so mocking unjust laws is our duty as citizens.

Casull · « **Reply #71 on:** February 03, 2012, 06:05:56 AM »

Quote

Employers setting themselves up as a form of government is wrong, decreeing drug testing is saying we are all guilty before proven innocent.

First, you don't have a constitutional right to a job with company X. Second, drug testing is no more proclaiming one guilty than would requiring a background check or credit report. A company has every right to know who it is employing.

Quote

What about a testing company that is willing to falsify your test results at the whim of the company so they can fire you for whatever reason?

IF that is true and it can be proven, then that company could be sued for tortious interference with a contract. Big bucks.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #72 on:** February 03, 2012, 06:36:48 AM »

CIVIL RIGHTS , good point explain how my rights are not violated when money is taken to support those who refuse to work and many who indulge in the illegal drug trade also costing me in tax increases ?
If drug testing is a prerequisite to getting a hand out I see little difference that screening at an airport as nither is a RIGHT !

BUGEYE · « **Reply #73 on:** February 03, 2012, 06:38:17 AM »

I was drug tested close to 200 times with Delta. it was better to test me than to let me cause a multi million airplane to crash and kill hundreds of people. the nurse at the testing station would offer me a coke or coffee, I could read or watch tv until I could "go"
a company requiring drug tests is not unconstitutional. they have the right to protect their assets.
lots of places don't require tests. go work there.
no, I was not a pilot, but was in a very sensitive job.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #74 on:** February 03, 2012, 06:55:24 AM »

My company does random drug testing, manditory drug and alcohol testing to be hired, as well as a drivers liscense check, and a credit check, and a background check. First you are working with gas, so not funny stuff on the job, because you can get someone killed. Second you will be driving a company truck, so you need to be a good driver without speeding or reckless driving tickets. Don't know why the credit check, but that helps weed people out since just one job posting gets about 200 applications. We are hiring someone now, and weeded down the about 200 to 5. So, we only interview 5. So many young people can't pass a drug test, or have a bad driving record.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #75 on:** February 03, 2012, 06:55:51 AM »

If you get down to brass tacks the reason some can't get a job is they can't pass a drug test.

Heather · « **Reply #76 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:01:33 AM »

I feel that the Government has no authority to TRAMPLE my RIGHTS. I am guaranteed PERSONAL LIBERTY under the Bill of Rights, and I can't think of anything more personal than what I put in my body. That being said, I also believe that the Government has no authority to TAKE CARE OF THOSE WHO WON'T TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. I am almost sure it was Nathan Hale who said during revolutionary times "Give me liberty or give me death." Unless people realize that true Liberty can only be achieved when the people want nothing from the government other than the roles laid out in the Constitution, then we will continue to be stuck in an endless cycle of loosing liberty to gain handouts. Do I think they should drug test those wanting benefits, heck no, there should be no benefits. Either you work or you go hungry...survival of the fittest and all.
Heather

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #77 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:10:00 AM »

Quote from: Heather on February 03, 2012, 07:01:33 AM

I feel that the Government has no authority to TRAMPLE my RIGHTS. I am guaranteed PERSONAL LIBERTY under the Bill of Rights, and I can't think of anything more personal than what I put in my body. That being said, I also believe that the Government has no authority to TAKE CARE OF THOSE WHO WON'T TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. I am almost sure it was Nathan Hale who said during revolutionary times "Give me liberty or give me death." Unless people realize that true Liberty can only be achieved when the people want nothing from the government other than the roles laid out in the Constitution, then we will continue to be stuck in an endless cycle of loosing liberty to gain handouts. Do I think they should drug test those wanting benefits, heck no, there should be no benefits. Either you work or you go hungry...survival of the fittest and all.
Heather

I believe you will find the qoute was from Patrick Henry in Richmond Va. Before the war.

Heather · « **Reply #78 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:16:57 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on February 03, 2012, 07:10:00 AM

Quote from: Heather on February 03, 2012, 07:01:33 AM
I feel that the Government has no authority to TRAMPLE my RIGHTS. I am guaranteed PERSONAL LIBERTY under the Bill of Rights, and I can't think of anything more personal than what I put in my body. That being said, I also believe that the Government has no authority to TAKE CARE OF THOSE WHO WON'T TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. I am almost sure it was Nathan Hale who said during revolutionary times "Give me liberty or give me death." Unless people realize that true Liberty can only be achieved when the people want nothing from the government other than the roles laid out in the Constitution, then we will continue to be stuck in an endless cycle of loosing liberty to gain handouts. Do I think they should drug test those wanting benefits, heck no, there should be no benefits. Either you work or you go hungry...survival of the fittest and all.
Heather

I believe you will find the qoute was from Patrick Henry in Richmond Va. Before the war.

LOL! I said I was almost sure. I know that one said the above quote, and the other said, "I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country."Thanks for the brain jog.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #79 on:** February 03, 2012, 07:25:48 AM »

Both were good words for sure.
I grew up about 25 blocks from the church P.H. spoke so I had to say something , no harm ment. Hey it was drilled into us at school.

briarpatch · « **Reply #80 on:** February 03, 2012, 09:29:04 AM »

I dont believe a working man that pays his own way should be tested for drugs or anything else.
I do believe if you get government assistance you should be tested daily.
I dont believe the 2% of welfare people on drugs deal. They must have tested the very old or somehow knew who to select. Every person I know, everyone receiving welfare is a drunk, druggy or both. some of them in my family. They would not work at testing beds, to lazy to breath. The only time they move much is when they sell their vote for a pol that promises them more.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #81 on:** February 03, 2012, 11:01:21 AM »

If I have to be drug tested, and I pay my taxes, then they should be tested. Again, some jobs are dealing with high voltage electricity or high pressure gas lines. Can't have alcohol, drugs, or such while working. It is a danger to others, not just themselves. My contractor fired a welder last summer for drinking a beer at lunch. The contractor happened to go to the same resturant and saw him. Can't have a burn through a high pressure gas line with compromised responses.

DDZ · « **Reply #82 on:** February 03, 2012, 12:23:12 PM »

If everyone was responsible and did the right thing companies would not need to drug test, but irresponsibility seems to be a spreading disease. How can we expect companies that serve the public to not drug test, when they are liable for public safety. Like natural gas companies, truck drivers that haul heavy loads or hazardous materials. Or bus drivers, pilots, or cruise ship captains. If one of these types of employees has an accident because of drug use, it could cause injury, and loss of life to others. I'm glad that there is drug testing for certain jobs, because I don't trust everyone to do the right thing and be responsible while on the job where they could endanger me or others. How you you like a drugged up school bus driver taking your kids to school? Or flying in a plane with a smoked up pilot in the cockpit? Or a drugged up truck driver hauling a highly explosive or toxic chemical. Certain companies have to drug test their employees, for their own protection, and the protection of the general public. It would be insane for them not to.

Dixie my nephew got a job for the gas company I work for, but lost it when his back round check revealed a prier DUI, and for a fight he was involved in more than a year before. It has been made known anyone caught using illegal drugs, its instant termination.

BUGEYE · « **Reply #83 on:** February 03, 2012, 01:01:24 PM »

drug testing can save lives. besides, don't the business owners etc. have rights too. they make the rules for employment. if a person don't want to be tested, they can get a job picking tomatoes or something.

Gary G · « **Reply #84 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:08:46 PM »

Quote from: BUGEYE on February 03, 2012, 01:01:24 PM

drug testing can save lives. besides, don't the business owners etc. have rights too. they make the rules for employment. if a person don't want to be tested, they can get a job picking tomatoes or something.

Now if a company wants to test and it is made known up front, I will be the one to decide if I want the job or not. This is justifiable.
However, if the government wants to require it as in this example, that being those who want to be my overlord and run my life for me because they think they know better than I. It is something that I had rather do myself, for the reverse is not freedom.
As for welfare recipients, this is a typical unintended consequence of unconstitutional law by or overlords in Washington; a result of meddling in other peoples lives. It is a good example of government passing another law to repair the unintended consequency of their original law; a process that never ends until the system breaks.

BUGEYE · « **Reply #85 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:19:42 PM »

uh Gary G, the government is meddling in my life when they steal my money and give it to those who won't work. if I'm gonna subsidize them, I want to make the rules and one of those rules is get tested.

ironglow · « **Reply #86 on:** February 03, 2012, 02:30:28 PM »

Quote from: BUGEYE on February 03, 2012, 02:19:42 PM

uh Gary G, the government is meddling in my life when they steal my money and give it to those who won't work. if I'm gonna subsidize them, I want to make the rules and one of those rules is get tested.

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Only fair that one who's money is being "invested" have a voice in how it is invested... Even if that money is taken by government... under force..

Gary G · « **Reply #87 on:** February 03, 2012, 03:21:56 PM »

Quote from: ironglow on February 03, 2012, 02:30:28 PM

Quote from: BUGEYE on February 03, 2012, 02:19:42 PM
uh Gary G, the government is meddling in my life when they steal my money and give it to those who won't work. if I'm gonna subsidize them, I want to make the rules and one of those rules is get tested.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Only fair that one who's money is being "invested" have a voice in how it is invested... Even if that money is taken by government... under force..

The government sure is meddling in your life, in fact it is theft by force when they take that money from you with threats of prison or fines. I cannot take your money like that without going to jail. The government can pass a law making it legal for them to steal. That shows you that they are the few who live at the expense of the many and it is a wonder why we so easily let them, and some even look up to them.

Now, just how are you going to have a voice?

The only solution is a constitutional government in which welfare is slowly phased out.

Oh, that will never happen, especially if you vote against it as you both have indicated.

osokusmc · « **Reply #88 on:** February 03, 2012, 04:21:33 PM »

Quote from: turk762 on February 02, 2012, 03:31:29 AM

To many people think that FREEDOM is absolute, it is not, we need laws rules and guidelines to follow or it would not work.

Absolute freedom means no laws to govern.

If we have absolute freedom I could go into someones home, steal their things, rape their wife, kill their dog and children and their would be nothing anyone can do about it. This is true FREEDOM.

Doesnt sound that great to me.

We need to have some laws and guides to follow for protection of all. You may disagree with some of them and that is fine, a majority of the public want the drug laws where they are, (except cal. LOL)

Some laws are need for the greater good of everyone, if crappy laws are put out we band together to have them changed.

Your freedom ends at the point you infringe on another's freedom, we don't need any laws beyond that. Men, whether a part of the government or not, need to deal with their fellow men through reason, not force. If your cause requires the forced participation of another, then your cause is flawed. If your cause is good, you'll not need force, but only reason to get others to go along with you.

osokusmc · « **Reply #89 on:** February 03, 2012, 04:34:47 PM »

Do you suppose drug testing companies have an opinion on this, and do you suppose that their opinion is strong enough that they may even send some money to politicians who would support legislation that would help their business? The solution is to end welfare, not make another aspect for the government to oversee in the same proficient manner that they oversee everything else. Every dollar that goes to Washington should be earmarked, and it should be earmarked by the guy who sent it.