Drug test

[Nefarious]

Drug testing is a racket. It can really only effectively catch pot users due to the short times in system for other drugs. Meaning unless you go to work high on cocaine or heroin or meth, it's the only way your getting caught and even then, you usually have some type of time to detox.

[sunfan1121]

I agree. I'm not paying taxes so some crackhead can support his habits.

[rpm]

I think every government employee (including politicians and their staff) should have to take a pee test before they test anyone else.
Do as I say, not as I do?

The Daily Show has done the best journalism to date on the growing trend of opportunistic lawmakers introducing legislation to drug test people who receive unemployment benefits.

Daily Show correspondent Aasif Mandvi did a powerful and humorous segment that features elected officials, including Florida Governor Rick Scott, hypocritically forcing poor people to piss in a cup for money to feed their children, but refusing to take the piss test themselves.

The segment successfully counters stereotypes and misinformation (by showing that people who receive benefits do not use drugs more than the general public) and the myth that these tests are about saving taxpayer money (these programs actually cost much more money than they save).

The segment also features Luis Lebron, a navy veteran who is being represented by the ACLU in a lawsuit against the Florida law. Lebron, a father of two, explains that he is unwilling to submit to a drug test because it is a violation of his constitutional right to privacy under the 4th amendment.

Opportunistic elected officials around the country are capitalizing on Americans' economic insecurity by bringing back the "welfare queen" stereotype that President Reagan used so successfully to stigmatize the poor -- instead of looking at the real fiscal waste, like keeping more than 500,000 people behind bars for nothing more than a nonviolent drug offense.

There are now dozens of states that have introduced legislation to drug test people who receive welfare or unemployment benefits -- and more states will surely follow. We need to combat these divisive laws that erode privacy, waste taxpayer money and demonize people who are struggling the most.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-february-2-2012/poor-pee-ple

[RTHolmes]

I think every government employee (including politicians and their staff) should have to take a pee test before they test anyone else.

sounds reasonable, since they are also living off the taxes from the productive economy

[Penguin]

I'm pretty sure that at least in the case of the president, a full physical (one that makes young men like me squirm) is in order annually or even semi-annually in order to keep the president in good working order.

-Penguin

[Golfer]

For those who go to concerts??

What does that mean???

It depends on the tests conducted and your exposure. Second hand marijuana smoke won't cause a positive on a routine screening but that isn't to say it cannot be detected.

THC, opiates, nicotine and any compound really can be detected. The type of screening and tests being conducted and the tolerances all vary depending on the situation.

I'm only referring to routine DOT screens and random drug tests. The tolerances are set to where you need to actually be using or sitting in a cloud of marijuana smoke for a positive to be triggered.

Pre employment, probationary and security screening requirements may vary, void where prohibited by law, only whole supplies last.

[Golfer]

I'm pretty sure that at least in the case of the president, a full physical (one that makes young men like me squirm) is in order annually or even semi-annually in order to keep the president in good working order.

-Penguin

Executive physical. They're not just for presidents and they're very thorough.

[Penguin]

I learn something new every day.

-Penguin

[icepac]

Insurance companies do the bulk of drug usage enforcement.

[BreakingBad]

I think the point is if you're going to go on welfare, you should have to take a drug test.

I think it is a good idea.  If you have enough disposable income to buy illegal drugs, you shouldn't be collecting public assistance.  Or for that matter, using public assistance to fund a drug addiction or habit.

[Rob52240]

I think the point is if you're going to go on welfare, you should have to take a drug test.

I think it is a good idea.  If you have enough disposable income to buy illegal drugs, you shouldn't be collecting public assistance.  Or for that matter, using public assistance to fund a drug addiction or habit.

Some illegal drugs are cheap, and all get shared from time to time.

[Karnak]

The answer, as Florida found out, is no.  It costs far more money to pay for all of the drug tests than it saves by kicking users off of welfare.

Well, that and the fact that it is a politician steering .gov funds to companies that contributed to his/her campaign.

As a money saving plan, this one is sheer idiocy.


A better plan would be to legalize cannabis, regulate and tax it like tobacco.  That saves us huge amounts of money from the criminal justice system, shuts down the black market and associated crime and even generates revenue through the tax on the cannabis as well as the taxes paid by workers who otherwise would have been in prison costing us $40,000/yr to support and all of this for a drug that isn't chemically addictive and is less debilitating than alcohol when intoxicated.

Personally, I still won't use it or other drugs.  There are wonders enough in the universe without dulling one's senses.

[Butcher]

If you are on welfare then you need to pass a drug test to get benefits - I'm sorry but I own rental property and this is just what I see every day.
People that are late 30s and mid 40s collecting social security that do drugs and drink all day - some work day labor to make a few bucks for a score.

Far as work goes - I agree with random testing - I worked for a metal fabrication shop long time ago and remembered they had absolutely no testing what so ever, far as I remember some people were getting drunk and high before work.

Worse case scenario: guy mow'd off 4 fingers to a sawzall because he had a few hits from a joint earlier. He sued the company and eventually won an out of court settlement, the company went bankrupt a few years back.

When I worked for Software spectrum (a third party tech support company) they tested once a month if not twice a month for drugs/alcohol. Problem was the job was extremely stressful and they wanted people to stay mentally fit to handle the stress. They offered a few plans to help cope with the stress, fact you worked 20 minutes each half hour with a 10 minute break, also had a full kitchen and Recreation room to relief stress.

My only problem with drugs is - if you are at home on your couch and decide to fire up a joint - you shouldn't be fired if you test positive 2 weeks later.

[infowars]

he cut fingers off because he smoked a joint...  That doesn't make sense.  Did he admit that.  Why did he win if that was the case?

Oh,  we're being dramatic.

There's probably about 50,000 other problems the state needs to fix first. 

I think politicians should take lie detector tests and full complete background checks, drug tests and make public where their money comes from.

Lets get the state on the up and up before attacking more citizens.

[BreakingBad]

There's probably about 50,000 other problems the state needs to fix first. 

Naaa, this is a pretty good one to start with.  The idea of welfare people sitting around doing illegal drugs while collecting payments from working people bothers me to no end.   

Plus alot of jobs require a drug screening before taking the position.  Someone doing illegal drugs while out of work shows me someone not serious about trying to find employment.