2007-11-17 01:35:49 · 19 answers · asked by The prophet of DOOM 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I also posted this on my blog. I think it's a really good idea. What do you think? Just curious.
2007-11-17 01:36:47 · update #1
This was actually dent to me via email by a friend today....and he happens to be a Dem!
2007-11-17 01:38:01 · update #2
Sorry about my spelling this morning.
2007-11-17 01:41:35 · update #3
Hey Hoo Hubba Hubba!!!! Now you're talking!! I love that idea. I have a few of my own regarding the welfare debacle in our country. Keep up the great thinking!!!!
Edit- I wonder how many of these "thumbs down" ratings are from welfare leeches.
2007-11-17 01:40:05 · answer #1 · answered by Miss Delanne 6 · 7⤊ 4⤋
I'm all for it.
But as an employer myself, I can tell you that people go to great extremes to fool the urine test. I've had people tested that I know beyond reasonable doubt that they are doing drugs yet they pass the test.
Urine test, to be accurate, must be random, and the testee must be supervised from the moment they are notified of the test until the specimen is taken.
If a welfare drug addict knew they were subject to testing, as are parolees, they would simply regularly take masking agents available at every drug store in America to hide the fact they are using drugs.
All in all, it's a good idea, but it would be a waste of taxpayers money. It's just too easy to beat a drug test.
2007-11-17 09:56:38 · answer #2 · answered by Perplexed Bob 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I have no problem with that idea...If you have money for drugs and alcohol then you do not need MY money!!
Edit:
If you fail a drug test you should have to provide proof of rehab and agree to be tested randomly (even at your house) before being allowed to apply for help again.
P.S. I don't worry about spelling and grammar. If I can understand the question or point, I'm happy. Nit picking is the sign of a small mind concerned with small issues.
2007-11-17 09:57:25 · answer #3 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You know the real reason they don't want to test them, right? If they find any drug users, they can't just say "no, you don't get the check". The welfare office will have to detain them and have the police take them. The system will have to provide drug counselling and rehab. So the government people just turn a blind eye to avoid having to deal with it.
By the way, it's fun to think about what jobs require a urine test. I came up with mostly jobs where you work with machinery. For safety reasons...
2007-11-17 09:52:39 · answer #4 · answered by averagebear 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I take a lot of opiate based pain meds. I once took a pee test for a job and of course, it came up dirty for opiates. It didn't matter. They hired me anyway and told me that if I had come up positive for THC (the active ingredient in cannabis), they would not have hired me.
Pee tests are fascistic. They are a form of illegal search and seizure. They are irrational. Why is it okay for one to hit the bars on the way home and it's not okay to smoke a fattie after work? It's hypocrisy at its best. Nobody, not welfare recipients, or hard working people, should be subjected to this nazi intrusion into their personal life. The whole war on drugs is a dismal failure and complete waste of tax payers dollars. It is based on LIES and disinformation. But then, that is what the American government does best.
Testing should only be done, if at all, when an employee gives an employer reason to suspect a problem. It is like punishing a person for a crime they have yet to commit. It goes against whatever "values" this country has left. To accept this personal invasion is the first step toward a fascist state. Start Goose-steppin' baby!
2007-11-17 10:05:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
They have to attend courses before they can be approved for their first check- I know this because my friend and her husband are currently in the midst of such a crisis.
I think a simple urine test at the time of application should be mandatory, it just makes sense.
2007-11-17 09:49:44 · answer #6 · answered by amosunknown 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Interesting and thought provoking question. I'm a liberal Democrat, but then I have to pee in a jar to get a job.
Maybe you're onto something.
2007-11-17 12:00:55 · answer #7 · answered by Terry 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Capital Idea, although the libs would scream that it violates privacy yadda yadda, and we can't have THAT ruining the entitlement programs now, can we? Hmph.
2007-11-17 14:53:12 · answer #8 · answered by Zipperhead 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
..."Yes" ! excellent question. Now see if you can get the Government to implement it... The A.C.L.U. will file suit against it and every "slug" sucking up the "handouts" will run to "mommy Hillary" and cry... Great idea tho....
2007-11-17 21:37:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Both my children had to prove that they were never arrested for a drug offense on their FAFSA. Which means they couldn't even borrow money much less get it for free if they had been.
Seems like a resonable standard for anyone who expects anything at all from the government.
2007-11-17 09:42:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋