The Pee Test

[ledhedsymbols]

"Can we include bi-weekly testing of all government employees, including military and subcontractors, who are currently using potentially dangerous equipment?"

As the current Pee-Boss (Urinalysis Guy) for my comand, I can tell you that the military already has a testing protocol. It's computer based, so it is random. I test 30% of the command per month. Sometimes you come up two weeks in a row, sometimes you go six weeks without testing. After an accident in the early 80s involving dope and a flight deck accident on an aircraft carrier, the Navy is pretty serious about it. You will find yourself looking for a new job lickety-split.

Micah

[Evans, Marv]

Don't get me starte on this. I had to work with the welfare population for about 7 years. Don't get me started.

[john70t]

I'm actually for the legalization of pot and minor amounts of other drugs- keeps the money in the US and rightfully identifies it as a medical/psychological problem. Use the sales/taxes to provide educational alternatives for childhood angst and boredom.

Hemp also has powerful industrial uses as well: from strong fibers for clothing, paper, and fiberboard to its nutritional seed. Why not use it?

On welfare though, it's the gub'ments money, so it's the gub'ments rules and one less detrimental factor in their rehab.
When they have their own jobs, then they can find out if they are functional users.

[Rick Lee]

Legalization is a separate issue. I wouldn't mind it either. But just like I don't welfare recipients blowing their checks on smokes and booze, which is perfectly legal, I wouldn't want them blowing it on weed either. Earn your own paycheck and you can spend it as you wish. Get on the public dole and there should be some restrictions.

[notfarnow]

They shouldn't be able to spend it on condoms either. I don't think they should be able to lay around all day having more sex than me.

No wait, maybe they SHOULD have to buy condoms...

Aargh... legislating people's lives is hard!

[Rick Lee]

Oh, and getting pregnent while a ward of the state should get you cut off immediately.

[Tobra]

Originally posted by gprsh924
Why not just make welfare a work program...kind of like a new deal, instead of just giving people money make them earn it and at the same time they can, idk clean up trash on federal roads, things of that nature that the government spends so much money on every year

That would never happen. The scofflaws don't want to work, hence on the dole. You could get them out there, but they would do a poor job, which I guess would not matter for some of the menial stuff. SHould have prison labor out there too, bring back the chain gang

[notfarnow]

As for legalization of marijuana, even Britain is reconsidering its leniant legislation:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article332383.ece

The original decision to drop cannabis's status to C also reflected advice that it carries a lower risk of addiction and health-related problems than other drugs. However, fresh studies have since indicated that there is a strong link between the drug and "psychotic symptoms".

I think that you have to go one way or another: either legalize it with taxation & regulation, or keep it illegal.

I worry that decriminalization alone would put WAY too much money in the drug trade. People sometimes have a utopian vision of marijuana being grown by nice old hippies beside crops of corn. Not so, the marijuana is a mafia-controled, violent business.

Furthermore, the marijuana we (err, I mean some folks who partake in such illagal activitiues) get today is a whole different drug than it was in the 60's & 70's, it can be a very hard drug. The biggest problem is you don't know if you're goig to get a mild buzz, or end up laying on your back, seeing spots and speeking to God.

That unpredictability is dangerous. Imagine if you didn't know whether one beer would get you flat-faced drunk?

[wludavid]

But the very reason it's a mafia-conrolled, violent business is because it's illegal. If we legalized and regulated it (or any other drug) the price would go down because importers and producers wouldn't have to charge extra for risk, the profits would go to legitimate business people and be taxed, and abusers wouldn't fear reprisal if they wanted help.

This is not a new argument. I just don't understand why it's not taken more seriously.

[notfarnow]

Originally posted by Rick Lee
Oh, and getting pregnant while a ward of the state should get you cut off immediately.

One of my best friends works in "intake" for social assistance. He meets the clients and sets them up. We've had a lot of VERY interesting conversations about this stuff.

For example, sometimes they know that a mother is stretching the truth, or not disclosing all the pertinent info for their application.

However, as soon as children are involved there is A LOT more leniency. There is a lot of focus on getting the kids in child care and after school programs, with the goal of breaking the cycle. Also a lot more follow-ups from social services to ensure the kids are attending school and being well cared for. Social workers are encouraged to promote programs like Big Brothers & Sisters, where kids are likely to have positive relationships and be exposed to good role models.

I'd think cutting off parents could have REALLY disastrous results.

[notfarnow]

Originally posted by wludavid
But the very reason it's a mafia-conrolled, violent business is because it's illegal. If we legalized and regulated it (or any other drug) the price would go down because importers and producers wouldn't have to charge extra for risk, the profits would go to legitimate business people and be taxed, and abusers wouldn't fear reprisal if they wanted help.

This is not a new argument. I just don't understand why it's not taken more seriously.

Agree 100%

I'm just saying decriminalization of posession, by itself, is not necessarily a good step. It would leave the production & profit in the hands of criminals.

[svandamme]

i don't understand why y'all accept random piss test period
not one country in the EU allows that... unless you are obviously impaired at work , your employer has no business invading ones personal privacy

[Rick Lee]

Originally posted by svandamme
i don't understand why y'all accept random piss test period
not one country in the EU allows that... unless you are obviously impaired at work , your employer has no business invading ones personal privacy

Because I want to keep my job. My employer does not have the same restrictions the government has.

[svandamme]

i was speaking as a populace, y'all have accepted them and not made it a point with your legislators to get privacy laws instated to prevent it from happening...

i for one would consider a randomp pee test an invasion of my privacy, and in turn of my personal freedom

[Rick Lee]

Doesn't bother me, since my employer pays for my health insurance, I am considered on-call all the time, can work remotely and do a lot of gov't. contracting. I don't think recreational drug use would harm my company much, but there are plenty of industries where I would like to see testing done a lot. How many times in the last few years have you heard about pilots showing up for work drunk? How would you like to be on those flights?

[svandamme]

Originally posted by Rick Lee
How many times in the last few years have you heard about pilots showing up for work drunk?

quite a few times actually
but those are special jobs, hauling 200 people around requires some higher standards then sitting behind a pc

i'm talking deskworkers doing piss tests

if a deskworker stops performing, changes appearance for the worse, looks grungy, dirty , acts strange sure,

but anybody who performs, doesn't fly planes, drives busses or boats... doesn't act weird, embarras or do dangerous things.... should not be bugged with piss tests, what you do at home is your business

[Rick Lee]

Honestly, I think companies do this for reduced insurance rates. My company only requires it if you start acting like you mentioned above and they are very liberal about recommending and paying for all kinds fo treatment.

[svandamme]

that's fine then, but the problem is random tests, in companies who actually use it randomly... there is no law in the us , that protects your privacy , unless i'm mistaken, if so, feel free to correct me

the problem is , that some folks, are good workers, don't misbehave, perform, and do no harm, yet they occasionally smoke a joint on a saturday evening or something like that...show up on monday straight as an arrow, happy , performing, nothing wrong with em...

and the company can give them a piss test that monday, and ruin a career and in some cases even a life... even if the employee was top notch on all counts...

while a regular boozer , can go on a bender on sunday , show up on monday with a freshly shaven mug, washed and fresh clothes, still have x milligrams alcohol in his blood, and be very much impaired and have a very bad "case of the mondays"
and get away clean...

[Rick Lee]

Are you under the impression that life is fair?

[svandamme]

maybe not entirely , but that sort of stuff cannot happen to me... so in that respect, it is for me