PDA

View Full Version : drug testing



pat addis
12-31-2010, 09:31 AM
i was a truck mechanic for 40 yrs.before injuries forced retirement and as such is had random drug tests. this got me thinking don't you think the police and politicians should have to also.what about people on welfare and those poor souls that couldn't find jobs for 99 weeks and had to extend unemployment to feed their families,any one i missed?

road kill
12-31-2010, 09:43 AM
i was a truck mechanic for 40 yrs.before injuries forced retirement and as such is had random drug tests. this got me thinking don't you think the police and politicians should have to also.what about people on welfare and those poor souls that couldn't find jobs for 99 weeks and had to extend unemployment to feed their families,any one i missed?

If we really wanted to end drug abuse, testing would be a requirement for all entitlement handout recipients.

No one should be on an entitlement unless they are clean and trying.


I know, how heartless of me.........:mad:


RK

david gibson
12-31-2010, 09:52 AM
If we really wanted to end drug abuse, testing would be a requirement for all entitlement handout recipients.

No one should be on an entitlement unless they are clean and trying.


I know, how heartless of me.........:mad:


RK

as of 1998: "In the past, scholars have noted that there were more White families in America on welfare than there were Blacks. That is no longer the case. Blacks now outnumber Whites. Black and Hispanic welfare recipients combined now outnumber Whites 2-1, according to a New York Times report."

there is some fluctuation year to year, but the percentage of blacks is higher than the general population every year.

so you cannot drug test them or it would be racist. and dont forget, its all our fault they are there in the first place. all we have to do is pay reparations and all will be well.

Franco
12-31-2010, 09:58 AM
I'll take it a step further;

Any person that is a career ward of the Fed Gov. should have thier reproductive abilities restricted!

mjh345
12-31-2010, 10:04 AM
I'll take it a step further;

Any person that is a career ward of the Fed Gov. should have thier reproductive abilities restricted!

Bingo!!!
If you can't afford to take care of you and your spawn, and the govt has to pick up the tab, the govt should be able to ensure that you dont add to the {bottom}of the gene pool

Franco
12-31-2010, 10:10 AM
Bingo!!!
If you can't afford to take care of you and your spawn, and the govt has to pick up the tab, the govt should be able to ensure that you dont add to the {bottom}of the gene pool



The Fed Gov. is a function of tax payers. As a tax payer, I have the right to demand that our Fed Gov. handle the matter in a manner which is most beneficial to the country!

BonMallari
12-31-2010, 10:20 AM
I'll take it a step further;

Any person that is a career ward of the Fed Gov. should have thier reproductive abilities restricted!


Bingo!!!
If you can't afford to take care of you and your spawn, and the govt has to pick up the tab, the govt should be able to ensure that you dont add to the {bottom}of the gene pool

as much as you both would like to limit one's ability to repopulate the planet, the country/society cant even agree on the rights of the unborn or an individuals rights to terminate pregnancy..so restricting an individuals reproductive rights would be a stretch

Julie R.
12-31-2010, 10:23 AM
Bingo!!!
If you can't afford to take care of you and your spawn, and the govt has to pick up the tab, the govt should be able to ensure that you dont add to the {bottom}of the gene pool


http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/Best.gifhttp://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/yourock.gif

HAHAHA... Healy some of your posts of late have worried me but PC or not, I ***SO**** agree with this one. Everyone agrees the gene pool needs a little chlorine and this would be a good start towards halting the dumbing down of America. If you can't feed em don't breed em.

Julie R.
12-31-2010, 10:24 AM
as much as you both would like to limit one's ability to repopulate the planet, the country/society cant even agree on the rights of the unborn or an individuals rights to terminate pregnancy..so restricting an individuals reproductive rights would be a stretch

Just because you're on a diet doesn't mean you can't look at the menu and fantasize.

dnf777
12-31-2010, 11:05 AM
The Fed Gov. is a function of tax payers. As a tax payer, I have the right to demand that our Fed Gov. handle the matter in a manner which is most beneficial to the country!

Franco...LOVE the Avatar!

Nothing like a little Blue Dog!

I really wanted an original last time in NOLA, but decided a new truck would be more useful. (and a little cheaper!)

menmon
12-31-2010, 11:06 AM
If we really wanted to end drug abuse, testing would be a requirement for all entitlement handout recipients.

No one should be on an entitlement unless they are clean and trying.


I know, how heartless of me.........:mad:


RK

That is the problem. I don't want some child going without because of their loser parents. If it was not for that, I would agree with every thing said.

dnf777
12-31-2010, 11:16 AM
I'll take it a step further;

Any person that is a career ward of the Fed Gov. should have thier reproductive abilities restricted!

Hmmmm....seems like I've heard that somewhere before, and got attacked for being anti-woman! :rolleyes:

luvmylabs23139
12-31-2010, 11:33 AM
That is the problem. I don't want some child going without because of their loser parents. If it was not for that, I would agree with every thing said.

That may be how you feel but I should not have to pay for someones kid. That is just total theft and redistribution of wealth.
There is another simple solution.
Many people have been waiting for a long time to adopt infants. Why not simply give those babies to those who can care for them on their own.
Let's be real it would be in the best interest of the infant. That is much beter than waiting a few years and then the kid is already screwed up and unadoptable when it is finally taken from the useless "parent".

dnf777
12-31-2010, 11:38 AM
That may be how you feel but I should not have to pay for someones kid. That is just total theft and redistribution of wealth.
There is another simple solution.
Many people have been waiting for a long time to adopt infants. Why not simply give those babies to those who can care for them on their own.
Let's be real it would be in the best interest of the infant. That is much beter than waiting a few years and then the kid is already screwed up and unadoptable when it is finally taken from the useless "parent".


And who, besides big government and YOU get to decide who is a worthless parent?

that is the greatest example of intrusive, big gov't. and I though conservatives were for smaller gov't and less intrusion?

Franco
12-31-2010, 11:45 AM
Rodrigue is best know for his Jolie Blonde. The original hangs in a restaurant named after her in the Oil Center, Lafayette.



http://i716.photobucket.com/albums/ww167/gumboyaya_2009/jolieblondesilkscreen4.jpg

Franco
12-31-2010, 11:49 AM
Hmmmm....seems like I've heard that somewhere before, and got attacked for being anti-woman! :rolleyes:

Doesn't matter which sex they are. There are procedures for both.

luvmylabs23139
12-31-2010, 11:57 AM
And who, besides big government and YOU get to decide who is a worthless parent?

that is the greatest example of intrusive, big gov't. and I though conservatives were for smaller gov't and less intrusion?

OK lets rephrase that. Why should someone be given taxpayer money for their kid. They can either pay for it themselves or if they can't afford it they should give the child up for adoption rather than let the child suffer.
Let it remain the parent's choice but don't make the taxpayer be funding their child.
This proposal completely eliminates any big brother. That includes "Big brothers" money.
Simply put I should not pay for someone's kid.
I'm all for eliminating all gov't involvement especially gov't (taxpayer) money.

BonMallari
12-31-2010, 11:58 AM
Doesn't matter which sex they are. There are procedures for both.

didnt some madman from the 1940's attempt the same sort of maneuver and attempt genocide of entire race of people...surely you're not suggesting something along that path

Cody Covey
12-31-2010, 12:02 PM
And who, besides big government and YOU get to decide who is a worthless parent?

that is the greatest example of intrusive, big gov't. and I though conservatives were for smaller gov't and less intrusion?

Outside of the sterilization topic (I assume most of that was in jest?) how is someone going to the government for a handout and the government wanting to make sure they are not on drugs an intrusion of the government. I had to get a drug test before working for my current job and I don't get free money I have to listen to people complain all day long how their stuff is broke :)

Julie R.
12-31-2010, 12:12 PM
didnt some madman from the 1940's attempt the same sort of maneuver and attempt genocide of entire race of people...surely you're not suggesting something along that path

No genocide envisioned, and no elimination of entire races. Although we all know it's a pipe dream, what would be wrong with sterilizing losers that can't even take care of themselves? No one race has a monopoly on sorriness, but why should ANY of them get PAID to dump their spawn for the rest of us to pick up the tab for? And we all know the zillions spent on their entitlement isn't being spent on nutritious food and warm clothes, it's going up the parents' noses, slurped out of 40 oz. bottles or smoked; although some of the luckier children get plumped up like fattening hogs on twinkies, Happy Meals and soda.

Franco
12-31-2010, 12:13 PM
didnt some madman from the 1940's attempt the same sort of maneuver and attempt genocide of entire race of people...surely you're not suggesting something along that path

Having reread my post, I don't see where you would get that idea. We are talking about career wards of the state with no discrimination for race, color, sex or creed.

BonMallari
12-31-2010, 12:25 PM
No genocide envisioned, and no elimination of entire races. Although we all know it's a pipe dream, what would be wrong with sterilizing losers that can't even take care of themselves? No one race has a monopoly on sorriness, but why should ANY of them get PAID to dump their spawn for the rest of us to pick up the tab for? And we all know the zillions spent on their entitlement isn't being spent on nutritious food and warm clothes, it's going up the parents' noses, slurped out of 40 oz. bottles or smoked; although some of the luckier children get plumped up like fattening hogs on twinkies, Happy Meals and soda.

I am not disagreeing with you per se...but we cant even close the borders, yet thousand of illegals reproduce and you and I pick up the tab on them and their families...how would you even propose that we as a society decide who gets to have children and who doesnt ?

I would venture a guess that certain demographics and certain ethnicities are statistically responsible for population explosions, but until we stop their infusion into the country then you can start with other alternatives

Eric Johnson
12-31-2010, 12:33 PM
You might be interested in the Supreme Ct case Buck v. Bell (274 U.S. 200 (1927)). A good summation is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell. This the case that Mr. Justice Holmes concluded his argument with the now famous statement "Three generations of imbeciles are enough".

Eric

Franco
12-31-2010, 12:34 PM
I am not disagreeing with you per se...but we cant even close the borders, yet thousand of illegals reproduce and you and I pick up the tab on them and their families...how would you even propose that we as a society decide who gets to have children and who doesnt ?

I would venture a guess that certain demographics and certain ethnicities are statistically responsible for population explosions, but until we stop their infusion into the country then you can start with other alternatives

Yes, I agree. It all starts with real Immigration Reform and I'm not talking about the MCCain/Kennedy version. Or the Dream Act bs. I'm talking new laws that protect not only citizens but thier future.

Cody Covey
12-31-2010, 01:00 PM
No genocide envisioned, and no elimination of entire races. Although we all know it's a pipe dream, what would be wrong with sterilizing losers that can't even take care of themselves? No one race has a monopoly on sorriness, but why should ANY of them get PAID to dump their spawn for the rest of us to pick up the tab for? And we all know the zillions spent on their entitlement isn't being spent on nutritious food and warm clothes, it's going up the parents' noses, slurped out of 40 oz. bottles or smoked; although some of the luckier children get plumped up like fattening hogs on twinkies, Happy Meals and soda.

Who doesn't love a 40 and some twinkies :)

Marvin S
12-31-2010, 02:27 PM
Bingo!!!
If you can't afford to take care of you and your spawn, and the govt has to pick up the tab, the govt should be able to ensure that you dont add to the {bottom}of the gene pool





http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/Best.gifhttp://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/yourock.gif



HAHAHA... Healy some of your posts of late have worried me but PC or not, I ***SO**** agree with this one. Everyone agrees the gene pool needs a little chlorine and this would be a good start towards halting the dumbing down of America. If you can't feed em don't breed em.


No genocide envisioned, and no elimination of entire races. Although we all know it's a pipe dream, what would be wrong with sterilizing losers that can't even take care of themselves? No one race has a monopoly on sorriness, but why should ANY of them get PAID to dump their spawn for the rest of us to pick up the tab for? And we all know the zillions spent on their entitlement isn't being spent on nutritious food and warm clothes, it's going up the parents' noses, slurped out of 40 oz. bottles or smoked; although some of the luckier children get plumped up like fattening hogs on twinkies, Happy Meals and soda.

That makes 3 of us not PC on this issue. Several years back I was more active in politics. We had a perennial candidate for state office whom everyone praised as being conservative & saying his wife was more so. Happened to talk to her at a meet the candidate night. She was talking about her adult child who was mentally challenged having a girlfriend. Her Hope was that they could conceive so she could have a grandchild. One of the major problems with all this taxpayer funded conception is they treat them like pets that can be discarded at the local pound, which in these cases is the local hoosegow.

road kill
12-31-2010, 02:34 PM
Hmmmm....seems like I've heard that somewhere before, and got attacked for being anti-woman! :rolleyes:

No, that was the DADT thread.......;-)


(I'm kidding)


RK

mjh345
12-31-2010, 04:10 PM
That is the problem. I don't want some child going without because of their loser parents. If it was not for that, I would agree with every thing said.

I'm not advocating starving children. I do advocate limiting the amount of children you can have, if you can't support them. You want a check then take ovuplant or whatever.
I'd go further and not give a check, but a voucher for staples like flour, beans, cheese, rice, lard, hamburger etc.; God forbid they may learn how to cook and get a job skill. Also If you have money for booze, cigs, drugs, big screen TV's etc, then you don't need my money for food, shelter etc

I also know that they now get a "credit card" to purchase their food[frequently, convenience foods & better cuts of meat than I'm buying]. I presume this is to not offend their dignity, but what right to dignity do you have or deserve if you can't take care of you and your spawn? Furthermore why do they need convenience foods? If they ain't working they have all day to cook

charly_t
12-31-2010, 04:44 PM
That makes 3 of us not PC on this issue. Several years back I was more active in politics. We had a perennial candidate for state office whom everyone praised as being conservative & saying his wife was more so. Happened to talk to her at a meet the candidate night. She was talking about her adult child who was mentally challenged having a girlfriend. Her Hope was that they could conceive so she could have a grandchild. One of the major problems with all this taxpayer funded conception is they treat them like pets that can be discarded at the local pound, which in these cases is the local hoosegow.

People like that scare me............maybe she was short a of a full deck herself. Our country has passed some foolish, foolish laws. The Americans with disabilities act prevented us from getting our retarded grandaughter
"fixed". She and her husband had a child. It was taken from them. The husband's side of the family has fought to get the child returned to the
retarded couple. What a royal pain it is for the courts. His family flat out refuses to admit that he has major problems. The child is almost 3 years old now and was removed from them at less than 6 months. We are still fighting this battle. Maybe we will win and maybe we won't because of the Americans with disabilities law. People who don't even know the child nor the parents in question will decide this possibly normal child's fate. The child has no rights but her parents do and they have back up from a bunch of well meaning people who won't have to answer for any mess that they are making.

mjh345
12-31-2010, 05:04 PM
didnt some madman from the 1940's attempt the same sort of maneuver and attempt genocide of entire race of people...surely you're not suggesting something along that path

Bon you are usually one of the more rational posters on here;.....but this one really misses the boat.

Advocating Temporary contraception for people who can't provide for themselves and there already existing offspring, in no way can be equated with Hitlers program

mjh345
12-31-2010, 05:26 PM
http://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/Best.gifhttp://i490.photobucket.com/albums/rr266/MouseOnAFeedsack/Smilies/yourock.gif


HAHAHA... Healy some of your posts of late have worried me but PC or not, I ***SO**** agree with this one. Everyone agrees the gene pool needs a little chlorine and this would be a good start towards halting the dumbing down of America. If you can't feed em don't breed em.

Hey there Reardon, don't worry about me. I have never abandoned the cause of conservatism and fiscal responsibility. The purported leaders of "Republican Conservatism" have abandoned me IMHO.
They talk a good game, but delivery on that rhetoric has been sorely lacking for way too long.
Trust me if they made me Supreme Ruler of these United States for a couple of years I suspect you would LOVE 99% of the changes I would make. Hell I'd even ask you to be my Vice Supreme Ruler, but I doubt if playing 2nd string is in your makeup. LOL

If I can find your phone # I'll give you a call after the Holidays slow down. I really enjoyed chatting with you and so admire your ability to cut through the BS, and get to the meat of the issue.
I think I'm going to breed my bitch shortly and it will be my first and I'd love to get your input

Still love ya girl
Have a great New Year!!

BonMallari
12-31-2010, 05:32 PM
Bon you are usually one of the more rational posters on here;.....but this one really misses the boat.

Advocating Temporary contraception for people who can't provide for themselves and there already existing offspring, in no way can be equated with Hitlers program

Temporary contraception is one thing, I have no problem with that, actually think its a good idea....now sterilization of a person ramps that up to a whole new level...are there cases where someone should be sterilized..Absolutely..but then we begin a slippery slope as to who get to decide, as is the case with a previous poster and their dilemma with a handicapped family member, they probably should have been allowed to take preventative measures

dnf777
12-31-2010, 05:36 PM
Temporary contraception is one thing, I have no problem with that, actually think its a good idea....

Where were you when I suggested norplant or depo for all welfare recipients??
:D

BonMallari
12-31-2010, 06:13 PM
Where were you when I suggested norplant or depo for all welfare recipients??
:D

probably waterfowl hunting or dog training in Idaho...:D


Honestly I never saw/read that thread

david gibson
12-31-2010, 07:19 PM
Where were you when I suggested norplant or depo for all welfare recipients??
:D

you recommend only fixing women - but not reversible V's for men?

gman0046
12-31-2010, 07:27 PM
The people we're talking about told Warthogs how to procreate.

dnf777
12-31-2010, 08:07 PM
you recommend only fixing women - but not reversible V's for men?

Give all the norplant and depo to men you want. Won't do any good.


Vasectomy reversibility is only marginally successful. Cessation of norplant or depo is 100%.

"fixing" implies permanent sterilization. That is inaccurate and misleading.

Blackstone
12-31-2010, 09:02 PM
i was a truck mechanic for 40 yrs.before injuries forced retirement and as such is had random drug tests. this got me thinking don't you think the police and politicians should have to also.what about people on welfare and those poor souls that couldn't find jobs for 99 weeks and had to extend unemployment to feed their families,any one i missed?

I agree that anyone that can endanger the wellfare of the general public should receive drug tests. As far as some of the others, I'm not sure how productive it would be. I would bet a significant number of people on welfare and unemployment are not using drugs. Also, how are we going to pay for all that testing? That sounds like a whole new goverment agency and a lot of tax dollars to me.

Marvin S
12-31-2010, 10:20 PM
I agree that anyone that can endanger the wellfare of the general public should receive drug tests. As far as some of the others, I'm not sure how productive it would be. I would bet a significant number of people on welfare and unemployment are not using drugs. Also, how are we going to pay for all that testing? That sounds like a whole new goverment agency and a lot of tax dollars to me.

IMO, the deterrent effect would minimize the number of tests required, just like the welfare rolls slim down when it becomes workfare.

RedlegHunter
01-01-2011, 12:20 AM
I agree that anyone that can endanger the wellfare of the general public should receive drug tests. As far as some of the others, I'm not sure how productive it would be. I would bet a significant number of people on welfare and unemployment are not using drugs. Also, how are we going to pay for all that testing? That sounds like a whole new goverment agency and a lot of tax dollars to me.

Random testing would not be that expensive relatively speaking compared to the amount of money being provided through current entitlement programs and the deterrent factor alone would probably be considerable. There will always be some who will violate testing or not and they should be weeded out of the programs. Could even go with a 2 or 3 strikes rule instead of 1 and done. The bigger issue would be the determining what would be screened for in the tests; just THC and Opiates or even some of the more popular illegal prescription drugs as well?