Drug tests: Good or bad?

I was reciently on "facebutt" and I noticed one of my buddies on there talking about how an Arkansas congressman has proposed a measure that would make people have to take a drug test to get unemployment.

This in my opinion is completely absurd! Once you work for a company for a certain ammount of time you EARN the right to recieve YOUR unemployment. In my opinion this is totally different than having to take a drugtest to recieve welfare. Am I wrong in that thinking?

Its one thing to be givin aide because you wont find a job, but a completely different think to have something that you have EARNED stripped away from you due to a technicality.

It would appear to me that this is targeting marijuana users only, seeing as how THC stays in your system for a month compared to the two or three days harder and more dangerous drugs are in your system.

Opinions?

MessOnTheFED!

reply to post by MessOnTheFED!


I both agree and disagree

I disagree with you because there are a lot more people likely to abuse the system than there are those who actually need the help.

On another level i feel for the people who have been laid off and they do deserve it. the issue then becomes, are you abusing the right to it, and purposely avoiding work because you can't find an "ideal" job?

I had a friend of mine who got laid off, got unemployment, then refused to get a job because unemployment "paid better"

reply to post by MessOnTheFED!


s&f for your take on marijuana users being victimised over harder drug users. i mean you could be on heroine and crack a few days earlier and pass the test, not sure about crystal meth but thats not really an issue in the uk, and being english i have a lot less knowledge than all you lot over the other side of the atlantic on that subject.
also if you have just lost your job then maybe you might want to smoke a couple of reefers to ease the pain.

reply to post by Juggernutty


Well thats an argument that need to be taken up with the rules and regulations of unemployment. Your friend EARNED the right to be paid x ammount of dollars for x ammount of months. All I'm seeing here is a way to squeek around the regulatory edges and save money for something that a company has agreed to pay.

MOTF!

commercial drug test are not reliable

only way to be on the track of being sure is a bone marrow sample
and even that sample is a coin flip 50/50 of 50/50 if its accurate even if its a positive result and the person in question as admitted usage of drugs ,

id propose labour camps for people on the unemployment list , must be tons of tasks out there that needs to be done ,

The Fed (Federal Gov't, not reserve) never had a Constitutional right to prohibit any drug use in the first place!
We live under a Totalitarian Dictatorship affectionately labeled a "democracy".

People should be able to take whatever they want and be responsible for their actions regardless.

reply to post by MessOnTheFED!


It assumes everyone is guilty so everyone must Submit to the system.

We are a piss in the cup society, I wonder when the day comes when we must give our blood.

Employment, soon it seems welfare and unemployment will be a very conditional benefit.

It's clearly a Fourth Amendment violation. It's also a waste of taxpayer money.

Additionally, if this precedent is set it's very likely that in the future they could legislate that you may have to take a drug test in order to get your tax refund or some other state benefit.

Unfortunately, people rally around these government drug test proposals as a good thing without EVER thinking it through.

reply to post by lewman


Im not advocating useing any drugs in this thread. MODs might give me the chop. It DOES seem however that marijuana users are footing the proverbial bill for people who use drugs that RUIN your life. I guess it's easy to pick on someone who doesen't have a leg to stand on.

MOTF!

I think drug testing at the workplace is a violation of our personal lives period. You are judged at work for what you do at home. Yes drugs are illegal. To get fired for what you do on your own time is crazy.
I would rather work with someone who smoked weed the night before then i would working with someone with a hangover.

reply to post by MessOnTheFED!


You are correct to assume that it is mainly targeting cannabis users, whether directly or indirectly. Opiate and amphetamine (among a whole score of other drugs) leave the body in a couple of days. If these tests are not random then it would certainly appear that heroin users and the like have the upper hand as far as preparation.

I do not think a person should be denied their unemployment, kicked out on the street, and being forced to live a grueling life just because they choose to enjoy a toke every now and then.

I am not advocating that other people have to pay for this kind of activity, but it is already setup in such a manner that it is hard to effectively do anything to change it.

reply to post by zerbot565


As soon as I hear, "sir we're going to have to have a sample of your bone marrow" I'll be out of this country faster than the guy than brought his knife to the gun fight.

MOTF!

reply to post by LDragonFire


I am for drug testing for people on welfare. ta dollars used to buy booze and drugs is an outrage. If you work for a company, though, you have EARNED the right to recieve your unemployment if oyu have gotten layed off imho.

MOTF!

2x tuesday

do politicians get drug tested in the us, i know that they dont in the uk but out of every job around these days, i would say that politicians would be up there on list of people who should be tested, along with sports stars and the police. anyone else should be free to do what they want in their free time as long as they dont turn up to work high

bad-For unemployment makes no serious sense except to take more money from people w/o jobs and circulate it in the system again.
good-For employment yes it makes perfect sense as a way to evaluate your potential workers.

Drug tests, specifically urinalysis, can be extremely unreliable in determining if someone has or hasn't used a drug. Example:

If a person who has never smoked marijuana before goes in for a drug test, and decides to smoke up right before the test, the urinalysis would not be sufficient to detect the thc in the system as it has not had time to pass into the urine. It will, however, show if that same person decided to smoke up 3 weekends ago in their own home on their own time. It will not show if that same person decided to drink the night before, either, in most cases.

Saliva tests, on the other hand, can pick up on drug or alcohol use minutes after consumption, can determine if that person is currently under the influence, and does not discriminate against the casual user who consumed 3 weekends prior.

The problem isn't the tests being performed, in my opinion. The problem is the tests that are used, and that being the urinalysis. And besides, many companies make body flushes or masks that render the tests useless anyway.

As for taking tests for unemployment: absolutely rubbish, just a power play by the state to deny more people benefits that they earned.

Originally posted by MessOnTheFED!
reply to post by LDragonFire

 

I am for drug testing for people on welfare. ta dollars used to buy booze and drugs is an outrage.

Sure, that's an outrage.
But, do you want to give our corrupt government the power to perform unreasonable searches on people just because some people may be doing things you dislike?

I think for the most part drug testing is wrong. It is certainly wrong in relation to an unemployment claim, no question.

I feel that if you are lucid and co-ordinated and able to perform your job as well as usual then it should not matter what drug you use.

In the UK, for alcohol (one of the worst drugs) there is only the requirement that you can only consume so much if you intend to drive a vehicle. They use a breathaliser to determine how much alcohol you have ingested and prosecute accordingly. Your state of mind and body has no bearing on the situation. I believe this is wrong and the US system of a field sobriety test is of much more relevance, as it actually tests your ability to drive the vehicle. Different people can withstand different levels of alcohol before becoming innebriated.

I believe the same is true for other kinds of drugs. A Cannabis user could shmoke a joint of an evening and be perfectly capable of performing any job the next day, but would lose his job if he was drug tested even though he could be the most competent and productive employee ever. Does this not seem wrong to people?

I think the issue comes down to legality. You can be very drunk in the evening and go to work the next day with enough alcohol to fail a breathaliser but you would not lose your job due to a drug test. You would only lose it by being drunk at work and not being able to do your job properly. Being drunk at work is not spotted by any test but by other people observing your behaviour. The same should be true for other drugs (legality aside).

Sport is a different story as the drugs used have a positive effect on the outcome, in your favour. In essence, cheating.

If most drugs weren't illegal it would be a human rights issue.
Does drug testing look for painkillers and anti-depressants? I bet it doesn't but they are some of the most abused drugs out there.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


If my tax dollars are going to buy someone's, who wont even TRY to get a job to begin with, daily fix. Then yeah drug test the crap out of them, BUT if Sally Jo Johnston works for company "x" for 12 years and they decide to "let her go" for nothing that her performance has caused, then she should have her Unemployment for however long as stated by the unemployment regulations.
..
MOTF!