Michigan State Police picking counties for roadside drug testing pilot

a reply to: Arizonaguy

"So?" The opening salvo of well reasoned arguments throughout time.

Nothing anywhere, any time, ever has zero chance of misuse of shenanigans. So let's crap our pants over a test that's already in place being made mobile.

Stoke that fear bruh.

a reply to: avgguy

No drs are not involved in the process.

In Germany for instance if you handle toxic waste and are screened you go to a dr he takes a sample you do a physical. If the sanple comes up positive you back to the dr he re evaluated the the situation if the test was say a small amount of the metabolite it's up to him to evaluate if you can do the job, if this seemed to be an addiction issue or just a puff in holiday with your brother Tommy. Then he reports to the company if your fit for work or not. Drugs are not even mentioned to the employer.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: bknapple32

I can absolutely compare the two. Why? Because both tests are done after a driver has already exhibited signs of impairment. If you smoked a bowl two weeks ago, you're probably not going to exhibit signs of impairment in the moment, are you?

no but if you smoked a bowl 8 hours prior and a cop mistakes you being tired for being high. Or god forbid the smell sticks to your clothes.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: bknapple32

I can absolutely compare the two. Why? Because both tests are done after a driver has already exhibited signs of impairment. If you smoked a bowl two weeks ago, you're probably not going to exhibit signs of impairment in the moment, are you?

Drug tests will give positives if you were high up to 24 hours ago. A breathalyzer will only give you a positive if you are physically drunk. Testing someone for drugs because they were swerving their car and they come up positive isn't evidence that the person is on drugs.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The weed breathalyzer is almost here you currently need to blow into about 20 times but they are expecting to lower that in a year or two.

a reply to: luthier

I work in the field. Literally I deal with injuries every single day. The last 4 out of 5 I've seen have had positive results saving their respective companies close to 60,000. Reimbursement is between $9 and $75 dollars for a drug screen. We wouldn't survive off of drug screens alone, they wouldn't even pay the light bill.

a reply to: avgguy

Maybe you don't get it.

An accident is probable cause for a drug test in employment. It also coincides with discovering the reason of the accident

That is far different than a preemployment drug test or random drug test.

I have no issue with an insurance company doing testing after an accident.

And you couldn't keep the lights on by multiplying the prescreen by millions?

Then you need a better ceo and led lights.

Just as reference it cost Florida about 150k to test 4k wellfare people. . Seems Scott's wife's company was going to make millions if they went beyound the pilot. Just turned out not very many of those folks tested positive so...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The story wasn't. It's right there in the article.

The op is sensationalized. Add to that people who can't be bothered to read, and here we are.

"Deny ignorance."

a reply to: luthier

We do hundreds a month and maybe break even

We also have tested the welfare/ unemployment group and they had nearly a 50% fail rate. So I'm not sure what drug screens they were actually giving.

I live here and it's against the Michigan constitution just like red light cameras and sobriety check lanes. It's going nowhere.

Counties have tried it and had to throw all cases out.

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: JHumm
Your work can do the same thing, and so can a hospital. I guess you just have to not do illegal drugs.

If you mine this one a little deeper, you might conclude that this is necessary part of of a legalisation/decrim process. Alcohol is legal, but you can't drive impaired. Fair enough. We have DUI checkpoints in Ontario, and the rule of law is that it can't be a fishing expedition (not that it's always followed).

If pot is made legal, as they say it will in Canada, you need a protocol to keep #ed-up people off the roads. I get it. Do I want to provide DNA? Nope.

a reply to: avgguy

So your a small company I read all about how to set one up in the field in a Forbes article years ago.

However, the contract for massive labour forces make plenty of money off this. I am sure quest makes plenty off prescreens.

If your company got the contract to prescreen test every wellfare person for instance you would be rich.

Or say thousands of fourth of July field tests. Not only paying the cops to checkpoint but then handling and evaluating results by who?

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: luthier

We do hundreds a month and maybe break even

Sounds like a business model problem. Other labs make fortunes with testing contracts.

originally posted by: avgguy
a reply to: luthier

We do hundreds a month and maybe break even

Really which state? Sounds like BS.

Do you have any proof?

And to stick to the point there is zero proof prescreens prevent accidents or increase productivity.

a reply to: luthier

Labs do. The places that actually administer them make nada.

a reply to: luthier

I just told you drug screens range from $9-75 reimbursement. That doesn't include supplies or staff time.

a reply to: avgguy

Sure how much do they cost an employer?

The prescreen is not only a civil liberty issue it just doesn't show any beneifit.

If there was a dr directly involved like I mentioned you have a chance for intervention in addiction cases or an evaluation that the test didn't show you did drugs recently like low metabolites for weed.

I think of you get in accident then yes you test other than that leave it alone unless your job is so crucial that you need regular testing.

This is silly.....they are trying to cut their losses and are continuing to use the criminalisation of MJ to generate pepripheral income from the public.......FIGHT THEM TOOTH AND NAIL NOW MAKE THE STAND RIGHT NOW.....while they are weak and BEFORE THEY ENSHRINE LEGAL PRECEDENTS....they can be defeated NOW but not once the enshrine legeslation.....dont let them use this......... they simply wish to keep filling prisons to keep the Prison Industry which is owned by TPTB operating and generating money.......we dont "follow the money" anymore folks....now we REMOVE IT FROM THEM...hit them hard here and now and you will continue to CRIPPLE THEIR PRISON INDUSTRY......and you will remove some of their income streams.They pay MONEY to bring in sympathetic tacticlly engineered legeslations then they use the Police to enforce and over-arrest and then they OWN THE PRISONS WHICH GENERATE INCOME which they re-invest in again developing con-job sympathetic to them legeslations.

You DONT HAVE TO LET THEM HAVE THEIR WAYS .....and they are weak and pitifull and it will only take a small pushback to send them scurrying into the shadows again.

Lets keep track of the politicians, groups, and prosecutors and Judges and Civic Employees who PERIPHERALLY SUPPORT TPTB IN THIS SOCIETAL FRAUD IN THIS MILKING OF THE MASSES ".We need to remember WHO THEY ARE BECAUSE THEY WILL LEAD US BACK TO THE SNAKES MANY HEADS.

a reply to: luthier

There is a doctor at the lab that will call to confirm prescriptions or hospitalizations. That's pretty standard practice.

Do you have to sit on the side of the road for a couple of hours waiting for your test results? Or, will the SWAT team break down your door and drag you out of the house a couple days later?