jgoose71 0 #1 March 28, 2013 As my dad used to tell me: "My house, my rules. If you don't like it move out!" If you ask the government for help, I believe they have every right to expect something in return. What I don't want is the government forcing me to be on one of there programs then telling me how to run my life (Obamacare, just wait and see) http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/27/17489469-texas-advances-bill-to-require-drug-screening-for-welfare?lite="There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #2 March 28, 2013 Legislative majorities, as well as executives (of both parties), like to come up with feel-good stuff to show their constituents they're doing their job. And both actively engage in social engineering. This is one example of it. I suppose there's some facial logic to it: drug addicts are more likely to be so messed-up from their drug use that it reduces their employability, thereby inducing them be be on welfare, etc..... That's not the motivation the constituents are thinking about, but it's enough to rationalize it and maintain plausible deniability of any other motives..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #3 March 28, 2013 QuoteAs my dad used to tell me: "My house, my rules. If you don't like it move out!" If you ask the government for help, I believe they have every right to expect something in return. What I don't want is the government forcing me to be on one of there programs then telling me how to run my life (Obamacare, just wait and see) http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/27/17489469-texas-advances-bill-to-require-drug-screening-for-welfare?lite= "Applicants who test positive for drugs would be barred from receiving TANF funds for 12 months." So what is Texas going to do with an indigent mother and her kids if the mother tests positive? Let them starve on the streets? Export them to Louisiana?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #4 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteAs my dad used to tell me: "My house, my rules. If you don't like it move out!" If you ask the government for help, I believe they have every right to expect something in return. What I don't want is the government forcing me to be on one of there programs then telling me how to run my life (Obamacare, just wait and see) http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/27/17489469-texas-advances-bill-to-require-drug-screening-for-welfare?lite= "Applicants who test positive for drugs would be barred from receiving TANF funds for 12 months." So what is Texas going to do with an indigent mother and her kids if the mother tests positive? Let them starve on the streets? Export them to Louisiana? Unfortunately this is one that sounds better on paper than it is in the real world. The costs of testing far outweigh the savings in denial of benefits, and the unintended consequences can be brutal.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #5 March 28, 2013 Quotethe unintended consequences can be brutal. Ah, but it feels good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #6 March 28, 2013 Florida discovered this, like many "Drug Free Workplaces" did as well. Not to mention the illegal search of one's person. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #7 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteAs my dad used to tell me: "My house, my rules. If you don't like it move out!" If you ask the government for help, I believe they have every right to expect something in return. What I don't want is the government forcing me to be on one of there programs then telling me how to run my life (Obamacare, just wait and see) http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/27/17489469-texas-advances-bill-to-require-drug-screening-for-welfare?lite= "Applicants who test positive for drugs would be barred from receiving TANF funds for 12 months." So what is Texas going to do with an indigent mother and her kids if the mother tests positive? Let them starve on the streets? Export them to Louisiana? Already provisions for substitute benefit recipients in the codes in the states. You just don't have the mandatory screening for everybody, you actually have to have some cause and factual basis."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bertt 0 #8 March 28, 2013 Nothing wrong with testing people in a position of responsibility to make sure they're clear-headed. I'm sure the legislators would happily take drug and alcohol tests on their way in to work every day. http://www.petitiononline.com/DTC/petition.htmlYou don't have to outrun the bear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #9 March 28, 2013 likely unconstitutional, as it should be. Was already found an unconstitutional search in Fl."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #10 March 28, 2013 The 1700's brought us witch-hunts. The 1950's brought us McCarthyism. The 1980's brought us mandatory drug testing. All assuming guilt until the accused proves their innocence; All protecting us from largely imaginary threats."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #11 March 28, 2013 QuoteThe 1700's brought us witch-hunts. The 1950's brought us McCarthyism. The 1980's brought us mandatory drug testing. The 1970s brought us The Carpenters. Just sayin'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #12 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteThe 1700's brought us witch-hunts. The 1950's brought us McCarthyism. The 1980's brought us mandatory drug testing. The 1970s brought us The Carpenters. Just sayin'. But no bulemia legislation?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #13 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe 1700's brought us witch-hunts. The 1950's brought us McCarthyism. The 1980's brought us mandatory drug testing. The 1970s brought us The Carpenters. Just sayin'. But no bulemia legislation? Leave my Jalapeño Smokehouse Bacon Burger alone!Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #14 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuoteThe 1700's brought us witch-hunts. The 1950's brought us McCarthyism. The 1980's brought us mandatory drug testing. The 1970s brought us The Carpenters. Just sayin'. And disco - don't forget disco.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #15 March 28, 2013 QuoteAs my dad used to tell me: "My house, my rules. If you don't like it move out!" If you ask the government for help, I believe they have every right to expect something in return. What I don't want is the government forcing me to be on one of there programs then telling me how to run my life (Obamacare, just wait and see) http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/27/17489469-texas-advances-bill-to-require-drug-screening-for-welfare?lite= I thought the courts just stopped this in FL? Not that the courts should have IMO"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #16 March 28, 2013 Quote I thought the courts just stopped this in FL? Not that the courts should have IMO Yes they did. I'm not 100% which court overturned it or what the boundaries are, but it probably is not binding on Texas (although the jurisprudence on this issues is pretty strong and consistent."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #17 March 28, 2013 QuoteQuote I thought the courts just stopped this in FL? Not that the courts should have IMO Yes they did. I'm not 100% which court overturned it or what the boundaries are, but it probably is not binding on Texas (although the jurisprudence on this issues is pretty strong and consistent. I dont know the details either and understand the non-binding I was just wondering about the president going forward"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #18 March 28, 2013 Quote I was just wondering about the president going forward The President said he inhaled. I don't think he partakes any longer."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #19 March 28, 2013 Unconstitutional search of one's person. a.k.a. The Fourth Amendment Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #20 March 28, 2013 QuoteUnconstitutional search of one's person. a.k.a. The Fourth Amendment Three letters TSAPlease don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #21 March 28, 2013 Not the same game in any form or fashion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #22 March 29, 2013 Quote Unconstitutional search of one's person. a.k.a. The Fourth Amendment If you don't want to fill a cup, don't ask for a hand out, get a jobJust like, was it Kallend or Bill Von that said, if you don't want to deal with TSA, don't fly...."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #23 March 29, 2013 Quotef you don't want to fill a cup, don't ask for a hand out, get a job Oh, if only that were the case. But oppressive, demeaning, privacy-invading drug tests forced upon people by their private-sector corporate employers for jobs that have nothing to do with safety have invaded the culture like a disease that can't be eradicated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 897 #24 March 29, 2013 The problem is, the constitution applies to everyone, all the time. Especially those we don't want it to apply to. Even when we don't want it to. I think that's a good thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #25 March 29, 2013 QuoteThe problem is, the constitution applies to everyone, all the time.. Except Moozlims. And wetbacks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites