Are mandatory random drug tests violations of the fourth amendment?

[Nosmo King]

Why are so many folks willing to roll over on the Fourth Amendment but fight tooth and nail for the Second?

Aren't rights rights and equally sacrosanct?

Not a good analogy. The county has the right to make you leave your gun in the car or even at home. It's the government doing the drug testing but it's for a job. They may have a good reason, like someone doing something dopey and costing the citizens a bundle. Or it may be a factor for health or liability insurance.

It isn't like the government is random testing citizens, that would be an issue.

Do you think drug testing by a government agency on their employees is unreasonable search and seizure?

If they issued a warrant and showed probable cause, I would gladly comply.

But I don't want my medical records unsecured. I don't want my body searched without cause. I value privacy.

Freedom isn't free. Protecting freedoms is not the exclusive province of the Department of Defense. I believe every citizen must fight for their freedoms whenever they are threatened.

It's a job and they may have good reason to do it like the private sector does. I don't know what you mean by unsecured medical records. If you are a building inspector they are paying you to drive around so they have skin in the game.

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

It's one of my hose pesky phrases in the constitution. Searches and seizures must be conducted under a warrant and warrants can only be served if there is probable cause.

 

[Nosmo King]

Here's where I see my rights:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things

Show me where you see the right to make the workplace safe by conducting unwarranted searches.

Yes I know you far left drones cut and paste your religious dogma!

The employer has the right to make sure the work environment is safe, even safe from those that abuse alcohol and drugs! So they can make it safe for everyone. Please show the law that prevents the employer from making a safe work environment..

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

No you evidence is in far left religious dogma, the Constitution is something you far left drones have no clue about. To you drones it is just a GD piece of paper!

Said the idiot who doesn't know the constitution when she reads it.

 

[Nosmo King]

Here's where I see my rights:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things

Show me where you see the right to make the workplace safe by conducting unwarranted searches.

Yes I know you far left drones cut and paste your religious dogma!

The employer has the right to make sure the work environment is safe, even safe from those that abuse alcohol and drugs! So they can make it safe for everyone. Please show the law that prevents the employer from making a safe work environment..

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

 

[Kosh]

Yes I know you far left drones cut and paste your religious dogma!

The employer has the right to make sure the work environment is safe, even safe from those that abuse alcohol and drugs! So they can make it safe for everyone. Please show the law that prevents the employer from making a safe work environment..

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

No you evidence is in far left religious dogma, the Constitution is something you far left drones have no clue about. To you drones it is just a GD piece of paper!

Said the idiot who doesn't know the constitution when she reads it.

Once again proving the far left drones do not understand the Constitution!

 

[Kosh]

Yes I know you far left drones cut and paste your religious dogma!

The employer has the right to make sure the work environment is safe, even safe from those that abuse alcohol and drugs! So they can make it safe for everyone. Please show the law that prevents the employer from making a safe work environment..

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

Not what you posted earlier!

Yet another far left drone caught in the their web of lies so they can push their debunked religious agenda!

 

[G.T.]

Yes I know you far left drones cut and paste your religious dogma!

The employer has the right to make sure the work environment is safe, even safe from those that abuse alcohol and drugs! So they can make it safe for everyone. Please show the law that prevents the employer from making a safe work environment..

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

The government operates under 2 differing capacities. They govern. They employ. Working for an arm of the government doesnt mean your employ(ER) is governing over you as the conglomerate of the entire govt simultaneously while employing you. Surely you can distinguish between the two.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not a good analogy. The county has the right to make you leave your gun in the car or even at home. It's the government doing the drug testing but it's for a job. They may have a good reason, like someone doing something dopey and costing the citizens a bundle. Or it may be a factor for health or liability insurance.

It isn't like the government is random testing citizens, that would be an issue.

Do you think drug testing by a government agency on their employees is unreasonable search and seizure?

If they issued a warrant and showed probable cause, I would gladly comply.

But I don't want my medical records unsecured. I don't want my body searched without cause. I value privacy.

Freedom isn't free. Protecting freedoms is not the exclusive province of the Department of Defense. I believe every citizen must fight for their freedoms whenever they are threatened.

It's a job and they may have good reason to do it like the private sector does. I don't know what you mean by unsecured medical records. If you are a building inspector they are paying you to drive around so they have skin in the game.

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

It's one of my hose pesky phrases in the constitution. Searches and seizures must be conducted under a warrant and warrants can only be served if there is probable cause.

They aren't seizing anything. They're testing your urine. You don't have to let them.

Refuse, cite the 4th Amendment, let us know what happens.

 

[Pogo]

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

Because it's pre-emptive.

And?

And ---- that's it. What more so you need?

Some relevance to the 4th amendment. Or constitutional rights.

Rights are restrictions on government actions. Not businesses. By the standards you're using, a non-disclosure agreement would violate your 1st amendment rights.

You can't arrest Joe Blow for bank robbery, on the basis that Joe needs the money.

A business isn't 'arresting' anyone. If you fail the drug test, you are free to go.

Permanently.

You miss the point. Arresting Joe Blow for a bank robbery just because he might do so in the future is acting pre-emptively.

As for the former, I'm not arguing Constitutional rights. I'm arguing human rights.

 

[Pogo]

Do you think drug testing by a government agency on their employees is unreasonable search and seizure?

If they issued a warrant and showed probable cause, I would gladly comply.

But I don't want my medical records unsecured. I don't want my body searched without cause. I value privacy.

Freedom isn't free. Protecting freedoms is not the exclusive province of the Department of Defense. I believe every citizen must fight for their freedoms whenever they are threatened.

It's a job and they may have good reason to do it like the private sector does. I don't know what you mean by unsecured medical records. If you are a building inspector they are paying you to drive around so they have skin in the game.

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

It's one of my hose pesky phrases in the constitution. Searches and seizures must be conducted under a warrant and warrants can only be served if there is probable cause.

They aren't seizing anything. They're testing your urine. You don't have to let them.

Refuse, cite the 4th Amendment, let us know what happens.

That's what I did, though I didn't cite the Fourth. I just said I was against it.

Know what happened?

Nothing. They backed down.

 

[Kosh]

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

Because it's pre-emptive.

And?

And ---- that's it. What more so you need?

Some relevance to the 4th amendment. Or constitutional rights.

Rights are restrictions on government actions. Not businesses. By the standards you're using, a non-disclosure agreement would violate your 1st amendment rights.

You can't arrest Joe Blow for bank robbery, on the basis that Joe needs the money.

A business isn't 'arresting' anyone. If you fail the drug test, you are free to go.

Permanently.

You miss the point. Arresting Joe Blow for a bank robbery just because he might do so in the future is acting pre-emptively.

As for the former, I'm not arguing Constitutional rights. I'm arguing human rights.

Well you have proven you do not understand either, just far left religious dogma..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

Because it's pre-emptive.

And?

And ---- that's it. What more so you need?

Some relevance to the 4th amendment. Or constitutional rights.

Rights are restrictions on government actions. Not businesses. By the standards you're using, a non-disclosure agreement would violate your 1st amendment rights.

You can't arrest Joe Blow for bank robbery, on the basis that Joe needs the money.

A business isn't 'arresting' anyone. If you fail the drug test, you are free to go.

Permanently.

You miss the point. Arresting Joe Blow for a bank robbery just because he might do so in the future is acting pre-emptively.

As for the former, I'm not arguing Constitutional rights. I'm arguing human rights.

They aren't testing for future drug use.

 

[Skylar]

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

Because it's pre-emptive.

And?

And ---- that's it. What more so you need?

Some relevance to the 4th amendment. Or constitutional rights.

Rights are restrictions on government actions. Not businesses. By the standards you're using, a non-disclosure agreement would violate your 1st amendment rights.

You can't arrest Joe Blow for bank robbery, on the basis that Joe needs the money.

A business isn't 'arresting' anyone. If you fail the drug test, you are free to go.

Permanently.

You miss the point. Arresting Joe Blow for a bank robbery just because he might do so in the future is acting pre-emptively.

As for the former, I'm not arguing Constitutional rights. I'm arguing human rights.

You're not required to take the drug test. Its merely a condition of your employment.

 

[Pogo]

Because it's pre-emptive.

And?

And ---- that's it. What more so you need?

Some relevance to the 4th amendment. Or constitutional rights.

Rights are restrictions on government actions. Not businesses. By the standards you're using, a non-disclosure agreement would violate your 1st amendment rights.

You can't arrest Joe Blow for bank robbery, on the basis that Joe needs the money.

A business isn't 'arresting' anyone. If you fail the drug test, you are free to go.

Permanently.

You miss the point. Arresting Joe Blow for a bank robbery just because he might do so in the future is acting pre-emptively.

As for the former, I'm not arguing Constitutional rights. I'm arguing human rights.

You're not required to take the drug test. Its merely a condition of your employment.

Yeah --- because "required" and "a condition of" are different things.

Anyway -- in my case I called their bluff, and they blinked. The more people do that, the more they'll blink.

 

[Nosmo King]

My "dogma" is the actual text of the Fourth Amendment. Are you not familiar with the constitution?

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

Not what you posted earlier!

Yet another far left drone caught in the their web of lies so they can push their debunked religious agenda!

Show us where I posted something else. Show us, feel free to take all the time you,need, show us where I said I did not work for the government.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, for 20 years while I was in the U.S. Navy, I was subjected to random urine screenings on a regular basis, at least once every three months, and, depending on the command, it could be done as often as once a month.

The way they did it was the CO and the XO rolled a 10 sided dice, and then, that number was used as a way to screen the command, by going after the last digit on your SSN.

However............as a Drug and Alcohol Program Specialist, I learned that the intoxicating effects of cannabis only last about 3 to 6 hours (depending on use), but because the THC molecule adheres to body fat, it can be detected for up to 30 days.

Someone else brought up the point of why should you be penalized for something that you did over 2 weeks ago, when there are zero intoxicating effects at the time of testing.

If they could get a different test that would show the difference between being intoxicated and one that just says you used it sometime in the past 30 days, I might be okay with that, but only if you were penalized when you are actually intoxicated from the cannabis.

The military has been doing testing since the late 70's, early 80's, but then again, in the military you are on duty 24/7, because you can be called off of liberty or leave at any time and required to report back to the ship (I've had it happen to me twice).

Do I think that civilian companies should be able to test? Only if they tell you up front (before you accept the job), that urine tests are a requirement for employment, but to bring up a policy in the middle of someone's employment? Not cool.

Besides, unless you are working in a high risk job (like heavy construction, bus driver, airline pilot, etc), I don't think that any employer should require the employees to drug screen randomly, only in cases where an accident has occurred.

After I retired from the Navy? I swore to myself that I would never take another urine test for employment ever again.

 

[Nosmo King]

Do you think drug testing by a government agency on their employees is unreasonable search and seizure?

If they issued a warrant and showed probable cause, I would gladly comply.

But I don't want my medical records unsecured. I don't want my body searched without cause. I value privacy.

Freedom isn't free. Protecting freedoms is not the exclusive province of the Department of Defense. I believe every citizen must fight for their freedoms whenever they are threatened.

It's a job and they may have good reason to do it like the private sector does. I don't know what you mean by unsecured medical records. If you are a building inspector they are paying you to drive around so they have skin in the game.

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

It's one of my hose pesky phrases in the constitution. Searches and seizures must be conducted under a warrant and warrants can only be served if there is probable cause.

They aren't seizing anything. They're testing your urine. You don't have to let them.

Refuse, cite the 4th Amendment, let us know what happens.

They ARE seizing my urine. They have a procedure in order to seize it. It's not like they are rummaging through the trash at the end of the driveway on garbage day.

 

[Agit8r]

My company wants to start drug testing this summer.

The Fourth Amendment applies to governments under the United States.

 

[Kosh]

Your religious dogma comes from being a far left drone and not understanding the Constitution!

So you have no evidence to support your claims other than a far left religious view, because you want unsafe work environments!

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

Not what you posted earlier!

Yet another far left drone caught in the their web of lies so they can push their debunked religious agenda!

Show us where I posted something else. Show us, feel free to take all the time you,need, show us where I said I did not work for the government.

Your very first post!

And several after that!

It is all over this thread, if you need to be shown your own words again, that is on you. And now this proves why you are against a drug test!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's a job and they may have good reason to do it like the private sector does. I don't know what you mean by unsecured medical records. If you are a building inspector they are paying you to drive around so they have skin in the game.

Where is the probable cause?
Particularly when it's "mandatory" as a condition of employment?

Why would an employer need 'probable cause' to give you a drug test?

It's one of my hose pesky phrases in the constitution. Searches and seizures must be conducted under a warrant and warrants can only be served if there is probable cause.

They aren't seizing anything. They're testing your urine. You don't have to let them.

Refuse, cite the 4th Amendment, let us know what happens.

They ARE seizing my urine. They have a procedure in order to seize it. It's not like they are rummaging through the trash at the end of the driveway on garbage day.

Did they tie you down and insert a catheter?

 

[Nosmo King]

My evidence is the text of the constitution.

The constitution is a list of government powers and individual rights against federal government interference.

What does have to do with your employer?

My employer IS the government.

Not what you posted earlier!

Yet another far left drone caught in the their web of lies so they can push their debunked religious agenda!

Show us where I posted something else. Show us, feel free to take all the time you,need, show us where I said I did not work for the government.

Your very first post!

And several after that!

It is all over this thread, if you need to be shown your own words again, that is on you. And now this proves why you are against a drug test!

Where? Where did I say I did not work for the government?

You are so tedious to debate. You're worthless.