Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
OMG! A politician who was a hypocrite, I've never heard of such a thing.
Still doesn't change my mind about drug testing welfare recipients.
Georgia Republican Who Wanted Drug Testing For Welfare Recipients Gets DUI | Addicting Info
Rep. Kip Smith, the Georgian Republican sponsor of Georgia House Bill 464, which would require random drug testing for citizens on public assistance, found himself drunker than Lindsey Lohan (only ugly and with no talent) and apparently was arrested friday morning on a DUI.
So Rep. Smith, the public has to wonder, since 99% of the time people drive drunk, they get away with it - how many times were you out driving drunk while taking the people's money as salary?
I'm not condoning drunk driving...
I know when I'm ok to drive and when I'm not.... I would never get behind a wheel if I felt I would fail a basic field sobriety test.... Just because someone may have a BAC of .08 of higher doesn't mean they're "impaired."
That is a limit not too many drunks are aware of.
I hope you're not condoning drunk driving here.
While there is an ounce of truth in what you say regarding buying booze with your own money earned, nonetheless, this guy is an elected, public official drawing a tax-payer salary and is automatically held to a higher standard.
This DUI sure doesn't help his case to drug test welfare recipients.
I'm not condoning drunk driving...
I know when I'm ok to drive and when I'm not.... I would never get behind a wheel if I felt I would fail a basic field sobriety test.... Just because someone may have a BAC of .08 of higher doesn't mean they're "impaired."
Yes, this guy should be held to a higher standard, however that doesn't make him a hypocrite because he got popped for a DUI.
The guy has a job and earns money - money he used to buy the booze.
I'm not defending the guy - I'm just saying that there is a difference between drug testing those who live off taxpayers and a guy who works and who buys his own booze or drugs with his earned money.
I don't even get behind the wheel when I've been taken my legally prescribed pain pills.
If you are impaired, you do not know it. You may be legally drunk and "think" you'd pass a sobriety test.
When my friend and I went out for dinner and knew we were gonna buy drinks, we had our husband drop us off and pick us up. We each had ONE drink.
I'm not condoning drunk driving...
I know when I'm ok to drive and when I'm not.... I would never get behind a wheel if I felt I would fail a basic field sobriety test.... Just because someone may have a BAC of .08 of higher doesn't mean they're "impaired."
True. Impairment is really a matter of perception. Let's not forget the legal limit used to be 1.5 and over the years they kept making it lower and lower and some still feel the current rate of .08 is not low enough.
Drug tests aren't that expensive.
They have instant ones - they're like 5 bucks.
That's the cost of the test. The test also has to be administered. If you're going to trust drug users to administer their own tests, you may as well not give them one, genius! You can even buy clean piss in some gas stations these days, for crying out loud, and its readily available in head shops or online. The only way to administer a drug test and be sure the urine is from the test subject is to observe the piss come out of the test subject and into the sample vial, and that my friend will cost more than $5 a pop.
As someone who has paid taxes all his adult life, god forbid should I ever need public assistance, I would find no greater insult than to be required to allow a government employee to observe me pissing in a jar.
I never said they should administer their own tests..
They should be required to go down to the welfare office once a month and piss in a cup with someone standing in the room to confirm that individual actually did urinate in the cup.
wow whats 30,000 x 5
$150,000 dollars in drug tests a month.
Meanwhile these welfare fucks receive roughly $12,000 a year minimum in welfare each. I suppose it would take 15 welfare drug addict benefits to cover the drug tests.
The notion you have to hire more workers to administer drug tests is ridiculous - their welfare case worker can do that...
I'm not condoning drunk driving...
I know when I'm ok to drive and when I'm not.... I would never get behind a wheel if I felt I would fail a basic field sobriety test.... Just because someone may have a BAC of .08 of higher doesn't mean they're "impaired."
True. Impairment is really a matter of perception. Let's not forget the legal limit used to be 1.5 and over the years they kept making it lower and lower and some still feel the current rate of .08 is not low enough.
I have a BAC tester and I'm perfectly fine at .10.
If I felt I was a danger to myself or others I wouldn't drive. Not only that but I don't want a DUI. If I cant control a vehicle I may as well be asking for one.
I'm not condoning drinking and driving -- I'm just saying its not dangerous if you know your limit.
Under any circumstances no one should drive if they don't feel they can safely.
That's the cost of the test. The test also has to be administered. If you're going to trust drug users to administer their own tests, you may as well not give them one, genius! You can even buy clean piss in some gas stations these days, for crying out loud, and its readily available in head shops or online. The only way to administer a drug test and be sure the urine is from the test subject is to observe the piss come out of the test subject and into the sample vial, and that my friend will cost more than $5 a pop.
As someone who has paid taxes all his adult life, god forbid should I ever need public assistance, I would find no greater insult than to be required to allow a government employee to observe me pissing in a jar.
I never said they should administer their own tests..
They should be required to go down to the welfare office once a month and piss in a cup with someone standing in the room to confirm that individual actually did urinate in the cup.
wow whats 30,000 x 5
$150,000 dollars in drug tests a month.
Meanwhile these welfare fucks receive roughly $12,000 a year minimum in welfare each. I suppose it would take 15 welfare drug addict benefits to cover the drug tests.
The notion you have to hire more workers to administer drug tests is ridiculous - their welfare case worker can do that...
Don't know where you get your figures from, but years ago I saw a study that added up all the aid to those on welfare and on average, they got more than $35,000 a year in various welfare benefits.
Wonder what that statistic is today?
True. Impairment is really a matter of perception. Let's not forget the legal limit used to be 1.5 and over the years they kept making it lower and lower and some still feel the current rate of .08 is not low enough.
I have a BAC tester and I'm perfectly fine at .10.
If I felt I was a danger to myself or others I wouldn't drive. Not only that but I don't want a DUI. If I cant control a vehicle I may as well be asking for one.
I'm not condoning drinking and driving -- I'm just saying its not dangerous if you know your limit.
Under any circumstances no one should drive if they don't feel they can safely.
.08 is the legal limit. If you get pulled over for any reason and test out at .10, you are getting a dui.
I'm not condoning drunk driving...
I know when I'm ok to drive and when I'm not.... I would never get behind a wheel if I felt I would fail a basic field sobriety test.... Just because someone may have a BAC of .08 of higher doesn't mean they're "impaired."
True. Impairment is really a matter of perception. Let's not forget the legal limit used to be 1.5 and over the years they kept making it lower and lower and some still feel the current rate of .08 is not low enough.
I have a BAC tester and I'm perfectly fine at .10.
If I felt I was a danger to myself or others I wouldn't drive. Not only that but I don't want a DUI. If I cant control a vehicle I may as well be asking for one.
I'm not condoning drinking and driving -- I'm just saying its not dangerous if you know your limit.
Under any circumstances no one should drive if they don't feel they can safely.
But he's not on welfare....
He buys his booze with his own money...
Everyone on welfare should be drug tested...
Its OK to drive drunk as long as you aren't on welfare?
WTF?
What do you think is a greater threat to society - someone buying $10 worth of pot while collecting food stamps, or someone buying $20 worth of booze, getting hammer, and driving drunk out of their minds? Which would you rather run into on the road?
hmmm, high on pot, or drunk, think I'd rather not run into either of them, thank you.
Its OK to drive drunk as long as you aren't on welfare?
WTF?
What do you think is a greater threat to society - someone buying $10 worth of pot while collecting food stamps, or someone buying $20 worth of booze, getting hammer, and driving drunk out of their minds? Which would you rather run into on the road?
hmmm, high on pot, or drunk, think I'd rather not run into either of them, thank you.
Not for nothing Sniper Kitty, but I used to work at a biker bar called Boondocks, and in the back parking lot, people would go back there and smoke cannabis. Some of them would smoke only, preferring to just drink coke, and the people that smoked only were probably the best behaved in the whole place.
Nope, if I had to pick between the 2, I'd rather run into someone who was high only rather than drunk only.
Pot smokers are pretty friendly when they're stoned. Drunks tend to get mean.
I have a BAC tester and I'm perfectly fine at .10.
If I felt I was a danger to myself or others I wouldn't drive. Not only that but I don't want a DUI. If I cant control a vehicle I may as well be asking for one.
I'm not condoning drinking and driving -- I'm just saying its not dangerous if you know your limit.
Under any circumstances no one should drive if they don't feel they can safely.
.08 is the legal limit. If you get pulled over for any reason and test out at .10, you are getting a dui.
Obviously, however a cop would need to believe I was drunk in order for him to administer a BAC test.
I would never drive if I thought I would appear to be drunk because that means you are drunk.
.08 to me is probably different than what it is to you.
We all have different tolerances for substances.
You may get plastered off a beer or two, however I'd be perfectly fine despite having the same BAC.
But he's not on welfare....
He buys his booze with his own money...
Everyone on welfare should be drug tested...
What he said.
how libertarian of you two...Well at least nick because he claims he is one.
OMG! A politician who was a hypocrite, I've never heard of such a thing.
Still doesn't change my mind about drug testing welfare recipients.
Being that he's not receiving free money from the taxpayers, I fail to see the hypocrisy there. He should, however, resign immediately from the state legislature seeing as how he chooses not to obey the very laws he is supposed to be legislating.
hmmm, high on pot, or drunk, think I'd rather not run into either of them, thank you.
Not for nothing Sniper Kitty, but I used to work at a biker bar called Boondocks, and in the back parking lot, people would go back there and smoke cannabis. Some of them would smoke only, preferring to just drink coke, and the people that smoked only were probably the best behaved in the whole place.
Nope, if I had to pick between the 2, I'd rather run into someone who was high only rather than drunk only.
Pot smokers are pretty friendly when they're stoned. Drunks tend to get mean.
This is true. But drug testing requirements for Welfare Recipients are not soley focused on Marijuana use. Personally,i'm fine with de-criminalizing Marijuana.
.08 is the legal limit. If you get pulled over for any reason and test out at .10, you are getting a dui.
Obviously, however a cop would need to believe I was drunk in order for him to administer a BAC test.
I would never drive if I thought I would appear to be drunk because that means you are drunk.
.08 to me is probably different than what it is to you.
We all have different tolerances for substances.
You may get plastered off a beer or two, however I'd be perfectly fine despite having the same BAC.
Let's just say, I like to err on the side of caution.
If it was up to me I would abolish the welfare program (or at least limit welfare) and I would legalize drugs in general..
However under our currant system, where people are allowed to live on welfare for life any illegal substance should get you booted off the program.
Taxpayers shouldn't have to work hard so a bunch of lazy fucks can sit on their asses all day and get high - on any substance.
Which welfare programs can one live off of for life?
With the exception of TANF, all of them.
