What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Drug Testing

Dr, Nurse, teacher, firemen, policemen, bus drivers truck drivers drug tested?


  • Total voters
    19
  • Poll closed .

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,532
Reaction score
16,069
Points
2,180
Should


Doctors

Nurses

Policemen

Firemen


Teachers

Bus Drivers


Truck Drivers




Be drug tested..




Yes? or No?


If you want to go into the whys or why knots.. it's fine with me.
 

Inthemiddle

Rookie
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
6,354
Reaction score
675
Points
0
I will say no, generally speaking. There's no reason, in my book, to predicate employment based on what a person does on their own time. IF some kind of accident happens, and there's a reasonable basis to suspect that said accident was due to being under the influence at the work place, then I could support an employer requiring a drug or alcohol test for the sake of workmen's comp, preserving the integrity of the profession, etc.
 
OP
WillowTree

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,532
Reaction score
16,069
Points
2,180
I will say no, generally speaking. There's no reason, in my book, to predicate employment based on what a person does on their own time. IF some kind of accident happens, and there's a reasonable basis to suspect that said accident was due to being under the influence at the work place, then I could support an employer requiring a drug or alcohol test for the sake of workmen's comp, preserving the integrity of the profession, etc.

so you are quite willing to let your loved ones go under the knife of a surgeon under the influence and if something happens then we'll test him or her?? That's good.
 

Sallow

The Big Bad Wolf.
Joined
Oct 4, 2010
Messages
56,532
Reaction score
6,243
Points
1,840
Location
New York City
Personally, I am not in favor of testing anyone with good performance reviews.

However, if they are fucking up, then that might be a good way to get to the bottom of it..and get them into treatment.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
50,884
Reaction score
10,761
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
Personally, I am not in favor of testing anyone with good performance reviews.

However, if they are fucking up, then that might be a good way to get to the bottom of it..and get them into treatment.

Hey..........even in the military, most of the drug testing was random. Once a month, they would call out the numbers (last digit of your SSN), and if your number was called, you took a test.

Of those that DID take the test, only around half were actually tested.

However.........if you did something against the UCMJ (such as going on unauthorized abscence), they generally test you when you get back to the command. Why? Because you brought suspicion on yourself by doing something wrong.

No. They should only be tested if they screw something up. If they've got good performance reviews and do a decent job? Leave 'em alone.
 
OP
WillowTree

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,532
Reaction score
16,069
Points
2,180
Anything that deals with Public Safety? You bet. If you don't? You better have one Hell of an insurance policy...

so it's okay to test these fine folk, let them work their asses off, pay their taxes, so the drug users can get said dollars but we won't test said drug users cause it violates they privacy.. okay.. I can see where that makes good walking around sense. can't you?
 
OP
WillowTree

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,532
Reaction score
16,069
Points
2,180
Yes because their jobs have to do with protecting the public and also being around the public all day in the case of truck drivers transporting huge loads it can be dangerous if they are doing drugs.

so drug users in the general population aren't hazards to the public? that makes good walking around sense.. I can see that.
 

ClosedCaption

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
53,238
Reaction score
6,700
Points
1,830
Wiwwow doesn't understand why a fireman or doctor being drug tested is different than other forms of employment. It's sad in a funny sort of way.
 

old navy

<<< Action Figures
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
380
Points
98
Location
U.S.
Give them all a whiz quiz.

Except for teachers of course.
 

The T

George S. Patton Party
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
48,082
Reaction score
5,533
Points
1,773
Location
What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
Anything that deals with Public Safety? You bet. If you don't? You better have one Hell of an insurance policy...

so it's okay to test these fine folk, let them work their asses off, pay their taxes, so the drug users can get said dollars but we won't test said drug users cause it violates they privacy.. okay.. I can see where that makes good walking around sense. can't you?
One word for living in a very litigious society just waiting for a fuck up for a gravy train to commence at some one else's expense...LIABILITY.
 

BlindBoo

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
37,932
Reaction score
6,536
Points
1,130
I vote no because it violates the 4th.....

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 to be seized.
 

BlindBoo

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
37,932
Reaction score
6,536
Points
1,130
I will say no, generally speaking. There's no reason, in my book, to predicate employment based on what a person does on their own time. IF some kind of accident happens, and there's a reasonable basis to suspect that said accident was due to being under the influence at the work place, then I could support an employer requiring a drug or alcohol test for the sake of workmen's comp, preserving the integrity of the profession, etc.

so you are quite willing to let your loved ones go under the knife of a surgeon under the influence and if something happens then we'll test him or her?? That's good.

I think the problem is the drug tests don't really tell if that person is intoxicated but they can tell if a person has done a certain drug in the past xx number of days or years. So saying no to drug testing is not being willing to undergo surgery with a surgeon who is wacked out on drugs.
 

High_Gravity

Belligerent Drunk
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Messages
40,159
Reaction score
7,084
Points
260
Location
Richmond VA
Personally, I am not in favor of testing anyone with good performance reviews.

However, if they are fucking up, then that might be a good way to get to the bottom of it..and get them into treatment.

Hey..........even in the military, most of the drug testing was random. Once a month, they would call out the numbers (last digit of your SSN), and if your number was called, you took a test.

Of those that DID take the test, only around half were actually tested.

However.........if you did something against the UCMJ (such as going on unauthorized abscence), they generally test you when you get back to the command. Why? Because you brought suspicion on yourself by doing something wrong.

No. They should only be tested if they screw something up. If they've got good performance reviews and do a decent job? Leave 'em alone.

I can agree with that.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$260.01
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top