bait dunker,

Go set yourself on fire, you f'n thief.

I'd rather be surrounded by drug users than thieves. Not every drug user is a lowlife, but every thief is.

Heck, if we're going to drug test people for welfare, then I think we should start docking TAX BREAKS from people who commit misdemeanors... You know like that mortgage interest tax deduction? You lose that if you run a red-light.

Oh, what's that? You think YOUR misdemeanors shouldn't cost YOU an entitlement? Hypocrites...

It never fails to amaze me how many of those who preach diversity cannot tolerate opposing opinions. Just how does that work??

Personally, I'm not taking sides on this as I think I see this whole issue from a slightly different perspective than most. I am a recovering alcoholic almost 24 years sober, and believe me, I did my share of stealing (both in merchandise and family availability). As far as I know there is no such thing as an honest addict and the first lie is the one they tell themselves that what they choose to do is OK. The disease has been referred to as the, "I ain't got it." disease.

At my 20th class year reunion I told the then Chief of Police whom I went through high school with that the cops who let me off the hook repeatedly, while with the best of intentions, really had done me no favors. And for what it's worth, I had very little to do with my getting sober. I believe there are times in my life where God simply picked me up by the shirt collar, so to speak, and said, "Well, it's obvious you can't handle this."

I'm not attempting to sway anyone's opinion in any way here, as I know full well that I could neither hear nor see the truth until I was ready. Just offering up a bit of my own personal experience. Flush at will.....or not.

Too lazy to read this whole thread but as the title states. Hell yes they should be drug tested. The welfare line would shrink for sure, un employment a little too. At the mini mart yesterday a girl was in front of me and asked if they accept the EBT card, some sort of state assistance. They said yes and she said I will take a carton of marolboros and she had a 12 pack of beer. She didn't know her PIN number and started yelling at the clerk that she shouldn't need to know it, then started crying and left. Clerk said he sells lots of smokes and alcahol to EBT card holders. Thats not right that we tax payers help pay for unfortunete peoples beer and smokes. Should be limited to bread, water, eggs and milk etc.

Nothing.

Thank you, Chuck.

Can't remember her pin#.Give me a fukin break.Trading there EBT cards and BJ's for crack/smokes and a couple beers.Good luck,
SZ

No one should get gov money if they have a drug or booze issue.

We should be testing our politicians, judges and CEO's on a random annual basis with the results being public. After all, who's more of a danger if they have a drug problem?

i agree

Six pages and a bunch of you still haven't read Aunty M's post indicating that this has been through the U.S. Court of Appeals and struck down as unconstitutional. For a generally smart forum we still have our share of slow learners. Probably didn't get enough publicly subsidized educational benefits.

Sg

Besides, why bother testing WSU alumni? We already know there's something wrong with them.

I'll second that amendment!

I can't tell you how much I hate thiefs..........

Speaking of which, should I go to jail if I gun someone down for breaking into my house? Hard part would be not emptying the clip...

Keith

Ah Hell they have been trying to overturn our Death with Dignity law for years, just wait intill this passes and there's a mass exodus from Portland to Vancouver.

you saying that is just incredible

Marsha, Marsha, Marsha, you carefully picked your links, citing lower courts to back your position, but the only court that matters, the Supreme court does not agree with you.

http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/drug-testing

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16639854

The Supreme court has ruled Multiple times that random, suspicion-less drug testing is legal because:
1) drug abuse is a serious societal problem; 2) drug use has an adverse impact on job performance; and 3) children must be protected from those who use drugs or could influence children to use them.

He said taxpayers shouldn’t have to foot the bill to support someone’s drug habit.
“We’re in a tough economic environment. We’re trying to look for opportunities to save money in government, and I think this is a way to do that that benefits the taxpayers and the recipients of state services.”

Maybe they should go find that 9 billion in reconstruction funds lost in Iraq or the 2.3 trillion the pentagon can't account for before they worry about some dopers collecting welfare.

Testing kids who participate in school activities is a far cry from testing welfare and unemployment insurance beneficiaries...

Fish on...

Todd

BD, shut up.

Just Shut the [censored] Up.

Really, how so? Both extra school activities and welfare collection are both voluntary. Both are funded by the tax payers. I fail to see the difference.

Not talkin drug test, just sayin its not right that us tax payers are paying for someone to have luxeries like beer and smokes. Those are extra non neccessary items.

So if its unconstitutional to drug test people who sign up for welfare and unemployment, how can it be ok when I sign up for a new job to get tested by the employer. Essentially the state is paying you, why can't they be tested. Make em random and lots of folks will get nailed. I got nothin against someone who gets high, thats their deal, until its coming out of my tax paying pocket. Or how about shortening enemployment? I know guys that have been on it for over a year. Some of them draw the maximum 600 bucks a week and work construction jobs for cash and are making more on unemployment than they ever would normally. They have no desire to go back to a paycheck. Also I think many of these folks are just lazy. Labor ready hires everyday.