| | pass a urine test to get a public assistance??Page 3 of 5 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) | Montreal Guy..... lighten up....... you are the one who came up with that crazy post.
"me thinks the lady doth protest too much." do you understand what that means? look it up if you don't, and use a better source than the one you did for your definition of libel.
if you don't want someone poking good-natured fun at you, then don't come up with goofy what if's that go on and on. read what you wrote -- it is way --- way out. You were supposed to give your opinion on the original thread, not hijack it with that nonsense story you came up with.
| |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 2:55:39 PM | now hold up funlady...i think montreal guy makes a good point with his story. ive been exposed to plenty of second hand smoke...lol and im a cop!
what montreal explained in his example could very well happen. its very possible. and i agree with the mans post under him (wolves)....it could be a warnin system. fail it once...ok we let it slide. fail it twice...ur done. and im sure anyone who fails it once is gonna be a lil more aware of there surroundins. but i think montreal makes a good point regardless i disagree with him on his opinion here not to test. and ive disagreed with him on a couple other forums...but i never got a sense from him hes sum drug user whos talkin out of his a$$.
drugs r killin this world. and if more agencys stepped in...maybe...just maybe...it could be brought down a few notches. sooner or later...most ppl will be affected by drugs or the alcoholic.
montreal...the systems in place and the systems in the future will never be perfect. most systems r put into place to help the majority. it sucks...i know. but the systems were invented by ppl...humans...and none of us can be perfect or invent a program that is perfect. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 4:51:55 PM | MGuy,
she gets second hand marijuana smoke inhalation.
Thats the same risk working people have to take.
As a NC state employee, I can be drug tested at any time. I could be in the same situation as this lady.
She fails, and loses all her rights to welfare.
I fail, I lose my job.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, let me give you a hypothetical example,
John and his wife Jane are into drugs and do receive a welfare check to support their 5 children. Being they have more kids, they receive a larger check than Mary.They attend this free concert. They are the people moking pot around Mary. They are the reason Mary lost her right to welfare. Dont you think Mary would have wanted them drug tested? If they were tested, and failed, they would have been less likely to have the pot to smoke in the first place. Now Mary has no way to take care of her kids. And it really makes her sad to see John and Jane trading food stamps for money, knowing they plan to buy drugs with it. OK, after they buy and use these drugs, they drive home, while stoned, lose control of the car and hit a bunch of children playing. In this crown of children, is your niece and nephew. The reason your neice and nephew are there is because your brother did not get a pay raise just because of a new baby, so money was tight and he was unable to take them to the park as he normally did. By the way, John and Jane are stoned, everything seems funny to them so they are laughing the hurt children and saying "This pot is so good, lets sell more food stamps and get more of this weed. You get the frantic phone call from your brother about what has happened. While in the ER waiting room,you read a news paper telling how taxes are going up to pay for the rising welfare cost.
Just something, I work with alot of drug induced mental patients, not saying all mental patients are drug induced, I have had my head slammed into desk,punched in the face, seen self injurious attempts from drug seeking patients who are receiving these checks. When they use up all their welfare money, they do what they can to get into the hospital to act out as to get drugs. I have seen drug seekers complain of back problems, hoping for oxycotton, pick up heavy chairs and throw them at staff when controlled drugs are not ordered. This is a state hospital,so the state pays for their stay. When DTs stop, they are soon discharged home,to start it all over again. And they brag about how high they plan to get after discharge, using these checks. Stop the checks if they fail a drug test. It may not stop them completly but it may slow them down. | |
|
| |
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 5:43:48 PM | tossed_salad, please change your user name. Do you know what it means? I will not tell you what it means on a forum, I cant even tell you in an e-mail.Its that bad.I found out what it means from these drug induced mental patients that hate drug test. Thay claim they were at a party where people were smoking it when they fail the drug test that we force on them when they refuse to piss for us.  | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 5:53:34 PM | Montreal Guy..... I read your Msg. 44 wherein you tell the hypothetical story of a welfare mother addicted to crack. However, her crack habit doesn't prevent her from being a really great mom. Furthermore, in this make-believe tale, this crackhead mom spends nothing on herself; every cent she gets from welfare goes on the children. Then you go into the point of the story. That is how she accidently inhales some pot and goes for a urine test and gets thrown off welfare.
Funlady made a joke about your being the one on pot, because the story was so unreal. In Msg. 47 you threaten to sue Funlady for libel. I am not even going to get into the wherefores as to why you have no justification to sue her. I don't want to turn this into a legal thread.
For Pete's sake, can't you tell when someone is having fun with you? Sure she should have put one of those emoticons or maybe a "lol" after her post to ascertain that you knew she was joking with you. Even so, you are unbelievable -- threatening someone because she says something you don't like is nothing more than having a temper tantrum. This type of behavior makes you seem as if you are hiding something, that perhaps the negatives said in jest about you are factual. Now don't go threating me (lol). I am not saying that these negatives about you are true, because I don't know you or anything about you. However, I suggest that the next time someone says something you don't like, bring out more facts to show that your argument has substance. That is more effective than starting a verbal confrontation on a forum.
Incidentally, just for your information I worked in a Halfway House for my internship and dealt with people addicted to crack. I know your story is make-believe, but there is no way this hypothetical mother of yours, by any stretch of the imagination, could be a good mom, let alone spend nothing on herself and use the money for her two kids. This crack mom would be spending every dime of welfare money on crack and selling the foodstamps for more crack. The kids would be neglected, because when you are on crack, nothing means anything to you except your fix. So, considering how off-base you were on the story, even if it is fictional, I can understand why funlady decided to have fun at your expense.
You most certainly should not have reacted with such a short fuse. In the future, take it easy when people irk you. This is just a forum. So what if someone tells you off or makes fun of you?! It has happened to all of us. We all say stupid things on forums, because saying dumb things sometimes is part of being human. Why don't you be a big man and apologize to funlady. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:00:31 PM |
Furthermore, in this make-believe tale, this crackhead mom spends nothing on herself; everything cent she gets from welfare goes on the children. Then you go into the point of the story. That is how she accidently inhales some pot and goes for a urine test and gets thrown off welfare.
Funlady made a joke about your being the one on pot, because the story was so unreal. In Msg. 47 you threaten to sue Funlady for libel. I am not even going to get into the wherefores as to why you have no justification to sue her. I don't want to turn this into a legal thread.
For Pete's sake, can't you tell when someone is having fun with you?
Read my example again, the mother ISN'T a crack head. The entire point of the example is that she is totally innocent of any crime - yet pays the price, and her family pays the price. 
I did NOT threaten to sue her.
The story ISN'T unreal, and actually quite possible (as others have mentioned). It perfectly illustrates the point I'm trying to make.
As for the "joke" aspect of it, it's far from that to me.
It's a false accusation made on a public forum I'm a member on. It belittles the time and effort I spent trying to make a point. I also work in the security industry, and such public accusations of drug use are not very respectful of that job, nor it's responsibilities.
Angry ? Not at all.
I just maintain the right to reply against a spurious accusation. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:01:28 PM | just because its a irritation of mine....and ive had it done to me....im goin to correct sumthin b4 ppl jump all over it....
montreal never said the mother was a crack addict. the way i read it...the father was a crack addict who left the mother for a crack addict. i dont think he meant the mother was an addict. | |
|
| |
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:30:19 PM |
As to Urine tests. I find the opposite to be true. White Collar is 100% tested. Blue Collar is about 50% tested.
Facts are a nice thing. Try to stick to them when you post here.
Huh? 100% of white collar jobs require drug tests? You honestly do not believe this bullshit do you? Read the employment section of the local news paper and see which ads say piss test required. It sure isn't the office manager jobs. It's all the grunt jobs.
Two of my sisters are teachers and I regularly hang out with 3 other teachers. All of them work in different counties/cities and NONE of them have ever taken a piss test. In fact, two of them are the biggest weekend partiers I have ever met. I have another sister who works for Bowing she has never had to pee in a cup for her job. Everybody I know who has a white collar job (except the ones with a security clearence) do not have to take a piss test.
Do lawyers have to take one? Nope. How about a banker? Nope. How about the President of the US? Nope. CEO's of any major corp.? Nope. Realtors? Nope.
Grunts for any big construction company? Yep. People who work on a manufacturing line? Yep. Factory workers? Yep. Workers in a warehouse? Yep. Cashiers at Lowes, Home Depot etc.? Yep
What I find very weird about government assistance is, if you have a drug conviction you can get welfare. But if you have a drug conviction you can't get any government sponsored student loans or education grants. Strange shit. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:32:00 PM | I don`t think it would be a good idea I work in this area with street people and people on assistance , many are on DB 1 and DB2 because of there addictions ,I don`t think anyone should really be tested unless they are in positions like a pilot of a plane or pilot a ferry , I think over half of the politicians would`nt pass a urine test.
I myself would`nt pass a urine test but my boss knows I have to take pain killers for my back but mine are Dr prescribed.
I know many that live on the streets that don`t collect assistance at all . | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:39:58 PM | avril...if they dont collect assistance...than they wouldnt qualify for this program and it doesnt matter.
the topic here isnt what line of work should be tested...its ppl who claim they cant afford to live and support themselves on there own...who need government assistance....should get funds or not.
ya ever have a friend borrow money from u...say 300 bucks...and not pay u back when they said they would cuz they "cant afford to." yet there out spendin money on stuff they dont need...like goin out to bars..buyin weed. wouldnt that bug u? im a tax payer. i want to know my money is really goin to help ppl in need...not ppl who can afford to spend it on drugs or drinkin when they could be buyin food/shelter/payin there bills. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 6:44:05 PM | Montreal Guy.....
There is something not right about the way you are carrying on. Maybe that Shakespeare quote, funlady referred to hit the mark. Is that why you are so angry?
I am not going to deal with you anymore. You have a real problem. It is not normal to go around threatening people. You should not be in the security industry, if this is a glimpse of the real you. I hope for your sake and the people that you deal with that you are just having an off day.
I am signing off and will not be back on this forum. I don't want to be on the same site with someone who has your ugly attitude. | |
|
| |
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 7:16:06 PM | Whoever actually thinks that a drug test will help lower their taxes is totally out of touch with reality. You will find a hefty increase in your taxes instead.
The reason is very simple. A druggie fails the test and you cut them off welfare, they would not be employable and would still get their fixes. Only now they will break into your residences or businesses, or maybe rob you with a gun or other weapon, how about kidnapping one of your kids?
Now let us suppose that the police get really lucky and catch them all and the courts send them all to prison.
Now rather than it costing say $5000 a year, it will cost you say $100,000 a year.
By the way, you can test positive on a urine test if you happen to eat a poppy seed bagel, from what I've heard.
I have no problems with the test in certain occupations or lines of work.
I am subject to the testing in the event of an accident as every one else involved with the incident.
I don't think welfare recipients are all druggies or drunks, and worse than an individual collecting welfare are the profitable corporations. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 7:34:53 PM | MGuy
The story ISN'T unreal
How did she support the kids before he left? If he was a crack addict, why did she stay and have 3 kids with him.?He couldnt have been supporting the kids before he left if he was a crack addict. Trust me, he would have used up his money and took hers. She should have been better off financially after he left, so I dont understand why she needed welfare. But its still possible,I agree. Its just people normally do better without crack addicts around. Thats why so many of the ones we discharge go to group homes.Their families cant afford them any more. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 7:45:01 PM | Only now they will break into your residences or businesses, or maybe rob you with a gun or other weapon, how about kidnapping one of your kids?
They do this anyway | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 7:54:59 PM | Patrol I work with both people on assistance and those not on assistance as an outreach worker I have to work with both, I also encourage and try and help those that want to get away from there addictions but to not allow someone assistance because of a urine test would be just plain crazy,there are Dr`s out there helping some get on DB assistance because of there addictions.
I`m a tax payer too , I would like to see more people off assistance that are capable of work but that`s not up to me to decide .
Being on outreach I see alot I talk to many drug dealers and they sell to guys working in offices as well ,there are even people working for the Gov. and city that use meth.
But a urine test would not work for people on assistance. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 7:57:07 PM | Hi OP,
Well I for one am against it, for many different reasons I suppose...but the main one for me is that I have seen with my own eyes "certain" people using much harsher drugs than pot just so they could in fact pass the famous drug test.... depending on the amount of body fat a person has, marijuana will show on your results for up to 6 weeks after your last use....sorry I could be wrong on that as I haven't googled the info....but much much more damaging drugs won't show up at all after just a couple of days have passed since you last used....so you could get blasted on cocaine or worse every friday nights and be okay by monday morning for your test....anyways, that is just my personal opinion on the matter.
Oh and the "certain" people I was refering to earlier? I work in a large metropolitan hospital....um....I think you can figure it out....I've said enough already! 
Love and peace...
Old... | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/27/2007 8:35:09 PM | Very well said, Isispriest! The Declaration of Independence guarantees "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." I believe that guarantees a citizen the right to ingest whatever he/she pleases as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of other citizens. A person should only be tested if they are obviously screwing up on the job or endangering others. To test anyone randomly or by threatening the loss of their job if they don't comply I believe falls under the "illegal search and seizure" clause of the Declaration as well as the right against self incrimination. The fact that 9 handpicked political ideologues (The Supreme Court) disagree is not convincing. The Declaration states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident." If I think it will make me happy to ingest a certain substance the government has no right to interfere. It's plainly written and "self-evident." It doesn't take government officials and experts to interpret these words for me and you.
The irony is that the most dangerous drugs in society are legal. Alcohol and tobacco kill more people than all the illegal substances combined many times over. Yet they remain legal. It's ridiculous to even conceive of testing welfare receipients. What after that? Take a piss test to get a library card?
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." I believe Americans have been remiss in this vigilance and have been brainwashed by the propaganda and distortions of the war on drugs. The war on drugs impinges on our basic freedoms and the spirit of our country as it was conceived by the founding fathers. Let's end the prohibiton on drugs and boldly embrace the future as a truly freedom loving nation. Let's strive to live in peace and end all war, becoming once again a beacon for freedom to the world. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/28/2007 2:56:53 AM | as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of other citizens. -----------drug users can become violent, drive reckless when high, and much more. Basically,they provide a non safe envirnment for others. this qualifies for infringing on the rights of others.
most dangerous drugs in society are legal.------I have no problem with welfare people being on legal drugs prescribed by a doctor, but when these legal drugs are abused, that becomes the problem. When they go to ERs faking back pain to get the doctor to give them a dose of "legal drugs" just for a fix at the taxpayers expense, thats also a problem. I dont mind tax money being used for treatment programs, or needed legal drugs. | |
|
yna6
| | Joined: 1/21/2007
Msg: 72 | |
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/28/2007 6:46:02 AM | I noticed a difference in opinion as to who now does more random testing...blue or white collar. I missed anyone pointing out that there may well be a reason for this. Not many white collar jobs have people running machinery that could hurt them or others. (Arm stuck in fax machine and you wind up looking like some Indian Goddess??) No, really, the guy pushing papers across a desk as compared to the guy running the crane carrying a ton of concrete above city sidewalks. Which one would you rather choose to be a habitual drug user, and may well be high right at this time? Also...if you are on a line, you want to be working beside the guy who is giggling at the little parts as they go by, making your whole group look bad cause they can't keep up, or the person who is actually aware of what they are doing?
I've worked with enough stoners as is. I've seen the quality of their work, and how much of my time is used redoing the work they blew. Their up and down attitudes are hard to deal with too! One minute they are screaming some obscenity and stomping off to the can, the next, they are coming out all smiles, and the world is right by them...but they still can't do the job right!
MGuy...I read your hypothetical scenario...and no...it wouldn't be fair. But...then again, it wuld be a lesson for "Mary" to pick better choices....to avoid places where drug use is prevalent. Getting harder and harder in our world today though. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/28/2007 7:21:23 AM | I don't agree with it.
It's a broad, sweeping action without any concrete justification. There are many jobs that do not require drug testing. There are many employers who do not participate in drug testing. There are many employees who do not participate in drug use. There are also many people who do participate in these types of activities who are gainfully employed and are more responsible than many who screw up without having anything in their systems. If the logic is about preventing people from making mistakes on the job, you'd have to include alcohol use in this one wouldn't you. There'd be a gazillion more people who couldn't possibly pass that one. You do realize there are a considerable number of people in authoritive, medical and security professions who are alcoholics and/or heavy drinkers right? Not to mention all the occupations that serve the public in more indirect facets. And what about the desk jockey who makes a crucial mistake on someone's documentaion (whatever type) because they had a drink or two with lunch that day. hmmmm Or the salesman who has a drink when he takes his client to lunch and then drives back to the office. He's breaking another law, yes - and so that problem is already covered right? But all this drug testing isn't fixing anything when he doesn't get caught right? Or the doctor or nurse who has a dependancy on the prescriptions he has daily access to. Or the cop who gets loaded at a party and goes to do his shift while the alcohol is still running happily through his veins. These are just a few examples. But for some reason - (remember alcohol would have to be include) people who are not gainfully employed at any given period of time and need assistance should submit urine samples? Yeah, that sounds real logical.
And as to the inclusion of unemployed people in this testing process - those people have paid taxes out of their own paychecks for unemployment insurance benefits. In case you have forgotten - SUI/SDI stands for State Unemployment Insurance and State Disability Insurance. If you are going to test urine samples to allow collection of these insurances, then you have to apply the same rules to all types of insurance. Life Insurance, Medical Insurance, Dental Insurance, Property Insurance, Accidental Death Insurance, etc etc etc etc
That's my take on it. I'm done. I disagree with it completely. | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/28/2007 7:43:27 AM | ^^^^
Great post 3rdedition!! 
Doctors and nurses and therapists of all kinds are the people I work with everyday....and I could write a book on the "legal" drug abuse that goes on in a large hospital......we also had a therapist who would come to work with alcohol on her breath first thing in the morning....by noon, she was already smashed....by mid-afternoon, we ALL had to endure her wrath, including all the patients who had the misfortune of being tested by her.....but hey, alcohol IS legal and so are prescription drugs.....go figure!  | |
|
| pass a urine test to get a public assistance??
Posted: 8/28/2007 8:06:36 AM | The problem with the basic idea of this plan is that it is essentially flawed.
Positive drug test equals drug user.
That type of simplistic view is wrong. All a test indicates is EXPOSURE to drugs, and that doesn't even take into account the chance of false positives.
Say some lab technician mixed some samples, by accident ?
Say a false positive does show up ?
In the case of marijuana, second hand smoke could possibly trigger a positive.
Say that someone decided to "spike" a drink or food with some drug - for some personal reason of revenge. The person tested has no defence, against any of these examples of the types of abuse this system can inflict on people.
They are judged, convicted , and penalized, without any recourse to prove their innocence.
I'd suggest a fairer way to proceed would be to base it on a drug possession conviction. At least there some justice can be at least a possibility. Once convicted, THEN perhaps tests could be administered on a regular basis.
That seems far more logical than this, and far more just. | |
|
Home
login 
