Kentucky:Drug tests for welfare.

Discussion in 'International Current News & Events' started by PamsPride, Jan 25, 2011.

  1. PamsPride

    PamsPride edirPsmaP

    1,587
    7
  2. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Oh, not yes, but hell yes!!:congrat:

    Virginia usually leads in many things...so go Kentucky!!!:2thumb:

    And where's the test for cigarettes too????:dunno:
     

  3. PamsPride

    PamsPride edirPsmaP

    1,587
    7
    One thing at a time Jay Jay! One thing at a time!
    Hopefully more states will follow suit... like Ohio! I think as more states go bankrupt they may more readily pass this law.
     
  4. kyfarmer

    kyfarmer Well-Known Member

    638
    0
    No sir! I hate sorry bums as much as the next person, but every time we find something unpopular we want to slap a law on it with out any thought to the const, or the bill of rights. We can not get rid of all the cheaters or sorry bums in the system no mater what we do, but taking rights away from some one because they ain,t popular in society is not the way to go. Read history this same type of little bit here and there because it was not popular is how everyone lost all rights in Germany, if ya don't think it can happen here your fooling yourself. The bandwagon is empty at the end of the line because in the end everyone does something everyone else don't like. I in no way support the use of drugs. No sir i have to disagree those rights were given by God not the govt. anything they give ya they will in the end take away double.
     
  5. Concerned_ Citizen

    Concerned_ Citizen Well-Known Member

    161
    0
    ITS ABOUT DAMN TIME!

    One question.....If the state drug tested, and people fail, will the state be responsible for any kind of rehabilitation services? What would the hidden costs be??

    I have a feeling this guy pushing the bill is gonna come up missing over this one...
     
  6. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Give me a job; I'd like to be the spy on those with disabiliies, etc..

    You're bowling with that bad back?? GOTCHA!!

    And I'd be real particular what my tax dollars bought that's considered junk....I was a cashier---I can tell stories...I heard one man bought all the bologna he could carry -----FOR HIS DOG!!:gaah:
     
  7. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    What are you ranting about??

    Spending my tax dollars on cigarettes, junk food, and drugs isn't a right!!
     
  8. UncleJoe

    UncleJoe Well-Known Member

    6,764
    108
    I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on this one as well.

    Today, in order to get a job in the corporate world, a drug test is almost always required. The last time(1996) I got a job with someone, I had to take a drug test. No test. No job. Simple as that. If employers can require a negative test result as a condition of employment, there is no reason that someone feeding off the public trough should not have to be tested as well before they get their "paycheck"
     
  9. Woody

    Woody Woodchuck

    3,347
    25
    I would have to agree also. I was required to take and pass a urine test and the company has the right to require me to take one at any time. If someone is required to not use drugs as a condition of employment why should we have a different standard for someone seeking free money, or kind of employed by the state (or fed)? After all it is OUR money they are getting.
     
  10. kyfarmer

    kyfarmer Well-Known Member

    638
    0
    That's why i,ve been against drug testing from the start, i know folks will argue it saves what ( money ) that's the goal of insurance company's in the end period. They could care less if we died off a hundred an hour, unless it saved their bottom line. The slippery slope has been opened. In the future if your genetic make up ain't right no job. It will become real, once this can of worms are opened no end in site for poking into your DNA. A free country means just that, not lick this Q tip or pee in the cup to see if you are suitable for living. It's just around the corner, the road to hades is paved with good intentions. The future does not look good if your genetic make up does not meet govt. standards. Again a free country means just that free period. If you are not in charge of your own body, what freedom do you have. In the end none! Unpopular view i know but for some reason being free appeals to me.
     
  11. Woody

    Woody Woodchuck

    3,347
    25
    Ok, the DNA thing is a whole different field of beans. Checking to see if OUR extorted tax money is being used to support a drug habit is not the same as checking to see if someone has a genetic disease or a better percentage chance of something or other. But I see where you are coming from with this. Give up a little here and a little there and all of a sudden you have nothing. Who is to say they are not doing DNA databases right now? A few years ago the Dr took a whole lot of little viles of blood to send for testing. I have no idea where they actually went and what actually happened to them. All I know is they had my name on them.
     
  12. MrSfstk8d

    MrSfstk8d Well-Known Member

    207
    0
    I still must disagree with you kyfarmer. Speaking of the U.S. Constitutuion, and our rights, let's put this in the context of the Fourth Amendment:

    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.

    Unreasonable search and seizure is the principle it appears you're trying to defend. And I applaud you for this. I will wholeheartedly defend it myself, as I've sworn an oath to ".. defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

    But let's look at this. The use of illegal drugs, and the use of alchohol on the job, I do not believe fails the smell test of Unreasonable. The prohibition of such behavior are for legitimate, demonstrable safety considerations. A person applying for a job decides whether, or not, they wish to work for an organization that chooses to apply these type of safety standards in their workplace. To extend this, the applicant to State/Federal aid monies decides whether, or not, they wish to get money from an organization whose express intent is to, among other things, promote and defend the public safety in their locus of control.

    The CONCEPT is sound. The VERBAGE of this particular legislation, however, is open to review. The question has been brought up whether persons failing drug tests will be required to go into rehabilitation programs. Will they be made to turn State's Evidence against suppliers? Will they have to do community service after treatment? I think the bigger question than whether the legislator promoting the bill will turn up missing, is which rehab clinic administrators' group he's in the back pocket of.
     
  13. tsrwivey

    tsrwivey Supporting Member

    3,243
    81
    I think folks should have the right to put anything they want to in their own bodies. If someone wants to be high/drunk all day, I think they should have the right to do it. I don't, however, think they should have the right the do it & make me pay for it. Rights & responsibilities go hand in hand. The ability to pass a drug test is a requirement for most jobs & those who are on public assisstance should be required to do everything within their power to get a job. That includes being drug free.
     
  14. HozayBuck

    HozayBuck Well-Known Member

    3,183
    16
    Whoe!! yawls talking apples and oranges here... the B of R covers a lot of ground as does the Constitution but nowhere in any of the founding documents does it cover giving the peoples money too people who won't work.. there has never been a "right" to not work nor to spew out babies to get more money.. we all have the same rights, go to school, learn and hopefully land a job to support ourselves till we retire or die..

    TANSTAAFL !!!!!!..... Where things really went wrong was when they changed the name to "Entitlements".. bullchit!.. you have the right to get your *** out of bed and go to work, you have the right to pay too much in taxes to shelter and feed and support the drug habits of the ones who won't work , yes there are folks who truly need help.. but the Demo's have turned the entire "Entitlement" program into a dream catcher for votes... our tax money goes to pay people who don't work to vote for the party that gives them our tax dollars

    The best written words on this came from a Black Columnist named John Daugerty(sp) he entitled the article " White Liberal Racist" it was in WND a few years ago, I've never been able to find it since... but he hit the nail square on the head.... he laid the entire Blacks in the Ghetto mess on the liberals in the Demo party.. with logic!..

    So..back to the OP.. Even my monthly DAV checks aren't covered in the BOR's and yes I have times when I question if I should take it... I always say YES I WILL!!.. but I feel I earned it, I wasn't sitting in a crack house waiting for the next check..

    Those who truly need help should get it until they can make it on their own.. those that are just playing the system should be out on their *** looking for a job.. but you can't work if you never learned how from the mother who never learned from her mother... and most of them have a pimpdaddy who takes their money and food stamps to sell for more dope.. it's a terrible endless cycle and until it's broken and don't exist anymore it will never change.. AND!! I mean people of all races.. but I'll bet you there are almost no Asians on welfare..

    Community organizers don't teach people how to get out of the slums, they teach them how to milk the system and who to vote for...and that change ain't working out for me..
     
  15. gypsysue

    gypsysue The wanderer

    4,350
    22
    We all know people who are getting food stamps and using their cash to buy achohol, cigarettes, and drugs. I've heard there are people who sell their food stamps, I guess by giving them their food stamp purchasing card. We all know people who are on disability who could work a job. There's corruption at ever level and in every form of any kind of transactions or business, whether it's welfare recipients or big business and everything in between.

    The drug testing sounds good up front, especially in light of all those in the work place that must submit to drug testing. But on the other hand, what happens to the children of those who test positive for drugs? Will they cut the family off? Take the children into Foster care (another hugs expense). I know children aren't always involved, but often they are part of the household. Now what?
     
  16. JayJay

    JayJay Well-Known Member

    3,104
    98
    Whoa...whoa..whoa here---- the drug testing probably started when some azzhole was so inebriated (s)he destroyed a piece of equipment or harmed a co-worker...causing the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, which always comes back to kick the employees in the butt one way or another??

    And if I'm on that assembly line with dangerous equipment, I damn sure want to know if the idiot beside me is zonked on something or that tow motor operator is buzzed!!:gaah:
     
  17. MrSfstk8d

    MrSfstk8d Well-Known Member

    207
    0
    Right there with you Jay Jay. You can be free to do what you want with your body. You are NOT free to bring said body into MY facility to work if I can't trust you to do is safely.
     
  18. Bigdog57

    Bigdog57 Adventurer at large

    541
    0
    It's a moot point anyways - the raging Libtards will NEVER allow such a law to pass. :eek:
     
  19. The_Blob

    The_Blob performing monkey

    4,230
    4
    As someone who's had personal experience with this very issue, a very concise: YES! & I would like to add: HELL YES! many children enter foster care with chronic health, developmental, and psychiatric disorders, reflecting neglect and abuse experienced before placement; great hurdles to be sure, but my faith in the inherent decency of most people (especially those who take the mantle of foster parents) can help alleviate the trauma of that Hell.

    In the June 2008 issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, researchers from Harvard Medical School showed that the extremely high rates of mental and physical disorders typically found among adult alumni of public foster care programs were significantly reduced among alumni of a private foster care program which universally had better trained workers with lighter case loads. The most dramatic differences were approximately 60 percent reductions in rates of adult major depression and substance use disorders among private program alumni compared to the control group of public program alumni.

    The US spends 44 billion dollars exclusively on a child welfare system in serious need of reform... showing that throwing money at a problem is not the same as fixing it and also:

     
  20. horseman09

    horseman09 Well-Known Member

    1,240
    4
    kyfarmer, as an employer, I have the right to tell my employees that coming to work impaired by drugs or alcohol is unacceptable -- for a whole lot of reasons.

    Just an FYI, drug tests test for validity (ph & specific gravity) to be sure the specimen in legit; the specimen is also tested for adulterants; then the specimen is tested for specific drugs. DNA, pregnancy, diabetes or other diseases are not screened.

    As for welfare recipients, we are all paying for those benefits, therefore we should have some assurance that they deserve them.