Put down the pipe if you want welfare

[DJ Raijin]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...rings

Cliffnotes: States are starting to consider mandatory random drug testing for welfare recipients. This will weed out those who are using their welfare money to fund their habits.

Big up on the government on this move for sure. My only question is, Why Wasn't This Done Sooner?

[480sx]

Wow i had this EXACT same idea a few months ago, posted it, and it turned into a good thread.

f***ING AWESOME.

The thread for those of you who missed it.

zerothread?id=382391

If you get busted with a positive drug test, or refuse to take a test while under welfare, there should be at least a 3 year minimum before you can reapply. I suppose this could be adjusted depending on your circumstances, IE, feeding a family while living in a trailer w/o a job Vs. a 25 year old guy in good health thats just worthless and 'needs' welfare....

[DJ Raijin]

I'd be willing to go a step further with this and start a mandatory IUD implantation for single women, with a child who are on welfare/medical assistance. This would cut down on those who abuse the system by getting knocked up to boost their welfare check. Yes it happens. I've met them. No they weren't joking either. They're depraved individuals who shouldn't be allowed to have kids.

I don't believe it's infringement upon civil liberties at all, as much as it is tying up loose ends and freeing up funds.

Recently, I applied for medical assistance to help me take care of some bills I had from a recent surgery. I was denied because I wasn't pregnant, a minority or a refugee. They said it's acceptable for those making 18k or less a year and I figured with me being unemployed I'd be able to get it but alas....somehow my 1200 a year income is too much money

[dusred]

I'm all for chopping welfare for coke heads but while you're at it you victimize all those who are legitimately using the welfare system.

There needs to be a different way. Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

There needs to be a different way. . . like maybe if you have a past of drug use within the last 4 years or something like that.

[audtatious]

People who have the money to do drugs should not be given welfare on my dime.

[Logan76]

This is the greatest news Ive heard all day, Ive said this for years now, I used to talk to teachers about it in HS, Random drug test's to all welfare recipients.

[audtatious]

Someone will claim discrimination. Watch and see....

[HashiriyaS14]

Someone will claim discrimination. Watch and see....

^^Unfortunately, you're probably right.

This is one issue on which I side solidly with the conservatives. Drug addiction is not a disease and it is not a disability.

NO CLEAN RESULTS = NO WELFARE

If you don't like it, GTFO.

[BusyBadger]

Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

Because all drug addicts look the same and display the same signs & behaviours, right?

Being on welfare should be no different than getting a job where a urinalysis is the norm. While they're at it, they should do a criminal background check.

As far as her having a tough time (presumably you're talking about freeing up some time in her busy schedule), its not like she's being asked to take time out of her busy work schedule. Peeing in a cup is no more an inconvenience than is trotting down to the mailbox to get a check and then finding someplace to cash it.

[intermilanrox]

Honestly, that's a load of CR@P!!

Give them ALL random drug tests and be done with it. I hate the idea of having my tax money being given to some welfare recipient who only uses it for beer and drugs (although I'm only 15 and do not pay taxes, I do not want that to happen when I do start paying taxes).

As that goes, I also agree with DJ Raijin with his IUD idea. There's too many people cheating the system and we need to crack down on it.

[nissangirl74]

I am 100% in favor of drug-testing people who receive government benefits, especially since I am currently a working U.S. citizen and my hard earned money goes to fund these programs. I am probably one of the strongest advocates for honoring the Constitution and the Bill of Rights; however, to those who think this is a violation of the Fourth amendment, get over it. All of the working people have to meet certain standards to earn a living; the unemployed should have to meet certain standards in order to get mailbox money. I have received both unemployment compensation and food stamps in the past; hell, I'll get an unemployment check in the mail THIS WEEK because i was laid off last week. I'd go piss in a cup for anyone and I wouldn't have a problem with it. That's because I'm CLEAN.

[smockers83]

Give them ALL random drug tests and be done with it.

If all of them got random drug tests, it wouldn't be random at all.

[DJ Raijin]

If all of them got random drug tests, it wouldn't be random at all.

Well, random just means that at anytime during the 1 month period, they may or may not be tested. Not random as in "oh we'll pull a name from the hat and they'll get tested".

When I have a steady job, I am an avid cannabis user. When I'm unemployed I do not smoke so I can stay clean for job drug tests. Even I, approve of this.

[intermilanrox]

Smockers, sorry if that wasn't clear enough, I thought it was clear but that's just me talking. But it is DJ said, "random" meaning at any point they can be tested, however everyone will be tested.

[DJ Raijin]

I'm all for chopping welfare for coke heads but while you're at it you victimize all those who are legitimately using the welfare system.

There needs to be a different way. Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

There needs to be a different way. . . like maybe if you have a past of drug use within the last 4 years or something like that.

If their livelihood depends upon them making the trip to pee in a cup, they'll make the trip. Where there's a will there's a way and honestly, whether the single mom can get a babysitter or not for 10 minutes is NOT the government's concern in the least. They can always have someone ride with them (bus, car, taxi, whatever) and watch the kid for the time it'll take them to urinate into a container.

The only people that need to worry about this will be those not smart enough to stop smoking pot and people with addictions to serious drugs such as heroine or crack. They would have to be an extraordinarily strong willed person to endure the withdraw symptoms brought about by stopping use of said drugs.

Don't let a weak willed pothead lie to you. They can stop smoking anytime they want or need to. They just choose not to. People on seriously hard drugs have actual physical and mental stress brought about by going cold turkey on seriously hard substances. They will be the ones to suffer the most.

[WDRacing]

I'm all for chopping welfare for coke heads but while you're at it you victimize all those who are legitimately using the welfare system.

There needs to be a different way. Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

There needs to be a different way. . . like maybe if you have a past of drug use within the last 4 years or something like that.

Intrusive? Perhaps you are thinking we need to catheter these people. But pissing in a cup to get free money is FAR from intrusive. I don't care if Mom is holding a Masters Degree. Piss or GTFO.

That post sounds like someone that knows someone on Welfare doing drugs...or does drugs and supports giving away other peoples money.

[smockers83]

Gotcha, I was thinking more along the lines of airport security with random bag checks. But makes sense, just never had to deal with it before so never sought to figure it out.

[bobotech]

I'm all for chopping welfare for coke heads but while you're at it you victimize all those who are legitimately using the welfare system.

There needs to be a different way. Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

There needs to be a different way. . . like maybe if you have a past of drug use within the last 4 years or something like that.

I don't give a flying s*** if its intrusive or not. If someone is taking MY money to pay for THEIR food, bills, whatever, then as far as I'm concerned, they need to be clean.

I dont' give a crap if its a single mom with 2 kids who ex hubby used to beat the crap out of her or if its some druggie who can't hold down a job, if you take advantage of MY money, then you have to be clean of hard drugs.

If you don't want intrusive, then don't take welfare.

And while we are at it, lets implement a sliding incentive scale of welfare and workfare.

[HashiriyaS14]

Drug tests, in general, are not intrusive. I happen to be in support of legalizing many drugs, but in the meantime, I believe that it should be within the powers of private enterprise to test employees under their employ as said employees can pose a potential liability to the firm if they are under the influence of illegal substances.

Obviously, I don't think that the Government should be able to drug test random citizens, but I definitely support the testing of welfare recipients. I don't think the "intrusive" argument holds any water whatsoever.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »There needs to be a different way. Giving some single mom who is on welfare and having a tough time getting by a cup to go pee in for a drug test is quite intrusive especially if she doesn't show any of the signs of drug use.

[/quote]If it's too instrusive, then they don't have to take the check.

Is it any less intrusive than the drug tests many of us take at work? You want some of my tax dollars for the "safety net?" Then prove you're clean.

I would think someone would be grateful to get assistance and would be happy to take random drug test. Except someone who is using illegal drugs.

What an inconvenience. Someone gets a handout (free money) and it's intrusive to pee in a cup? Fine. Don't accept the money.

Now, practically speaking, unless they test 2-3 times a week, they can easily use around the pee drops. THC stays with you for about 30 days so that's easy enough but opiates, 6-mam, and the like leave traces far more quickly, in days. So yes, randomly they could get caught but the chance is low unless it's frequent testing.

[BusyBadger]

Now, practically speaking, unless they test 2-3 times a week, they can easily use around the pee drops. THC stays with you for about 30 days so that's easy enough but opiates, 6-mam, and the like leave traces far more quickly, in days. So yes, randomly they could get caught but the chance is low unless it's frequent testing.

There's always a spinal tap. Turn it up to 11! Just kidding, that would be intrusive.

There's always hair follicle drug testing. Its good for around 90 days of coverage. Sure there are hair removal methods, but I can't imagine that many are going to resort to a full body wax to get around the testing.

[WDRacing]

I'd be happy with just a pee test. We'd knock out the addicts and basically 95% of the poor dudes that smoke weed. Since it's likes to chill in the fat cells.

But I'd vote for any law introduced no matter what the testing type might be. Brain tissue sample is fine in my book...lol.

[PyR0NiAk]

I'd be happy with just a pee test. We'd knock out the addicts and basically 95% of the poor dudes that smoke weed. Since it's likes to chill in the fat cells.

But I'd vote for any law introduced no matter what the testing type might be. Brain tissue sample is fine in my book...lol.

brain tissue sample would b a fantastic idea

[DJ Raijin]

I'd be happy with just a pee test. We'd knock out the addicts and basically 95% of the poor dudes that smoke weed. Since it's likes to chill in the fat cells.

But I'd vote for any law introduced no matter what the testing type might be. Brain tissue sample is fine in my book...lol.

Spinal Taps and Brain Matter sampling are not cost effective lol. Neither is follicle testing. This issue with that then is you start putting pressure on people who are clean or have recently been released from a rehab center.

Urinalysis is fine since the gov't can do that for under $1 a person plus lab fees. I'm sure you could even circumvent the lab fees by using the over the counter style pee tests.

[480sx]

But I'd vote for any law introduced no matter what the testing type might be. Brain tissue sample is fine in my book...

ROTF