Fl judge drug testing for welfare illegal!
- Thread starter The Dude
- Start date
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
No probable cause either. I mean for most conservatives, who probably don't have a clue what it means to be poor....and I mean really, really poor, this is a knee jerk response to support such an incredibly stupid law. Now I don't approve of unemployed lodos sitting around collecting welfare either but think this through people.
If they can legally coerce you into taking a drug test to collect welfare, then by establishing this precedent that could require you to take a drug test before applying for any government service. For example, they could require you to take a drug test before you can collect unemployment insurance, or Social Security benefits, or Medicare/Medicaid benefits or VA benefits. All benefits you paid for and have earned and that's just a small, small example of how you could be denied government service that you have paid for via your tax dollars with out the government having a legitimate probable cause to do so.
If they can legally coerce you into taking a drug test to collect welfare, then by establishing this precedent that could require you to take a drug test before applying for any government service. For example, they could require you to take a drug test before you can collect unemployment insurance, or Social Security benefits, or Medicare/Medicaid benefits or VA benefits. All benefits you paid for and have earned and that's just a small, small example of how you could be denied government service that you have paid for via your tax dollars with out the government having a legitimate probable cause to do so.
It is more government control, I don't understand why they support this! It expands government power. I thought they were against Big Brother?
The govt control is stealing our money to pay lazy fucks to sit on their ass and get high.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
States that have drug testing have not found a significant (as in, less than 1/10 of 1%) number of state aid recipients using drugs. Therefore these sorts of programs cost more money then they could save, and that's before the 4A considerations.
how is it unreasonable search? no one is forcing them to take welfare. If they want to be a taker they should have to jump through additional hoops.
It is not the same as social security because that is money OWED. The government is giving back money which is yours by right. Welfare money is not yours, and as such, you shouldn't have an expectation of privacy when the individual is going out of their way to be a taker.
It is not the same as social security because that is money OWED. The government is giving back money which is yours by right. Welfare money is not yours, and as such, you shouldn't have an expectation of privacy when the individual is going out of their way to be a taker.
takers should always be punished, be inconvenienced, and be made to go out of their way
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Bullshit. It's not the same thing. You have constitutionally protected rights. If you test positive for an employment drug test you may lose your job but you can't be criminally prosecuted. If you test positive for a drug test when applying for a government service you not only lose your right to a service you paid for but can also be criminally prosecuted by the government. That's a huge fucking difference and a serious abridgement of our freedoms.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
It's an unreasonable search because they don't have probable cause. Your wrong it is the same as SS. You pay tax dollars, which means if you qualify for that benefit it is owed just any other benefit is. You paid for it.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Un huh....how comes your definiton of "a taker" convienantly doesn't include you?
Wrong.
They have an option -- don't take the test, don't take the money.
Easy peasy.
There is no 'right' to someone else's money.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
That's because in conservative lingo "Big Government" is code language for opposing the expansion of individual freedoms and liberties. When it comes to real governance most of the big increases in the size and scope of government as occurred during Republican administrations. In addition when they scream bloody murder about "Big Government" it almost always comes when there has been a significant increase in the size and scope of individual freedom and liberty, which they oppose.
bullshit. the people on welfare are poor as shit. they will almost always be getting more than they put in with regards to welfare.
No one is forcing them to take welfare, the police aren't coming to their house to bust down their door without a warrant. To be drug tested the voluntarily have to submit themselves to it. it's tit for tat.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
So you're telling me that your constitutional rights have conditions?
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Bullshit back at you. That's coercion pal and we have constitutional protections against forms of coercions that erode our civil liberties.
You can waive your right to remain silent. If you do so, that doesn't mean your confession was coerced.
Likewise, you can waive your right to not be drug tested. If you do so, you can get some sweet taker goods, but it doesn't mean you were coerced.
and I have never heard of it being a crime for someone to have drugs already in their system. You would not be criminally liable for that. Unless it violated your parole or something.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Because patricians cannot be takers.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I see and what probable cause does the government have to believe that I've committed a crime?