I assume you mean pRick Scott, who owns (in his wifes' name) a chain of clinics that do drug testing?
Rookie gov has welfare folks testing. 2.5 percent tested positive while 9 percent of the gen population use drugs. What a bunch of education hating republicans.
I assume you mean pRick Scott, who owns (in his wifes' name) a chain of clinics that do drug testing?
Put blame where it belongs
ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.
one more example of how people seem forced to surrender their rights in order to get help from their government.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
for the most part, yes. only in extremely rare circumstances is a law enforcement officer charged with any crime if someone dies by his hand while on duty.
and adding on to this, there are very few policies in effect to force an LEO to undergo any testing after an excessive force incident. It also should include steroid testing at scheduled intervals.
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Really? Can you substantiate these claims with factual evidence?
Because in just one jurisdiction, I found the opposite to be true:
"Compelled intoxicant testing can be conducted if there are indications of possible intoxication and legal standards are met."
http://www.denverda.org/News_Release...20Protocol.pdf
And when I ran this search, I got a lot of results that indicate that police do face charges in shooting cases.
http://www.google.com/webhp?complete...w=1024&bih=510
And why should a test you regard as invasive be mandatory for law enforcement officers but not aircraft operators?
just because it CAN be, doesn't mean it's GOING to be. i've posted numerous articles on this forum about police officers causing accidents ON DUTY where it was later determined that there was evidence that the officer might have been drunk, but on scene fellow officers covered it up. Again, i've posted numerous articles on incidents like this. don't pretend that i haven't.
whats the date on this policy? oh, 2011????? what was it before?
so because a FEW are actually 'arrested', that would mean that no officer escapes being charged?
we have government agents that are aircraft operators?
A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.
Doesn't mean it's not going to be, either, does it? If you have evidence to the contrary, post it.
Numerous articles that police officers "might have been drunk", eh? If you have evidence that officers have perjured themselves and weren't prosecuted, you duty as a citizen is clear. If you don't, you're blowing smoke. Numerous doesn't mean anything, execept numerous.
I don't know. Why don't you find out and tell me?
Can you cite the ratio of guilty officers vs those arrested and charged? Yes, or no?
Probably, but that's not what I said. The discussion was about drug testing Florida state employees before you got all twisted with your favorite bugaboo.
We definitely have state employees who operate aircraft in the line of duty, yet you only want LEOs tested. What's up with that?
Bookmarks