BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-20-2011, 05:15 AM   #1
EngineCo52
Major
 
Drives: 2007 Montego 328xi CPE
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Havre de Grace, MD

Posts: 1,458
iTrader: (2)

Florida-Drug Test to Get Welfare

I heard today that Florida passed a law making it you have to take a drug test before being able to get welfare?? Why are there more states if not all 50 doing this?? We get a urinalysis to get a job and EARN money, but you don't have to have one to get free money

I say WAY TO GO FLORIDA

what do you guys think??
EngineCo52 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-20-2011, 05:43 AM   #2
matthewk
Private First Class
 
matthewk's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: TX

Posts: 110
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineCo52 View Post
I heard today that Florida passed a law making it you have to take a drug test before being able to get welfare?? Why are there more states if not all 50 doing this?? We get a urinalysis to get a job and EARN money, but you don't have to have one to get free money

I say WAY TO GO FLORIDA

what do you guys think??
Given there are instant drug tests now, I would completely support a requirement mandating a clean drug test prior to picking up your monthly check.
matthewk is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-20-2011, 02:36 PM   #3
EngineCo52
Major
 
Drives: 2007 Montego 328xi CPE
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Havre de Grace, MD

Posts: 1,458
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewk View Post
Given there are instant drug tests now, I would completely support a requirement mandating a clean drug test prior to picking up your monthly check.
yeah me to!!! just wish more states were doing this!
EngineCo52 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-20-2011, 03:20 PM   #4
AngelinIsRich08
Banned
 
Drives: '11 X5M, '09 CTS
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO

Posts: 709
iTrader: (0)

Hell yes. I think not all states are doing this because they think the tests themselves will cost too much however they should also take into account how much money they'll save when they're not giving tax payer money to crackheads.
AngelinIsRich08 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-21-2011, 05:56 PM   #5
UncleWede
Long Time Admirer, First Time Owner
 
UncleWede's Avatar
 
Drives: E90 325i Arctic
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Oxnard, CA

Posts: 2,294
iTrader: (0)

Would require a state law that says you can't be on drugs/alcohol BEFORE you can test for them. With our PC-correct representatives, how many are willing to stick their necks out for that? Obviously not enough.
UncleWede is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-29-2011, 07:37 PM   #6
1997gtx
Lieutenant
 
1997gtx's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 328xi | 08 S5 | 02 S4
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CT

Posts: 530
iTrader: (0)

Illegal and too expensive. Fail.
__________________
08 328xi - SOLD | 08 S5 | 02 S4
1997gtx is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 12:35 AM   #7
EngineCo52
Major
 
Drives: 2007 Montego 328xi CPE
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Havre de Grace, MD

Posts: 1,458
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
Illegal and too expensive. Fail.
how is it illegal??
__________________
E92 328xi Mods-KW V1-BMW Performance Exhaust-Matte Black Grill-CF Mirror Covers-CF B-Pillars-20% Tint-Coming soon:AG M310's, M3 Rep Front, Black Roof, Vinyl Window Trim

E9x Picture Game-8 Points-Roundabout, Something Remarkable(stack of 50 g's), Cruise Memorabilia, Dirt Road w/ Trees, Michael Jackson, Police Station ,Dress-Up Funny, TPMS
EngineCo52 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 08:07 AM   #8
OldArmy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2007 Z4 3.0si
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Central Virginia

Posts: 523
iTrader: (0)

It's only illegal until it's not. All this takes is balls, legislation and a willingness to see it through in court.
OldArmy is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 10:51 AM   #9
ryguy84
Private First Class
 
Drives: looking
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Francisco, Ca

Posts: 109
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
Illegal and too expensive. Fail.
Exactly sounds good but won't happen. Its giving the florida voters a show. How about no more welfare! Ive seen a house with 9 generations of family members on welfare all sitting in the same room how disgusting.
ryguy84 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 11:02 AM   #10
ryguy84
Private First Class
 
Drives: looking
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Francisco, Ca

Posts: 109
iTrader: (0)

Someone answer this question for me. Say a good president gets elected, the senate gets constitutional loving members in, and the same with congress. Say all the cuts happen and government finally gets smaller what will happen to all the hippies who live off art and music grants, all the non profits who say there helping people are pocketing the money, all the welfare recipients who will no longer get a check and asked to go to work, all the kids in college who say they deserve free education and don't, and the EPA gets no more say in our manufacturing sector what will all these people do?
ryguy84 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 05:16 PM   #11
1997gtx
Lieutenant
 
1997gtx's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 328xi | 08 S5 | 02 S4
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CT

Posts: 530
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineCo52 View Post
how is it illegal??
As demonstrated by all the other states that have tried this - and failed - it's unconstitutional (unreasonable search and seizure) and it's overly expensive.
__________________
08 328xi - SOLD | 08 S5 | 02 S4
1997gtx is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 05:17 PM   #12
1997gtx
Lieutenant
 
1997gtx's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 328xi | 08 S5 | 02 S4
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CT

Posts: 530
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldArmy View Post
It's only illegal until it's not. All this takes is balls, legislation and a willingness to see it through in court.
I don't know what that means? It's been ruled on before.
__________________
08 328xi - SOLD | 08 S5 | 02 S4
1997gtx is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 05:18 PM   #13
1997gtx
Lieutenant
 
1997gtx's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 328xi | 08 S5 | 02 S4
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CT

Posts: 530
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ryguy84 View Post
Someone answer this question for me. Say a good president gets elected, the senate gets constitutional loving members in, and the same with congress. Say all the cuts happen and government finally gets smaller what will happen to all the hippies who live off art and music grants, all the non profits who say there helping people are pocketing the money, all the welfare recipients who will no longer get a check and asked to go to work, all the kids in college who say they deserve free education and don't, and the EPA gets no more say in our manufacturing sector what will all these people do?
It's called a recession.
__________________
08 328xi - SOLD | 08 S5 | 02 S4
1997gtx is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 08:12 PM   #14
OldArmy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2007 Z4 3.0si
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Central Virginia

Posts: 523
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
I don't know what that means? It's been ruled on before.
And whatever ruling you refer to will stand forever? The term "settled law" is an oxymoron.
OldArmy is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 08:15 PM   #15
KGB7
Crazy Russian Bastard
 
KGB7's Avatar
 
Drives: 01 740i sport
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Siberian Prison

Posts: 824
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
As demonstrated by all the other states that have tried this - and failed - it's unconstitutional (unreasonable search and seizure) and it's overly expensive.
You not searching or seizing anything. If that was true, then it should be illegal for your employer to give you a drug test.

After all, welfare money comes from your taxes, so you should support drug screening.
__________________
B
M
W
KGB7 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 08:32 PM   #16
1997gtx
Lieutenant
 
1997gtx's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 328xi | 08 S5 | 02 S4
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: CT

Posts: 530
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KGB7 View Post
You not searching or seizing anything. If that was true, then it should be illegal for your employer to give you a drug test.

After all, welfare money comes from your taxes, so you should support drug screening.
You are performing an unreasonable search because getting welfare alone is not probable cause for someone to be doing drugs. Drug testing a prior felon, for example, does give probable cause.

In regards to drug testing in the work place, there are a few federal laws and many precedents that allow this. Reagan signed Executive Order 12564, which prohibited federal employees using drugs. Then in 88, Congress passed the Drug-Free Workplace Act. There have been a few more laws since then.

The difference between workplace testing and testing welfare recipients is that the company hiring you has a vested interest in your performance on the job. They are paying you for a service and have a right to make stipulations of that employment since most people are "at will" employees. Therefore, while it is a search, it's a reasonable one.

This is a good page to read more about all of this.

Personally, I'd be all for drug testing when reasonable suspicion exists. But the state will spend more money conducting the drug tests than they'll save. So, it's a waste of money.
__________________
08 328xi - SOLD | 08 S5 | 02 S4
1997gtx is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 09:04 PM   #17
KGB7
Crazy Russian Bastard
 
KGB7's Avatar
 
Drives: 01 740i sport
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Siberian Prison

Posts: 824
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
You are performing an unreasonable search because getting welfare alone is not probable cause for someone to be doing drugs. Drug testing a prior felon, for example, does give probable cause.

In regards to drug testing in the work place, there are a few federal laws and many precedents that allow this. Reagan signed Executive Order 12564, which prohibited federal employees using drugs. Then in 88, Congress passed the Drug-Free Workplace Act. There have been a few more laws since then.

The difference between workplace testing and testing welfare recipients is that the company hiring you has a vested interest in your performance on the job. They are paying you for a service and have a right to make stipulations of that employment since most people are "at will" employees. Therefore, while it is a search, it's a reasonable one.

This is a good page to read more about all of this.

Personally, I'd be all for drug testing when reasonable suspicion exists. But the state will spend more money conducting the drug tests than they'll save. So, it's a waste of money.

Take what you said about employers drug testing and replace it with welfare word for word. We just need the Congress to pass the Act.

And i strongly believe that Govnt will save a lot of money by drug testing people that are on welfare. Look at this way; if you get a check for $200 each month, but the cost of drug screen is $60, thats a savings of $140 to Govnt if you dont pass the test. And as of today, i would have to take a light guess, that 50% of people wouldn't pass a drug test. And thats a lot of savings to Govnt.
__________________
B
M
W

Last edited by KGB7; 07-30-2011 at 09:09 PM.
KGB7 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-30-2011, 09:12 PM   #18
AngelinIsRich08
Banned
 
Drives: '11 X5M, '09 CTS
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO

Posts: 709
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1997gtx View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by EngineCo52 View Post
how is it illegal??
As demonstrated by all the other states that have tried this - and failed - it's unconstitutional (unreasonable search and seizure) and it's overly expensive.
What? A simple piss in the cup before you get your checks? To work at a Mcdonalds you need a drug test. These people don't deserve money for doing nothing.
AngelinIsRich08 is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-31-2011, 06:25 AM   #19
OldArmy
Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2007 Z4 3.0si
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Central Virginia

Posts: 523
iTrader: (0)

We discriminate and differentiate all the time. What is unreasonable about not wanting to give my tax dollars to someone who will burn it in an illegal pursuit? Blind people don't get to drive, pedophiles don't get to work in a child care facility, felons don't get to buy guns, quadriplegics don't get to play pro football, women don't get to serve in combat arms, the list of acceptable discrimination is endless. Drug users are unlikely to use taxpayer aid to better themselves--indeed they are highly likely to use the money to feed or subsidize their habit. Now if aid consisted of subsistence items only (block of cheese, gallon of milk, etc) I might not care who got it but it doesn't.
OldArmy is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      07-31-2011, 08:36 PM   #20
Keto
Major
 
Keto's Avatar
 
Drives: 550i M-sport AW
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: N'awlins

Posts: 1,427
iTrader: (1)

We'll spend more money in police, prison and various other government functions when all the druggies lose their monthly check and go on a crime spree.
__________________
'11 550i, but it's too big for me
Prev: '08 E92 M3, '04 E46 M3
Waiting on redelivery: 2015 F80 M3 SO/SO MT, picked up at Welt 7/1/2014, dropped off in Antwerp 7/11
Keto is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      08-01-2011, 09:16 AM   #21
uberschnell
Brigadier General
 
uberschnell's Avatar
 
Drives: // 135i //, X5
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bay Area

Posts: 3,417
iTrader: (43)

Answer this question:

At least 3/4 of the welfare payments / benefits are issued to the Children in the family. Most child-less abled body adults do not qualify for much more then Unemployment insurance. It's the fact that they have kids that gets them the aid.

Lets say you cut off funding / housing to a family because the parent does drugs. What do you do when the rate of malnourished / abused / homeless children increases?

Do you take them away? Because that costs a hell of a lot more money then the original welfare payment. Do you let them live on the streets helping create hordes of parent less, uneducated gutter criminals like in Brazil? - and the Police costs needed to handle this cost way more then the aid payments (of course).

Sorry, but Florida is the LAST place to look for well thought out comprehensive ideas.
__________________
- 08 135i - Wavetrac LSD, AST 4100, Swift springs, Brembo GT brakes, M3 front sway, Meyle HD links, Dinan Camber plates, Whiteline subframe bushings, M3 rear guide and upper link, M3 front control arms, HP custom M3 front Strut brace, Megan rear control arms, F30 brake shields -
uberschnell is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
      08-01-2011, 09:23 AM   #22
uberschnell
Brigadier General
 
uberschnell's Avatar
 
Drives: // 135i //, X5
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bay Area

Posts: 3,417
iTrader: (43)

Quote:
Originally Posted by OldArmy View Post
We discriminate and differentiate all the time. What is unreasonable about not wanting to give my tax dollars to someone who will burn it in an illegal pursuit? Blind people don't get to drive, pedophiles don't get to work in a child care facility, felons don't get to buy guns, quadriplegics don't get to play pro football, women don't get to serve in combat arms, the list of acceptable discrimination is endless. Drug users are unlikely to use taxpayer aid to better themselves--indeed they are highly likely to use the money to feed or subsidize their habit. Now if aid consisted of subsistence items only (block of cheese, gallon of milk, etc) I might not care who got it but it doesn't.
Because you live in a society and must live with the consequences of your decisions. You cannot just cut people off without dramatic consequences.

Agree with you on the "care not cash" approach. In fact it was Gavin Newsome who really pushed the care not cash approach into law, in San Francisco of all places (gasp)!
__________________
- 08 135i - Wavetrac LSD, AST 4100, Swift springs, Brembo GT brakes, M3 front sway, Meyle HD links, Dinan Camber plates, Whiteline subframe bushings, M3 rear guide and upper link, M3 front control arms, HP custom M3 front Strut brace, Megan rear control arms, F30 brake shields -
uberschnell is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:24 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST