Comments on: Scott Appeals State Employee Drug Testing Case

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 01:51:31 +0000

REGARDING:
“Government employees are subject to the same laws as every private citizen ”

Not entirely.

Government employees can execute convicted killers. Private citizens aren’t allowed to do so.

Legislators are exempt from traffic laws while going to and from meetings of Congress.

There is debate concerning the constitutionality of private guards for imprisoned persons versus government employed corrections officers.

Private citizens can proclaim their religious beliefs and try to win converts while on the job. Government employees are forbidden under the Constitution.

Private citizens can employ people under restrictions not allowed to government employees.

There really IS a difference.

David thinking of differences

By: Mr Manager

Mr Manager — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 01:25:58 +0000

Government employees are subject to the same laws as every private citizen because guess what the laws that apply to government employees apply to everybody. Government employees don’t have special exceptions applied. I guess the question becomes would you like the government to test you at your at your private place of employment? It’s not about employer/employee. It’s about what the government can do and what the Constitution allows. The federal judge is correct.

By: bb12

bb12 — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 02:00:25 +0000

If the state wants to ensure its workforce is not a bunch drug addicts they should be able to. They are not forcing anybody to take a drug test. If you dont want to take one you can find a place that doesnt test and work there.

By: Betty

Betty — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 10:51:24 +0000

To bad you can’t test for lazy non productive state workers who just want to hang in until they can get that fat unearned retirement package..As for drug testing..I am with the crowd who says “If you are clean..why pitch a fit”

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 01:34:51 +0000

REGARDING:
“Nobody should be subjected to random drug test or pre-employment drug screenings, whether they are flipping burgers or working for the state. It’s in the Constitution ”

Not really

[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.]
(Note that drug screenings aren’t mentioned by name anywhere.)

but even if it were:

whether they’re babysitting nuclear bombs?
—or even ordinary thousand pound high explosive bombs?
whether they’re driving jet fuel down the public highways?
whether they’re carrying a busload of children?
whether they’re pulling a train carrying a hundred tankers of chlorine gas or anhydrous ammonia through the middle of town?
whether they’re flying a jet with over 500 souls into and out of densely populated cities?

I don’t know, some testing in these situations looks like it might be just a wee bit reasonable. Remember the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Besides, the Constitutional limitation on unreasonable searches is a restriction on government power, not on Burger King power. If Burger King doesn’t want drug addicts with communicable diseases making your ice cream cone, give them a break.

David considering unreasonable restrictions
on public safety

By: huh

huh — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 00:57:50 +0000

So much for limited government!

By: Jane

Jane — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 00:24:24 +0000

So you would prefer to have someone who is high evaluating your taxes, driver’s license exam, etc., than have them take a drug test? Maybe if more government workers/officials took drug tests there would be less people making costly mistakes with government money. Just a thought.

By: 429SCJ

429SCJ — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 23:56:14 +0000

This is what happens when you invite a perfect stranger, an outsider into your home and let them tell you how to live.

I have heard it said the people who voted for Scott, do not complain because they are satisfied. I have yet to find anyone who voted for him, to tell me just how satisfied they are.

By: Rufus Lowgun

Rufus Lowgun — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 22:28:58 +0000

Nobody should be subjected to random drug test or pre-employment drug screenings, whether they are flipping burgers or working for the state. It’s in the Constitution, ffs. I can’t think of a more unreasonable search and seizure than being required to pee in a cup to keep your job. It’s unbelievable how many people have the attitude that “if I have to take a drug test, everyone should”, rather than “nobody should have to take a drug test”. It’s the height of selfishness. Just how many of your Constitutional rights are you willing to give away just so “they” don’t have something you don’t have?

By: Mnon

Mnon — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 22:02:04 +0000

So I guess you can smoke crack and spend tax dollars while in a Government office, but not to flip a burger at McDonalds.