We should give money to drug users because otherwise they will kill and rob us?

Sounds good, in fact why don’t we just give them the most potent drugs made? Surely that would be safer for us and cheaper as well since it would cut out the pushers and their inflated prices.

David for cowing in fear

Drugs testing applicants is not cost effective. That has already been proven. While Conservatives assume that everyone on welfare is doing drugs, it is actually a very small percent so you end up spending more money testing everyone and continually testing everyone vs any money you think you are saving, because if you keep benefits from those who might be taking drugs, then they will likely get desperate and turn to steeling from your home or committing a violent crime/robbery, which is a cost in the degradation of society and they end up in jail which, like I said, will cost 3 to 4 times more in tax revenue and then they get out and the cycle starts all over again.

That, as we cut benefits to social programs at places like Lakeview that could help these people deal with their drug issues and why they use.

Not to mention, some folks have medical problems and need public assistance and the government shouldn’t have a right to access your medical information that should be between you and your doctor.

Drug testing is a way of having a bigger, more expensive and more intrusive government, just like conservatives really want. It is another contradicting principle that conservatives have.

The government wants them on welfare, so why would they make incentives for people to get jobs and get off? That would be the opposite of what the administration wants. Government only seeks to grow, consume, waste, erode, and spend.

Picture the federal government like this: A massive milticolored blob of fat with a huge mouth consuming all, eating excess food nonstop, all day and night, producing nothing beneficial to the economy, in fact restricting people and things as it grows fatter and fatter – sweating, burping, blowing smoke, lies, untruths, half truths, hogging all space, time, being incosiderate, loud, obnoxious, arrogant, disrespectful, foul mouthed, spitting, bad breathed, stinky, sloppy, rude, clumsy, crude, foul, inhumane and a downright disusting never ending run on sentence.

That is exactly the vision we should all have. Granted some federal government is good. *Some

Right now, the federal government is a fat obese blob of all consuming nature. It needs to be trimmed down to a healthy, fit, productive, fiscally responsible federal government. That is the image I have.

The limitation on searches is twofold: It is on government and it involves involuntary searches.

The second is the kicker here: nobody is searched without their consent. I’m not allowed in some court rooms without going through a metal detector. If I want to be there, I consent. I’m not allowed to drive tons of metal down the road without consenting to drug testing, I consent. If I want to fly in a machine with hundreds of others, I have to consent to searches even though one look shows I’m the most harmless person on earth. (Note: even though I’M harmless, someone MIGHT decide to slip a bomb into my luggage.)

Regardless, according to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is never wrong since it lists them as the ultimate decider.

David for truth

so, I agree with Rufus on this. although the supreme court ruled in favor of one unconstitutional law (employers drug testing), that does not mean we should encourage more unconstitutional laws be passed to make things seem more “fair”. if anything, you should be protesting against the legality of your employer requiring invasive searches of your person.

and to the person who said that this isn’t a socialist country–yes we are, at least somewhat. you might mean that our country was not founded upon the ideas of socialism.. but since every government program that has been listed here is a socialist program, you cannot say that we are not at least a somewhat socialist country.