Official News topic

[wataru]

He means the Vicodin, I beleive.

And seriously people, let's not start the bullshit again.

Yeah...3 vicodin over a 3 day period = major pill head.

Hey, blame gvamp - he's raggin' again.

[yaburu]

Hey, blame gvamp - he's raggin' again.

Oh trust me, I am.

[nectarsis]

At least up here if you have kids, the kids would be covered by WIC (obviously not the father).

We have WIC down here as well. There are many government aid programs but theyre just so cocked up. When my father died last year, my father's SSI was reduced to Survivors Benefits which is considerably less then what he was making with SSI. We she applied for food stamps and was turned down because she made too much money - nevermind that she doesnt get the money until mid-July and has to go from Jan. til June without it. Luckily Im able to take care of her now, otherwise she'd be scrapping by for food and her meds (she, like my father, has major heart problems). The 'system' is so skreeonk up, and getting more skreeonk up because of system like this drug testing BS, that no one can get help. Spending money without thought of where it goes and no spending money on programs to stop existing leaks.

I agree the "system" (as well MANY others ) are seriously flawed, and abused. On the other hand I see this drug testing as at least a start in "fixing" one of the loopholes. If it stops even 100-1,000, the benefits that wouldn't be paid out would easily cover the test costs. The ONLY people this would hurt/should bother people is those who have something to hide (would piss dirty).

[Malchik]

Boobies

[HayesAJones]

That's really messed up.

[NSZ]

Y'see, it's news like that that makes me want to pummel the human race's collective face with a crowbar.

[Chris55]

Y'see, it's news like that that makes me want to pummel the human race's collective face with a crowbar.

I'd rather just ignore it. Why have all that anger?

[anguirusnut94]

^Anger's more fun, duh!

[Jomei]

It's perfectly legal for companies that require me to take a drug test to actually WORK, I see no problem making sure people aren't using ILLEGAL drugs to receive a taxpayer funded program.

It violates the 4th amendment.

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.

A government-mandated drug test for welfare recipients would be a search without probable cause. They aren't hiring employees, so drug-free workplace acts don't really apply here.

Plus it's just a stupid idea: http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform/drug-testing-public-assistance-recipients-condition-eligibility

[Darth Calypso]

A picture of curley from the new Three Stooges movie is revealed: http://blog.movies.yahoo.com/blog/1554- ... ee-stooges

[DaikaijuSokogeki!]

A picture of curley from the new Three Stooges movie is revealed: http://blog.movies.yahoo.com/blog/1554- ... ee-stooges

God, this movie is just one huge bad idea.

[Showa Gyaos]

Will Sasso?.....THE MOVIE'S GONNA' BOMB!

[nectarsis]

It's perfectly legal for companies that require me to take a drug test to actually WORK, I see no problem making sure people aren't using ILLEGAL drugs to receive a taxpayer funded program.

It violates the 4th amendment.

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.

A government-mandated drug test for welfare recipients would be a search without probable cause. They aren't hiring employees, so drug-free workplace acts don't really apply here.

Plus it's just a stupid idea: http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform/drug-testing-public-assistance-recipients-condition-eligibility

If it does indeed violate the 4th amendment, how did "The 1996 Welfare Reform Act authorized - but did not require - states to impose mandatory drug testing as a prerequisite to receiving state welfare assistance" pass...much less not have been negated as unconstitutional in over 15 years? Going off the page you showed, even using the old (15 years out of date) Michigan #'s (and who knows how exact those #'s are as the program was stopped prematurely) at 10% failed that pretty much shows a REASON...hence unreasonable searches don't apply as they have established probable cause.

[Crocodile]

A government-mandated drug test for welfare recipients would be a search without[b] probable cause.]/b] They aren't hiring employees, so drug-free workplace acts don't really apply here.

Same reason businesses can do it, to ensure that the people recieving it aren't on drugs.

It's to prevent the welfare system from being used to support drug habbits, especially the ones that feed the cartels. It's protection of assets

/propable cause

[yaburu]

So apparently, the shooter of Tupac Shakur has come forward and confessed his crime:

http://celebs.gather.com/viewArticle.ac ... 4979454658

[Jomei]

A government-mandated drug test for welfare recipients would be a search without[b] probable cause.]/b] They aren't hiring employees, so drug-free workplace acts don't really apply here.

Same reason businesses can do it, to ensure that the people recieving it aren't on drugs.

It's to prevent the welfare system from being used to support drug habbits, especially the ones that feed the cartels. It's protection of assets

/propable cause

Probable cause means they have reason to suspect you of being on illegal drugs. It doesn't mean you just have to have a reason for wanting to screen people.

Given that the ACLU page I posted states that "according to a 1996 study by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, differences between the proportion of welfare and non-welfare recipients using illegal drugs are statistically insignificant," there is no probable cause to suspect welfare recipients more than anyone else of using drugs.

[gvamp]

Given that the ACLU page I posted states that "according to a 1996 study by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, differences between the proportion of welfare and non-welfare recipients using illegal drugs are statistically insignificant," there is no probable cause to suspect welfare recipients more than anyone else of using drugs.

That was back in 1996 this is 2011 a lot of things can change in 14 years.

[Showa Gyaos]

Well, this is one shocking story: A man can conduct 20,000 volts of electricity without negative effects.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... m-him.html

This story gave me a buzz. I swear, I'm stunned by this. I'm pretty sure he feels a jolt of excitement when he does this shit too! [Okay, I'm done with the crappy electricity puns.]

[anguirusnut94]

I'm immpressed... he's no X-Man, but still, that's pretty cool!
Lucky bastard...

[Godzillatheultimate]

Well, this is one shocking story: A man can conduct 20,000 volts of electricity without negative effects.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... m-him.html

This story gave me a buzz. I swear, I'm stunned by this. I'm pretty sure he feels a jolt of excitement when he does this shit too! [Okay, I'm done with the crappy electricity puns.]

Cole from Infamous IRL.