Do you think people on welfare need to give a drug test?

Post Reply New Topic

You failed to mention the cocaine

I forgot about that, plus there champagne and cigars

The Cronies sure do know how to live it up at our expense.

ruveyn

The thing is people at the low end of the society aren't the ones to worry about, socially or financially speaking. The ones you really want to go after the most are the millionares who are in drug cartels, who deal drugs, do cocaine, do whatever they please, who murder, the sociopaths who use children to sell drugs. These are the people who should be punished the most harshly, not the homeless person living on the back alley doing shooting heroin because he doesn't know what to else to do... the person who is not street smart enough to cheat his way out of urine tests, it's always the sociopaths who get off scot-free.. the innocent person who uses marijuana to cope with life is always the one who ends up demonized.

There is a fine distinction between helping a drug addict and punishing them. And part of this is how drug addicts are viewed. It's not always so cut and dry.

The people we need to worry about are ALL people who are involved in destructive activities, all the way from the (figuratively) lowest of the low who are slowly killing themselves all the way up to wealthy users who really keep the dealers in business.


Sure...but where are they getting the money?


The one's doing the most harm, agreed, should be the one's who get punished the most. But a crime is a crime is a crime, and if there is a guy in the back alley shooting heroin, not knowing what else to do is no excuse for the law. Put it in perspective--if you kill an innocent person because you "don't know what else to do..." you're still committing murder and deserve to be put on trial for your crime. Purchase and possession of harmful, illegal drugs is still a crime.

Question: where does the homeless guy get the money? Think about it...the homeless are extremely prone to losing any kind of verifiable identity without which they cannot even receive public help. Once you're homelessness, you fall into a whole string of Catch-22s that keep you on the street. So where's the money coming from?


But psychotropics aren't really coping mechanisms. If they were, they'd only be temporary measures carried out under the supervision of a qualified psychologist and prescribed only as-needed and withdrawn when the issue to be coped with is finally handled. The way something like marijuana and "hard drugs" are actually used when someone is addicted is not to cope with life. It's to escape from it. They don't themselves actually solve any problems that lead to the addiction in the first place. Instead of MY money going to help support a harmful habit or addiction, why don't we just get help for these guys that REALLY WILL help them cope without doing themselves harm? Escaping the problem won't help. Confronting it and dealing with it will.

Your problem is not really with "sociopaths." It's with people who have the means to buy drugs for recreational purposes. Addiction may or may not be an issue. And we should find these people and bring them to justice. But what are we really asking here? "Where is the money coming from?" It's their own money, not mine, that is enabling their behavior.

OK, it's MY money, too, if I buy products from a wealthy business owner who uses drugs. But if I'm AWARE that a wealthy businessman is using money I give him in exchange for even legit products and services to engage in illegal and/or destructive activities, I'm less likely to patronize him. I'd rather deal with someone I know is clean and honest than with someone with no regard for the law.


Could punishing them also help them? If it helps cut off a means by which they could get something that's just going to do them harm anyway, well, it's almost like six of one and half a dozen of another. At least taxpayers who do not favor putting money in their hands to enable an addiction would have a clear conscience. Divert the money to programs that will get them of drugs and KEEP them off.

Another thing to think about is that education programs have largely informed the young about the dangers of illegal drug use. So it's not like people who make the choice to use don't know the risks involved. Because they KNOW better, starting an addiction for many is a choice. I'm not talking about someone suffering from a back injury getting addicted to prescription pain meds. I'm talking about the willful, intentional purchase, possession, and use of drugs with no legit medical benefit for recreational purposes. Not everyone who consumes alcohol becomes addicted to it, but drugs such as heroin develop a quick addiction with painful and sometimes even deadly withdrawal. I can't understand why someone would choose that kind of destructive path, but I see it as pointless and maybe even criminal to just hand out money for the sake of someone working their way to an early grave. It is possible to moderate withdrawal symptoms so that a heroin user can safely stop using. Of course, there's the old fashioned method that involves nailing the bedroom door shut and holing up with three buckets. It's quicker, but not necessarily safe for all addicts. So ultimately it is possible to stop the behavior and get clean, one way or the other, and the public doesn't have to be concerned with supporting unfavorable behavior. I dunno if that's really punishment, though, because the recovering addict is better off without the drugs.

a bad habit like the war on drugs?

It looks like essentially your argument is it's ok for wealthy people to do drugs, but the poor and very poor should be drug tested to get any help because poor drug users are scum who should be looked down on and refused any assistance and even thrown in jail all in the name of 'well it's the law and the law is holy and cannot be questioned.' And also what would these drug tests help make your concience more clear because you know a poor mariujuana smoker who needs financial assistance wont recieve any but some wealthy banker snorting cocaine and contributing to all kinds of terrible things having to do with cocaine production and distribution should get a free pass because they're providing a 'genuine, good quality, wonderful service.'

A lot of the info they teach in these school programs is inaccurate......but you honestly think just telling kids 'don't do drugs' is going to prevent them from getting curious about drugs and experimenting with them? Also I don't think most people who try herion are planning on it becoming a full on addiction.......so to answer that no one really 'chooses' to get to that point.

Also if we drug test the poor and refuse them any aid if they fail.......what would be your solution for those people? if the system wont help them it's likely they'll just resort to crime like stealing which is probably even more unpleasant then the thought that maybe some money you paid in taxes went to drugs. Not to mention not everyone who uses drugs is an addict or working their way to an early grave so it is ridiculous to assume they are based on a drug test. Then of course there are the false positives.

A bad habit like buying and using drugs to one's own detriment.

ruveyn

Wealthy people should be held just as accountable. It just so happens they're not on the public dole. They're not living off of tax payer expense.

Unfortunately the major "welfare Queens" are some large corporations receiving tax subsidies and preferential legislation. It is amazing how cheaply our government sells its honor to the bribers.

ruveyn

Detriment is one thing, but I am sure not everyone see's their morning cup of coffee as to their own detriment(though caffeine when used regularly can cause some damage and of course drinking is legal and by all the ads I see I would say almost encouraged. So I don't see what's so different with some of the other substances.

I guess they ought to ban coffee, alcohol and any unhealthy foods they deem can contribute to any health problems. Then we can test people on welfare to make sure they are eating, sleeping and living within a very strict set of humiliating guidelines a parent wouldn't even subject their children to.

So anyways how should the problem of having a bunch of drug addicts with nowhere to turn but crime be dealt with, spending the taxes on more prisons to house them? Just saying regardless of any arguments for drug testing for welfare that I find reasonable, it would probably still be a disaster.

Well that is an interesting way to look at it, considering we supposedly have a trickle down system but it's really more of a suck the majority dry for the benefit of the super wealthy system. So by that logic they are very much on the public dole, I mean honestly who would benefit from requiring drug tests for welfare, think about it? the general public? probably not, considering the rate of crimes like stealing might go up, violent crime might rise because barring any in need of welfare of some sort who fails a drug test from receiving any sort of government help or welfare will lead to more desperation. So that would make for a more unpleasant time for the public I would think.

You have not read the latest. Us coffee folks live longer and we are more awake during the time we are alive.

Coffee does not detract from our ability to reason clearly. In point of fact the software industry is proof positive that gallons and gallons of coffee can be transmuted into useful software.

ruveyn

but it is proven that your thought process slows if you drink more than a couple of cups a day (actual cups not mugs) and then dont receive it.

so you are as addicted to this substance as most are to other stuff, the physical detriment is simply non existent unless you over imbibe(funny how that holds true for most drugs, legal, prescription or otherwise)

I am living proof that this is not so. The more coffee I drink, the smarter I get.

ruveyn