Fingerprint Drug Test

[going_home]

Looks like the government has figured out how to do a drug test from a fingerprint.


http://www.geekosystem.com/drug-test-fingerprint



Is this good or bad ?

Should it be termed as easier or more privacy invasive ?

Discuss .


:ninja:

[wetwrks]

Personally I am against all drug use...even medical pot. On the other hand I disagree with this. Too easy to be abused. I saw a show where the police called someone in that they thought had been involved in a murder and they tried something like 20 different ways to get a dna sample without him giving permission. Off a soda can, off a cigerette, off a licked envelope...

I also question the odds of a test being messed up by contamination from outside sources. They say that something like 90% of $ has drug residue on it...who is to say that just handling your cash wouldn't produce a false positive. And say a drug user touches something and leaves a drug positive print and then you touch that area and they test and claim you are positive for drugs when it was actually from the underlying print. Or say you touch something that a druggy has touched and it leaves his drug positive oil on your finger and then you transfer it with your print.

Too easy to have this abused and too easy to have a false reading from this.

[hill160881]

I dont care what people do in there free time so I am against the very idea of drug testing. But if this could be used by emergency personnel in an ambulance, or at the hospital in some way that would be cool. I love technology but hate when it is abused.


Personally I am against all drug use...even medical pot.

Im curious does this include medical opium,(morphine)? What about medical cocaine(local anesthetics and most numbing agents)? Do you even know what the medicine you get from the doctor is made from?
So are you against all pain medications and local numbing agents as well as all there synthetically derived cousins? If not then you mite want to rethink your position on drug use, even medical pot.

[wetwrks]

Im curious does this include medical opium,(morphine)? What about medical cocaine(local anesthetics and most numbing agents)? Do you even know what the medicine you get from the doctor is made from?
So are you against all pain medications and local numbing agents as well as all there synthetically derived cousins? If not then you mite want to rethink your position on drug use, even medical pot.

I am not against doctor issued perscriptions for needed medicines. But if this had legitimate medical use the drug companies would be making more use of it. Personally I feel if it is to be dispensed it should be thru pharmacies and pharmacies alone.

Locally this is an excuse for individuals who don't have a medical need...to get the drugs they want.

We have had at least 2 instances of Pot Dispenceries who were in business for at least a year and on inspection...they had no license nor had they even applied for one. They also had no records as to who they had sold to for most of the transactions.

I am also aware of "doctors" who will issue a license to pretty much anyone who walks in. Oh gee, I have a hangnail and need drugs doc. The local news have done undercover investigations and proven this to be true.

This is nothing more than a stepping stone to legalizing pot for everyone and I have had friends that pot was the drug that pulled them into much worse things. It lead into the regular use of ketamine (special K), ecstasy, and mushrumes... that I am aware of. Regular use typically being daily. Then to fund their addiction they started selling. In the end they were arrested shortly after receiving a shipment of more than 2500 ecstasy tablets. The police stated that they were the largest ecstasy distribution ring in the Rocky Mountain region at that time. One became a convicted felon and the others got a reduced sentence with a plea bargain and served more than 6 months locked up. All the result of some "innocent" pot use.

[OPBN]

I read that they are passing legislation in Florida to drug test welfare recipients.

As far as medicinal drug use, I think there is a lot of fraud in the system which makes it tough for legitimate uses like for an appetite increaser for those on chemo.

I don't buy into the gateway drug idea. I know tons of people that smoked pot and not many or any ended up getting busted for drug distribution or od'd. Personally, I burned a lot of weed back in the day and never once had issue with the law or an urge to move on to stronger stuff. People that go beyond simply have that inclination. If it wasnt pot, it would be alcohol.

As for fingerprint drug testinng, sounds like a viable method. I am not always a fan though of collecting dna or fluids off of disgarded items. I always thought it was sort of creapy, but whatever. I"m not a crook, nor do I intend to be so I don't really care. I am also all for requiring fingerprinting for pretty much anything such as getting a social security card, drivers license, etc. . As well as a national ID card.

Heck, if there wasnt the social stigma attached to it that there is, I would chip my kids.

[hill160881]

I am not against doctor issued perscriptions for needed medicines. But if this had legitimate medical use the drug companies would be making more use of it.

Sorry you have no clue what you are talking about.

Here educate yourself against your totally wrong propaganda. If all these studies dont show you how wrong you are then you are incapable of learning.
http://forum.grasscity.com/legalization-activism/345513-list-marijuana-studies.html


Does your position on drugs extend to alcohol? What about caffeine? Sex?........... Why not any dopamine dumper.

Do you have a reason to feel that your way of living is so much better that someone else's, that you need to decide what they can and cant do? Why should you decide what others do in there own homes when it does not effect you?



In fact I would love some data supporting your side, as long as it is backed up by an independent study and not just statements.

I will let you in on a little secret that is not a secret. I brun the strongest weed 24/7 and have for years. None of the BS the government says is true about weed. Do I seem lazy or stupid :rofl: I love the stuff and laugh at people who think as you do because they have no real information on this subject, just what they learned in DARE class in grade school.

[Coralis]

I will let you in on a little secret that is not a secret. I brun the strongest weed 24/7 and have for years.

I'm not trying to be offensive but from reading some of your previous posts , this doesn't surprise me in the least.

[wetwrks]

If all these studies dont show you how wrong you are then you are incapable of learning.

Studies can be twisted and often are to force one position or another. Seeing it occur for myself trumps any study. I also am quite capable of learning and am willing to look at evidence one way or another and change my stance based on all the info I have available. So far I have seen no info that trumps my personal experiences.



Does your position on drugs extend to alcohol? What about caffeine? Sex?........... Why not any dopamine dumper.

Alcohol is already restricted and getting more so every day. They keep decreasing the amount you can have in you and still be allowed to legally drive. They have raised the legal drinking age from 18 to 21. There has been discussion of raising it again. I also know people who cannot drink as they will become alcoholics. Caffeine...I haven't ever seen anyone break into homes and steal to support their caffeine habit. Sex...I also haven't seen anyone breaking into homes to support their sex habit...unless it is something along the lines of rape...are you advocating that should be allowed?


Do you have a reason to feel that your way of living is so much better that someone else's, that you need to decide what they can and cant do? Why should you decide what others do in there own homes when it does not effect you?

It has nothing to do with who lives a better life nor who is superior. My cousin broke into her mothers and our grandmothers places to steal so she could get pot. Later she was breaking into strangers places to steal so she could finance meth. To think this stays in someones home and never affects anyone else is obsurd. She has at this point spent half her life locked up over drugs, theft, burglery, posession of stolen items, meth manufacturing, prostitution, and more. Again started with a little bit of "harmless pot".


In fact I would love some data supporting your side, as long as it is backed up by an independent study and not just statements.

It doesn't make any difference what evidence I present. I have presented eye witness testimony and you refuse to accept it. Studies and more won't change your view as the only view you have is thru the haze of the drugs.


I brun the strongest weed 24/7 and have for years.

Why the strongest? Why so often? The need for increasing the dosage and for increasing the regularity is a sign of addiction. This does nothing but prove my point.

[SCpoloRicker]

Pot Debate:


http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7127/hipstertiredofthismeme.jpg

[DevilMan]

I think that people get confused with what people do and what they think they need to do.

Do you agree that there are people that "talk to God"?

Do you think/agree that there are people who believe they must go to church every Sunday to go to heaven?

Do you think there are people who feel that marriage between a white person and a black person is immoral and illegal and against the law?

What a person does to themselves in their own home should be up to them! If they want meth and want to make it at home and get jacked up at home and such then they should be allowed to. Same as if someone gets drunk at home. What is the law that says a person can't eat steak on Thursdays?

When that action leads them into breaking and entering, or DUI, or anything else that is a violation of OTHERS rights then that's when they have violated a law.

Can you tell me what the law is in self mutilation? You know that piercing, even of the ears is a form right? Yet it's acceptable where? Now you take that and you move it to the top of the ear, or the lip or the eyebrow and now it's just wrong... But is it affecting anyone else? NO. If a coke head OD's in their house and dies from it... then guess what... They won't do that again.

If that same coke head gets in a car and drives down the street and runs someone over and kills them... guess what... they SHOULDN"T do that again.. By shouldn't I mean, they should be put down. They could not control themselves and it affected others. So that means that have given up their right to exist by taking away another persons. It's a trade.

It has NOTHING to do with what's right and wrong about USE... It's about what those people choose to do.

Do you think it should be illegal to get a tattoo or to get scarification?

Do you think it should be illegal to tattoo or pierce or otherwise harm or mutilate another person against their will?

What's the difference?

The difference is, what a person chooses to do or have done to themselves should be allowed to the point that it ONLY affects them.

When they lose that control and can no longer maintain that, THEN they should be restricted and controlled and penalized.

Yeah I'm a bit of a oxymoron.... I think everyone should be free to do what ever they wish to do up to the point that it's not harming or affecting anyone else or their belongings... If you want to set your car on fire, then go for it. It's your car. If you damage the street or catch the forest on fire doing it... well then you gotta make up for that.

At the same time I think that when you lose that control then the repercussions come back to you ten fold.

I think it's funny how everyone can be for the restrictions of certain things that "they don't approve of" or find "immoral" and yet if those same people traveled to foreign lands say "where chewing gum is illegal" or "where you can't eat beef" or any other of the the "odd" or "weird" rules that are in place they would think the country was archaic and idiotic, yet when they see it in their OWN homeland it's fine.

http://www.dumblaws.com/

Check out this site and tell me exactly how many you think are "off the hook" "unreasonable" "stupid" or "insane" And note that whether or not they are enforced, known, or matter... they are in fact still LAWS that you can be prosecuted for and found guilty of.

Now why is it that these laws exist? Who came up with them? hmmmmm.... well let's see.... they are in existence because the powers that be said that it was better for the rest of the human race that way. And these are the smart people and who you elect to be your controllers. So tell me, why it is that you think that every law that they put into effect is RIGHT and LEGAL and something that should be enforced onto the rest of the masses?

Just some for those of you that don't wanna click the link... ~>

"Detonating a nuclear device within the city limits results in a $500 fine."
WOW!!!!! Getting a speeding ticket costs MUCH more!!!! I guess next time, I'll just carry around a nuke and if I get stopped just light it off, and then I'll only have to pay $500!!!!!

"One may not use one’s own restroom if the window is open."
WOW!!!! How the hell else are you supposed to air out the double deuce you just dropped? I wonder if it's also a law that every bathroom have an exhaust fan?

"Men who wear moustaches are forbidden from kissing women."
I wonder what the rule for women who wear moustaches is???

"Permanent markers may not be sold in the city limits." (Fresno, CA)
hmmmmm..... I wonder how many stores in Fresno are breaking this law???? I bet the whole budget crisis would be solved if each of the stores was fined just $25 for each violation.

"Cars may not be driven in reverse."
WOW!!!! So how exactly do you back up? I guess you just gotta push it out of the parking spot!!!!

"Cars are the only item allowed in a garage."
HOLY HELL!!!! Really? I think most places the car is the LAST thing that would go into a garage!!!!

Man... I sure hope these rules that everyone thinks is better for everyone else don't start getting enforced!!!!

Are these STUPID to you? Why? hmmmm.... because it's fine to restrict some people from things that you have no desire or need or want of....

So let's just take the last one... Do you think it's right that you can't put a motorcycle or a lawn mower or anything else for that matter in YOUR garage???? For the record... That's a law in LONGBEACH, CA. hmmmmm.... good to see that they are all proper and smart. So you think it's fine that someone can be fined/arrested/harassed/etc for putting something other then a car in the garage that they are paying for/buying/renting?

What makes it right for you to restrict someone else of their right to live freely?

DM :mad:

[DevilMan]

"Shotguns are required to be taken to church in the event of a Native American attack."

YES!!!!! I want to go here and walk in carrying my 870!!!! HELL YES!!!! This I think I would do.... honest... Just to make a freaking point!!!!

Just because LAWS are on the books doesn't mean that they are fair/smart/better/pertinent/etc.

As for the OT. I think asking for a fingerprint to get a drug test or anything else is fine. I think that taking this information WITHOUT consent is ILLEGAL. It's a violation of a persons rights to live freely. PERIOD!

I think taking blood or urine without consent is ILLEGAL. hmmmm.. is it? YES! When you get stopped for a DUI, do you have to consent to a breathalyzer? NO. If you don't... you can be held and blah blah blah... and it'll be a much greater hassle. They can't take from you without your consent. What makes it fine to take something such as a fingerprint to use without your consent? It would fall under "Illegal Search & Seizure"

DM

[hill160881]

Why the strongest? Why so often? The need for increasing the dosage and for increasing the regularity is a sign of addiction. This does nothing but prove my point.


Its the excruciating pain of living in a world full of people like you. :p

[DevilMan]

WOW!!!!... hehehehehe e I LOL'd at that one Hill....

Here are a few more.... All of these are from the great city of San Francisco, CA ~>

"Prohibits elephants from strolling down Market Street unless they are on a leash."
Well at least I know to not let me elephant off it's leash!!!!

"Persons classified as “ugly” may not walk down any street."
bwahahhhahahahaaa..... That's what makes San Fran SOOOOO BEAUTIFUL!!!

"Giving or receiving oral sex is prohibited."
Okay.... so if you GIVE oral sex, then wouldn't someone/something have to be RECEIVING it?

ahhhhhh.... so this means that BOTH PARTICIPANTS WOULD BE CHARGED WITH THE CRIME!!!!

I'm sure glad there is no oral sex going on in San Fran... Just another thing that makes the place so pretty.

DM

[DevilMan]

And WETWRKS, your cousin didn't break in or steal or any of that to get pot. Your cousin did it because she thought she would get away with it. Your cousin did it because she's a retard that don't understand that it's WRONG. Your cousin did it and can give ANY number of excuses. So would it make you feel better if say... hmmmm.... Your cousin did all of this to pay for an abortion? What if your cousin did this to pay for her nursing school? What if your cousin did this to buy a new XBox? What if your cousin did this to make a car payment so it wouldn't get repo'd?

Then would it all be better? What if your cousin did this to pay for the fine and lawyers fees because she was cited for ~>

"Kites may not be flown above 10 feet over the ground."

While having your niece with her in the park?

Then would it be different? The reason your cousin did this had ZERO to do with pot and meth... It had to do with her being disrespectful and disregarding the rights of other people.

When she infringed on the rights of others is when she messed up.

NOT when she got stoned on her own dime/time.

DM

[DevilMan]

How about this... it's easy....

What exactly is it that you get from playing paintball that you can't get from anything else?

So why shouldn't paintball be outlawed?

DM

[SCpoloRicker]

That's what makes San Fran SOOOOO BEAUTIFUL!!!

I'm basically with you; vis-a-vis the topic at hand.

However, as an on-again, off-again resident I am formally obligated to point out that "San Fran" is an entirely unacceptable form of reference for 'the City' or 'San Francisco' or 'the [neighborhood]' or 'SF'.

Just. Not. 'San Fran'.

/I'm told this is, as it were, 'serious business'
//voteseriouscat.jpg

[DevilMan]

I get a bit pissy when it comes to talk about FREEDOM and what not.

People want to play the blame game on pot, guns, crack, coke, cars, beef, chicken, air, water, etc...

Get over it.

People don't want pot legalized... and yet not a single one of them can come up with a single benefit for smoking tobacco.

NOT ONE!

DM

[hill160881]

http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae195/hill160881/Unknown.jpg

[wetwrks]

And WETWRKS, your cousin didn't break in or steal or any of that to get pot. Your cousin did it because she thought she would get away with it.

Lets see...she had no job, no one would give her $ because she was doing drugs so she breaks in and steals jewelery and $ to get drugs with. She admits she did it to get the drugs. She admits she thought she would get caught eventually but didn't care as all she cared about was getting the drugs. (These are her words...not mine)

This was why she prostituted herself...to get the drugs. Not because she wanted to have sex with strangers, not because she wanted the $ for schooling.

Before the drugs she didn't do any of this and since she has gotten out of prison she hasn't done any of this...that leaves 1 central theme to all of this... DRUGS. The drugs were the sole source of all the problems. While she was on the drugs she was rude with everyone in the family. Gee...again there is a sole common denominator...DRUGS. Not the case before the drugs and not the case since she got off the drugs.

She has been in need of $ ever since getting out of prison yet there hasn't been any thefts or breakins. She has been polite and loving with members of the family. Even her sister who basically disowned her during the bad days and wouldn't even speak with her for 2 years after she got out of prison has accepted her back. And the difference of before and now...NO DRUGS.

You guys have talked about other "drugs" such as alcohol, cigarettes, sugar, and caffine...now my turn. How many of these "lesser" drugs affect someones thinking and emotions?

Alcohol affects people differently but often badly. Some have uncontrollable rage, some get sulky, some get balligerent, a few get jolly.

Cigarettes tend to affect people when they are coming down off them...typically they get extremely grumpy and anger easily.

Sugar tends to make people hyper and agitated.

Caffine withdrawl makes people agitated and grumpy.

Yet you claim that there is no negative side effects to pot...that what my cousin was involved in wasn't related to the pot. The evidence disagrees with you. Not only does the evidence point that she did it for the drugs, it also points that she may have been more inclined to make stupid decisions while on the pot and meth. That she was more inclined to be rude and offensive while on the drugs.

If this could be contained to ones home and not affect others I might be willing to ignore others using it...but it isn't. I go to a concert and I smell it everywhere...this is not in someones home and affects me. Affects everyone else at the concert. I have had to put up with it. Their "right" has infringed on my right to not have to breath it in.

The thefts affected the lives of everyone in the family. The drugs affected the lives of everyone in the family.


Your cousin did it because she's a retard that don't understand that it's WRONG.

Yet where does that put everyone who knows that pot is illegal "wrong" and goes ahead and does it anyways? Does that make the potsmokers retards?


The reason your cousin did this had ZERO to do with pot and meth... It had to do with her being disrespectful and disregarding the rights of other people. When she infringed on the rights of others is when she messed up.

So using this logic...alcohol isn't to blame for drunk driving. A disreguard for others on the road is.

[DevilMan]

As they say... blaming alcohol for drunk driving is like blaming forks for fat people.

I know plenty of people who drink and don't drive.

I know plenty of people who smoke and don't get in trouble...

So you say it was the "DRUGS" that did it for your cousin... hmmm... actually what it was, was the legality of the drugs that she wanted. If she had a prescription that allowed her to legally buy and use the "DRUGS" and/or if she had gotten help/rehab for what she was doing illegally would it not have been a different story?

It has EVERYTHING to do with a persons view and respect and acknowledgment of other peoples rights.

Do you know what made pot illegal?

Do you know what MEDICAL uses of pot there are?

ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT POT HAS TO DO WITH CANCER PATIENTS?

Are you aware of what can do to people who have anxiety disorders?

Are you aware that pot can be easily and cheaply grown by ANYONE pretty much ANYWHERE in the US (hence the name WEED) and that because of it, the GOVERNMENT would have NO WAY TO CONTROL IT if it were legal? So there would be NO REVENUE, NO TAXES, NO "CUT" for the gov if it were legal. Instead the only way they can make money from it is to criminalize it.

So you avoided the question.

NAME ONE VALID USE/NEED/BENEFIT ON A PHYSICAL LEVEL THAT CIGARETTES ARE NEEDED FOR.

JUST ONE.

Why are they legal? hmmmm.... you know how hard it is to grow and process tobacco? Do you know where you can grow tobacco easily? Do you know how you can process it and make easily make your own cigarettes?

Are you aware of such things as OPIUM HOUSES?

Tell me this... have you ever been drunk?

Have you ever slept with a chick and woke up the next morning wondering where you were and how you got there and whether or not you can get out of the bed before the thing beside you wakes up?

Did you blame it on the beer and alcohol?

I bet you did.

So tell me... what did the beer and alcohol do that made you ingest it?

FOOD DON'T MAKE PEOPLE FAT, BEER DON'T MAKE PEOPLE DRUNK DRIVERS, CARS DON'T MAKE PEOPLE RACERS.

You notice the one constant in EVERY drug related issue? Or Drunk Driving issue?

Every OD is not because of COCAINE. Every theft is not because of METH. Every murder is not because of a GUN.

EVERY ONE OF THEM IS BECAUSE OF A PERSON!

The common denominator is HUMAN. When a person starts respecting and acknowledging the exist of the rest of the populace and respecting their rights, then there are no issues.

You want something? You earn it. You take from someone else.... you earned an ass whooping.

You drink and drive and cause an accident. You lose your license for a year. You do it again. 5 years. 3 times. Never drive again. And pay for ALL damages.

You drink and drive and kill someone? You pay for ALL damages, ALL costs, and then you get put in the ground.

You disrespected other persons' rights to be free and to live life. You took a life, you lose your life.

And you know the most entertaining thing... I bet you think I'm the biggest pot head this side of Hill...

DM

[DevilMan]

So she knew she was addicted, knew she was doing stuff wrong, knew that she was hurting those around her.... and instead of asking for help or going to rehab or actually CHANGING her life, she blames it on the drugs.

She gets busted, gets REHAB'd, and now is fine. Hmmmm.... why couldn't she ask for help to begin with? Ohhhhh yeahhhhhh... the drugs prevented that. Got it.

Tell me this...

If she had stood up when she "KNEW" she was doing wrong and ASKED FOR OR SOUGHT HELP what do you think the difference would be?

Drugs, Alcohol, and any other excuse that people give is still just the same for everyone. No one makes you drink the first beer, no one makes you take the first hit, no one makes you snort the first line.

DM

[wetwrks]

Ok...so you want a response to all of these...you got it.


So you say it was the "DRUGS" that did it for your cousin... hmmm... actually what it was, was the legality of the drugs that she wanted. If she had a prescription that allowed her to legally buy and use the "DRUGS" and/or if she had gotten help/rehab for what she was doing illegally would it not have been a different story?

Legality doesn't change her actions...addiction and mind altering of the drugs does. Perscription would have affected the outcome none...but legalizing it will allow this result on a massive scale. Expecially among children that lack in $ and in the ability to chose right and wrong to begin with. She had no $ and wanted the drugs AT ALL COSTS.


It has EVERYTHING to do with a persons view and respect and acknowledgment of other peoples rights.

And that view gets skued with mind altering substances.


Do you know what made pot illegal?

The politics doesn't matter to me in any way...I ONLY care about how the drug affects me and mine.


Do you know what MEDICAL uses of pot there are?

ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT POT HAS TO DO WITH CANCER PATIENTS?

Are you aware of what can do to people who have anxiety disorders?

If it has honest medical uses...distribute solely thru pharmasists. that is where you are REQUIRED to get all other perscribed drugs. Not some guy on the street, not some corner shop where the potency is unregulated. Not thru the mail. Manufactured only by FDA regulated medical companies. Let the FDA regulate it and deal with it just like any other perscribed drug. If it isn't about the medical uses and about legalizing it for common use then I would point out that you have already pointed out it is a medical grade item.


Are you aware that pot can be easily and cheaply grown by ANYONE pretty much ANYWHERE in the US (hence the name WEED) and that because of it, the GOVERNMENT would have NO WAY TO CONTROL IT if it were legal? So there would be NO REVENUE, NO TAXES, NO "CUT" for the gov if it were legal. Instead the only way they can make money from it is to criminalize it.

For me it isn't about the $. Couldn't care less if it were given away free or if it runs a million per gram. If people are willing to steal to get it there is a problem.


So you avoided the question.

NAME ONE VALID USE/NEED/BENEFIT ON A PHYSICAL LEVEL THAT CIGARETTES ARE NEEDED FOR.

JUST ONE.

None...never claimed there is...frankly I couldn't care less if it were outlawed completely. I get really tired of jerks that think I should have to breath this garbage too. It too is an invasion of my RIGHT to breath clean air without it harming my lungs.
.

Why are they legal? hmmmm.... you know how hard it is to grow and process tobacco? Do you know where you can grow tobacco easily? Do you know how you can process it and make easily make your own cigarettes?

Couldn't care less.


Are you aware of such things as OPIUM HOUSES?

Sure...I am sure they exist...never been to one, never intend to go to one. Same as sex slaves. All should be illegal. NEXT!


Tell me this... have you ever been drunk?

Have you ever slept with a chick and woke up the next morning wondering where you were and how you got there and whether or not you can get out of the bed before the thing beside you wakes up?

Did you blame it on the beer and alcohol?

I bet you did.

Never been drunk, never tried a cigarette, never tried chew, never tried illegal drugs...no interest.


So tell me... what did the beer and alcohol do that made you ingest it?

The very few times I have tried alcohol I haven't cared for the taste. I seldom ever drink and even then it is typically a few swallows to be polite to friends...don't really care for it and it doesn't do anything for me.


FOOD DON'T MAKE PEOPLE FAT, BEER DON'T MAKE PEOPLE DRUNK DRIVERS, CARS DON'T MAKE PEOPLE RACERS.

You notice the one constant in EVERY drug related issue? Or Drunk Driving issue?

Every OD is not because of COCAINE. Every theft is not because of METH. Every murder is not because of a GUN.

EVERY ONE OF THEM IS BECAUSE OF A PERSON!

The common denominator is HUMAN. When a person starts respecting and acknowledging the exist of the rest of the populace and respecting their rights, then there are no issues.

What of my right to not have to breath this garbage at concerts? At the common areas of CU Boulder? It is all about your right to do whatever you want wherever you are whenever you want. WHAT OF MY RIGHTS?


You want something? You earn it. You take from someone else.... you earned an ass whooping.

You drink and drive and cause an accident. You lose your license for a year. You do it again. 5 years. 3 times. Never drive again. And pay for ALL damages.

You drink and drive and kill someone? You pay for ALL damages, ALL costs, and then you get put in the ground.

You disrespected other persons' rights to be free and to live life. You took a life, you lose your life.

Yet even with losing their license many alcoholics feel it is their "right" to drive. Thus you see people without a license getting charged with their 14th, 18th, 22nd DUI. Yet there are those who argue as you do that what you do in your own home is your business…then go out and drive drunk. This right to do it in your own home thing is a bunch of garbage…I see it in public at CU, at concerts, at the beach, at other public events.


And you know the most entertaining thing... I bet you think I'm the biggest pot head this side of Hill...DM

[JLuke]

I'm all for legalizing pot and the such, but for drug testing, im glad they're starting to test people that are getting government help. If i cant smoke pot because theres a chance i'll be tested, the same should go for them, if i smoke, i dont get paid, if they smoke, they wont either.


Though i do think its completely wrong to try and secretively test people without them knowing, why cant it be simple as, pee in a cup, if you test positive then thats what it is, if you refuse to test then its an automatic positive as well. And that fingerprint thing sounds kinda sketchy to me, too many false positives, that makes as much sense as taking a dna sample from someones hand right after shaking hands with 50 people that day.

*edit*


LOL i love reading these kinds of threads, theres allways 3 different views on pot, the ones that think its the devil and nomatter what you say its bad, the neutral people, then the ones that argue about how good it is. Nomatter what one side explains to the other, the oppsite will allways have something to say to counteract it.
The battle for good and evil will never end, and the best part is, i dont even know which side is good or evil.

[hill160881]

For the record DM does not drink or smoke, ever. Not a drop or a puff EVER for as long as I have known him.

[wimag]

I brun the strongest weed 24/7 and have for years. None of the BS the government says is true about weed. Do I seem lazy or stupid :rofl: I love the stuff and laugh at people who think as you do because they have no real information on this subject, just what they learned in DARE class in grade school.

whoop de doo. good luck with your beta testing for efficiency. Was somewhat interested, but will not waste any time on some burn out.

[hill160881]

well as I plan on making no money on this I am devastated :D

Meaning there offered at cost

But you know us pot heads. We are desprate for money and will do anything to get it, which is why I make every mod I do public :tard: Its so profitable to show others how to do it them selves.


I wonder if you listen to musical artist that were messed up when they recorded there music. just think of me as an artist :p

[hill160881]

Lets get something strait. I have several medical conditions that two different doctors recommended Cannabis as opposed to prescription and over the counter drugs. This was due to there side effects on the liver, kidneys and stomach lining. I have a foot of SS and 12 screws in my left forearm and have had a shoulder op in the same arm to fix a torn AC ligament. I have another medical condition that qualifies me for this drug but that is not one i will go into.

or I could take Vicodin all day. But that would make me an opium addict and I prefer medications that have no side effects when I go days without. :cheers:

Further more I almost never drink and dont smoke sigs. I avoid all pills except for the heartburn meds I take. I have not needed a doctor except for a compound fracture since 2003.

[OPBN]

whoop de doo. good luck with your beta testing for efficiency. Was somewhat interested, but will not waste any time on some burn out.

Really?

[DevilMan]

bwahahhaahaa.... some burn out...

Gotta love it...

I don't think you are fully grasping what I'm saying WETWRKS.... What people do in their own home that affects no one else should be theirs to do.

How do you figure that getting plastered and driving down the road is "IN THEIR HOME" or that lighting up at the concert is "IN THEIR HOME" ???

How is second hand smoke that you inhale NOT affecting you? IT IS. Hence my stand on it.

You're in CO. They have also passed laws there I think about smoking inside and such. Why should it have to be a law?

Why as a bizness owner if you own a bar, that you can't have smoking and non smoking areas? If someone don't want to go to the bar because of the smoke, they can go somewhere else right? It's your choice to do so. That's what you aren't getting.

If it's legal for someone to smoke inside a building then that should be the property owners decision. NOT something for the government to decide. If you want to go somewhere but don't smoke and don't want to smell/inhale the second hand smoke.... then don't go there!!!! Make a choice go somewhere else. Or better yet... quit crying and take a stand and petition to get it changed so that you can go there without having to deal with it. But turning it over for the government to control is NOT something that should be considered.

If you notice that everything that you said... is NOT what I've said in relation to where it should be allowed. Every time you say, "At a concert, or out in public" that is NOT what I've said is it?

I think in PUBLIC buildings it should not be allowed. I do NOT think that it should be a law that in privately owned businesses you can't do it.

#1. Yes Legality does change her actions. If it were legal with the proper control then she would be a registered user. As such the first time that anything became an issue she would be rehabbed and gotten treatment as such and be where she is now. The first instance that someone "loses control" is the very same time that they give up their choice on that subject and turn it over for others to tell them what to do. It's part of the deal. You play nice... you get to go out to recess. You hit little johnny in the nose with a book, then you get hit in the nose with a book... AND a paddling, AND no recess, AND a note home to the PU's.

#2. Tell me this. Is the "mind altering" effect temporary? Or permanent? Did she commit all of these crimes while she WAS stoned? Or when she was SOBER and wanted to get high?

#3. So you can ONLY get what the government/FDA allows you to get? You sure you wanna hoe that row?

[OPBN]

You're in CO. They have also passed laws there I think about smoking inside and such. Why should it have to be a law?

Why as a bizness owner if you own a bar, that you can't have smoking and non smoking areas? If someone don't want to go to the bar because of the smoke, they can go somewhere else right? It's your choice to do so. That's what you aren't getting.

If it's legal for someone to smoke inside a building then that should be the property owners decision. NOT something for the government to decide. If you want to go somewhere but don't smoke and don't want to smell/inhale the second hand smoke.... then don't go there!!!! Make a choice go somewhere else. Or better yet... quit crying and take a stand and petition to get it changed so that you can go there without having to deal with it. But turning it over for the government to control is NOT something that should be considered. What about employees of such businesses? Should they have the right to a smoke free environment or should they just get another job? Do you feel this should apply to all businesses?

Ohio passed non-smoking laws here a few years ago and I love it. I can now go to restaurants and not be faced with the possibility of having to either sit near a smoker or smell the stale smoke smell while eating. Smoking/non-smoking sections within the same building are a joke. Unless the areas are physically sealed off from one another with seperate HVAC systems, you get cross over. It's amazing how much difference there is. Almost makes you forget until you go across the state line into someplace like Indiana where they don't have such laws and you walk into a place for dinner that smells like the bottom of an ash tray.

I also know a couple of restaurant owners that were thrilled to have such legislation passed so they could eliminate smoking from their establishments without the risk of backlash from the public. To a certain degree, it gave them a way to play the victim when in reality they hated to have a smoking section in their restaurant.


As such the first time that anything became an issue she would be rehabbed and gotten treatment as such and be where she is now.
If state run rehab centers are anything like the counseling that is provided for DUI cases, it's a joke at best.

[DevilMan]

What about employees of such businesses? Should they have the right to a smoke free environment or should they just get another job? Do you feel this should apply to all businesses?

If it's a place that is allowed to have smokers and you don't like it then you have the right to look for other jobs. NO ONE FORCES YOU TO TAKE A JOB. ANY Business that is privately owned and operated should be allowed to make the choices for this based on what they wish to do. Allow smoking, disallow it. It should NOT be a government function.

Ohio passed non-smoking laws here a few years ago and I love it. I can now go to restaurants and not be faced with the possibility of having to either sit near a smoker or smell the stale smoke smell while eating. Smoking/non-smoking sections within the same building are a joke. Unless the areas are physically sealed off from one another with seperate HVAC systems, you get cross over. It's amazing how much difference there is. Almost makes you forget until you go across the state line into someplace like Indiana where they don't have such laws and you walk into a place for dinner that smells like the bottom of an ash tray.

I'm well aware of what both sides of the coin looks like. And I'm aware of what the places smell like as well and I know that the split system is not cool and doesn't really work worth a damn. But it should be the business owners choice.

I also know a couple of restaurant owners that were thrilled to have such legislation passed so they could eliminate smoking from their establishments without the risk of backlash from the public. To a certain degree, it gave them a way to play the victim when in reality they hated to have a smoking section in their restaurant.

Yup... I know this as well. But should it be the gov's ruling?

If state run rehab centers are anything like the counseling that is provided for DUI cases, it's a joke at best.

Who said anything about state run? And yes it's ALL a joke anymore. Your idea of freedom and liberty is a joke as well. If the system was perfect everything would be fine right?? But it's not. But at what point do you think that it's NOT the gov's place to decide for you?



If it's a private business it should be their choice.

So tell me this. If a company has a dress code that says you must wear suspenders while at work. And you hate to wear suspenders are you going to take the job? Or are you going to look elsewhere?

So you go to a place that smells like an ashtray... what makes you think that the people that work there aren't smokers? If enough people don't smoke and want to bring it to the owners attention then it should be the owners choice. Do you know how much a pack of smokes costs?

What if the place was a SMOKE ONLY place. Meaning you could only work there and come there if you WERE a smoker? But now the gov doesn't allow that does it? What if that same place sold smokes as well as dinner? hmmmm... I bet it'd more than make up for the loss of patrons that are non smokers.

Yes it allowed some owners to make it smoke free without backlash... it also allowed them to lose business from people that do smoke.

I think all of you are failing to understand one thing... that's the freedom for someone to choose to live their life the way they want without restrictions from others AS LONG AS their life doesn't adversely affect others.

What about Hooters? Can you tell me why anyone would work there if they weren't alright with the attire that they would be required to wear as a work uniform? hmmmmm..... I bet not a one of you here complain about that place.

It's amazing how everything looks when the shoe is on the other foot.

Tell me this... is there ANYTHING that you can do on a motorcycle that you can't do in a car on the roads today? Is there ANY reason for street motorcycles to exist? ANY at all? Name one.

Why not just outlaw them?

What about black or white cars? Black/dark cars are known to have a larger "carbon footprint" than more muted colors. They "get dirty" quicker which means you wash them more often, which means more water waste. They get hot from the sun more so you run the AC when you get in your car for longer to cool it off, which burns more fuel. So should black/dark colored vehicles be banned? Name one reason that your car has to be black. Just one.

What about white cars that "get dirty" quicker and so people wash them more often? So there is more water wasted. Why not make all cars tan/brown in color? Would that not be a better system?

I guess if that happens we could truly become a giant turd nation.

So at point do you figure that you'll stand up for your freedom/right to live your life?

DM

[OPBN]

So at point do you figure that you'll stand up for your freedom/right to live your life?


Other than not being legally allowed to spark up if the mood arises, I have yet to find any restrictions on my freedoms and/or rights to live my life. I find the saber rattling about protecting our freedoms silly, when honestly I don't see any infringement on these rights by the government. It irritates the hell out of me when people act like you are a sheep if you aren't "fightin da man" all the time. Really, I have nothing to fight about. Trust me, when I feel my rights are being infringed upon, I'll take action.

As for the rest of your post, I feel you're wrong. I am totally happy with the current non-smoking bans in privately owned businesses. Granted, it doesn't affect me since I work from home, but I do remember working at a company that allowed smoking in the building and it was miserable. I did exercise my rights and quit the job. Shortly after, smoking bans were put in place. By your reasoning, private businesses shouldnt have to follow any types of rules? Minimum wage requirments? Minimum age requirments? Safety regs? How about food safety? FDA? Health inspections? Maybe we should allow business owners to discriminate against women and blacks again. I mean it is their private businesses right?

As for dress codes, many companies have dress codes in place. I agree, if you don't want to wear a suit and tie, don't take the job. But having to turn down a job because you don't want to have to sit in a cubicle 5 feet away from a chain smoker is a totally different story. You are comparing apples and oranges.

Not sure where the Hooters thing really comes into place, but I haven't been to a Hooters in probably 20 years. Not because I object or anything, but just really not my thing. Still not sure what it has to do with anything or the motorcycle comment for that matter. I don't think anyone was speaking in favor of banning motorcycles or tarts in short shorts serving mediocre food.

However, you are contradicting yourself regarding freedoms. You keep saying people should be able to live their lives without affecting others, and smoking in a public restaurant does exactly that. Like it or not, a restaurant is a public place.

[DevilMan]

However, you are contradicting yourself regarding freedoms. You keep saying people should be able to live their lives without affecting others, and smoking in a public restaurant does exactly that. Like it or not, a restaurant is a public place.

WRONG. A restaurant is a PRIVATE place that allows PUBLIC. You ever see those signs that say, "We reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE" hmmmm.... I don't think a courthouse can put up such a sign. I bet you'll never see it at the post office.

A PRIVATELY owned and operated business is a PRIVATE entity, that allows the public to come in and utilize their assets. How that company decides to do it should be THEIR choice. Not the gov's.

DM

[OPBN]

WRONG. A restaurant is a PRIVATE place that allows PUBLIC. You ever see those signs that say, "We reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE" hmmmm.... I don't think a courthouse can put up such a sign. I bet you'll never see it at the post office.

A PRIVATELY owned and operated business is a PRIVATE entity, that allows the public to come in and utilize their assets. How that company decides to do it should be THEIR choice. Not the gov's.

DM
But if smoking, like eating meat that hasnt been refrigerated prior to serving, is considered a health issue, it can and should be regulated. It has been determined that smoking and second hand smoke is detrimental to peoples health, therefore in a public access restaurant, it is prohibited. BTW, if I remember correctly, private clubs can and do allow smoking. If it's that big of a deal to smoke, smokers have the right to go there and join. :cheers:

So out of curiosity, other than blowing off steam on an internet forum, what are you doing to help protect our rights that you feel are so important? It seems to be a very big issue for you, obviously you must be very involved in trying to get such legislation overturned.... or are you a sheep like the rest of us?

Bahhh. :rolleyes:

[Dover]

Florida is the first State that will require drug testing when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional? It's OK to drug test the people who work for their money, but not those who don't ?

how about mandatory breathalyzers installed into motor vehicles to prevent drinking and driving...

[DevilMan]

I do think that random drug testing should be mandatory for welfare and social services.

I do not think that getting tested without your consent is or should be legal.

What do I do. I try to vote for what I can, I try to "enlighten" or explain logically the different sides of each facet of a subject as I understand it. I'm more than happy to learn more.

Man, I've never so much as ever puffed on even a cigarette... but I think that if you want to you should be allowed to. If you wanna shoot yourself in the head... go for it... just don't get the blood on someone else or their belongings.

I do NOT approve of someone burning the stars and stripes. But I'll not say they can't do it. I'll also reserve my right to not put their ass out when it catches on fire.

Do you not think that by a place serving bad food, or having it dirty that in time it will die off? Do you really think that the FDA and all of the other things really help? Now if you go somewhere and get sick from the food and it's found to be because of their service then you have something to complain about and to hold the place accountable. You can do that by complaining to them, and my avoiding the place and passing it on to people you talk to.

That will leave it up to them as to whether or not someone wants to go to eat there...

You know what I also find very funny.

How long have humans and animals been around? How long as the FDA, OSHA, and all the other "We're here to protect YOU!!!" organizations been around? hmmmmm.... You ever think about the fact that we GOT HERE WITHOUT THEM???? Maybe just maybe... they aren't really needed.

DM

[Dover]

Microsoft Explorer 7 SUCKS, i just "upgraded" because of "updates" and it SUCKS SO BAD :tard: :mad:

[Ando]

Florida is the first State that will require drug testing when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional? It's OK to drug test the people who work for their money, but not those who don't ?

how about mandatory breathalyzers installed into motor vehicles to prevent drinking and driving...
I hope ever state does it. I for one don't want to support some junky pot-head who would rather get high then use the money for what it's meant for, their family.

...And Dover, they have those in vehicles already. Mandatory for those habitual offenders.

[DevilMan]

...And Dover, they have those in vehicles already. Mandatory for those habitual offenders.

Why not just put it in every car then? Why not put that fingerprint drug tester in so that when you touch the wheel it knows whether or not you should be driving?

Is Driving Under the Influence aka Drunk Driving a violation in EVERY state in the country? YES. So why does the gov not put that system in EVERY car?

hmmmm... because it could be easily by passed and worked around and because of the cost... oh yeah... cost.. because it's much cheaper to prosecute and arrest and have deaths caused on a daily basis because of it. Should it be put in? I think so. Why? Because it's a private vehicle. It's your car. BUT, you are not going to be driving it ONLY on your property (more than likely)

DM

[Ando]

DM, who the hell put a quarter in you? Last thing you want to do is argue with me brother. :nono:

Hell, this place is full of bleeding heart Libs!!!

[OPBN]

I do think that random drug testing should be mandatory for welfare and social services.
I do not think that getting tested without your consent is or should be legal. As do I.



What do I do. I try to vote for what I can, I try to "enlighten" or explain logically the different sides of each facet of a subject as I understand it. I'm more than happy to learn more. In other words, nothing except saber rattle on the internet. That's what gets me about people that try to act like they are enlightening all of us that are in the dark getting our liberties trampled and in reality do absolutely nothing.


Man, I've never so much as ever puffed on even a cigarette... but I think that if you want to you should be allowed to. If you wanna shoot yourself in the head... go for it... just don't get the blood on someone else or their belongings. or say the smoke from their cigarette on my food...? Why are their rights to smoke more important than my rights to not inhale their second hand smoke? So if a restauranteur decides to just have people crap in the middle of the floor instead of go into the restrooms, that should be ok?


I do NOT approve of someone burning the stars and stripes. But I'll not say they can't do it. I'll also reserve my right to not put their ass out when it catches on fire. Again, agreed. Might even endorse squirting them with lighter fluid and bringing some marshmallows and sticks.


Do you not think that by a place serving bad food, or having it dirty that in time it will die off? Do you really think that the FDA and all of the other things really help? Now if you go somewhere and get sick from the food and it's found to be because of their service then you have something to complain about and to hold the place accountable. You can do that by complaining to them, and my avoiding the place and passing it on to people you talk to.
That will leave it up to them as to whether or not someone wants to go to eat there...
So rather than having regulations in place you really feel we should just leave it up to the owners? Really? Interesting. How many people should be allowed to get sick before any action is taken, or should it just be ignored?



You know what I also find very funny.

How long have humans and animals been around? How long as the FDA, OSHA, and all the other "We're here to protect YOU!!!" organizations been around? hmmmmm.... You ever think about the fact that we GOT HERE WITHOUT THEM???? Maybe just maybe... they aren't really needed.

DMYou do realize that the life expectancy of people has gone up considerably over the past 100 or so years right? Actually, it has gone up considerably over the past several hundred years, but we are just talking about since their were government regulations and organizations to help workers. Accidents in the workplace have drastically gone down as have workplace health related issues. While some safety regulations are silly at best, overall, I would rather see them in place than work somewhere without them. Oddly enough, these regulations etc actually protect YOU the worker, not the private company. Rather than leaving it up to the business owner who's interest in many cases is solely to turn a profit, they are meant to insure the safety of the worker. These regulations were put in place to keep greedy business owners from cutting corners and creating dangerous work conditions for workers. You can argue that people can simply quit such jobs, but some people don't have that option. If you have the choice of watching your family starve to death or crawl into a mineshaft and breath deadly fumes and black dust for the next 15 years, what would you choose? Government regulations in the workplace help clean such jobs up so that people don't have to make the decision of whether to live or die simply to put food on the table.

[DevilMan]

Funny that you bring up coal mining... my grandfather was one of the pioneers of some of the things they do in the mines these days.... Lived in it his whole life...

DM

[SCpoloRicker]

Microsoft Explorer 7 SUCKS, i just "upgraded" because of "updates" and it SUCKS SO BAD :tard: :mad:

Preserving this for teh lulz!

Also: I know I'm old-fashioned on this, but the lack of decorum in the usage of language is quite disheartening. Call me crazy, but a typo describing one's daily routine as:


I brun the strongest weed 24/7 and have for years. None of the BS the government says is true about weed. Do I seem lazy or stupid :rofl: I love the stuff and laugh at people who think as you do because they have no real information on this subject, just what they learned in DARE class in grade school.

It just sort of jumps out at me. See also IM TALKIN BOUT FREEDOM!!1

/my lawn, get off it; etc.

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/2793/lebowskimarkitzero.jpg

[Loguzzzzzz]

I told myself when I started to read this not to get involved but. . . . . . . .

DM, your argument is weak at best! Unless you live on an island or in a town with a population of ONE. Anything you do has an effect on everyone around you, good, bad or indifferent, there is an effect.

Personally I deplore anyone that needs to alter their current state of “being” with outside sources on a regular basis. Whether it is a stoner, drunk tweaker or whatever the vice, when someone needs to chemically alter their current state, in my opinion it shows weakness!! Anyone willing to allow a substance to RULE them is weak. I have little respect for WEAK people.

The reason there are rules is because enough people have been effected by whatever the situation may be where someone with authority felt the need to intervene for the “greater good of the masses”. When there are not a lot of people you don’t usually have a lot of rules. We live in a very populous society therefore we have lots of rules.

DM, using your logic anarchy is the answer. . . .we’ve seen how well that works!

The funny part is that this all started because someone made a post about drug testing via fingerprints now we have a full blown discussion regarding the rules and laws of the world. Funny how the worm turns.

I have no problem with drug testing but then I am not one to indulge in chemicals on a semi regular basis so I have nothing to worry about. Those who have concerns are the ones that must have something they want to hide.

I sure hope I don’t regret not taking my own ADVISE!

[DevilMan]

Also if you notice the one thing I say is that you should have the right to do what you want AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT AFFECT OTHERS.

So which part of this is hard to understand?

A private business is private and should not be made to follow each and every regulation that someone thinks is new and improved.

Think of it this way....

If a business has a catwalk, that is missing a section that ANYONE who walks normally is going to fall through is it a safety hazard? YES

Now... does that mean that someone who is not smoking will fall through it, but someone smoking won't?

That is not a choice about whether or not someone WANTS to do something. It's about a work place safety hazard. Is there a fine for the person who goes up and puts a board down over and crosses it and picks the board up? Was it unsafe? Maybe. Did that person choose to do so? YES. What if it's taped off, blocked off, marked off, chained off and yet a person climbs over all of that and walks and falls down the hole? Is it the company's fault? NO. Should the person be able to sue or prosecute the company? NO. It's the persons fault plain and simple.

See... these are differences that you all seem to try and tie together... I'm not talking about things that no matter what are going to be painful for anyone... is dropping a grand piano out of the 4th floor window for someone to catch smart? or legal? I bet no matter who you are it's not going to go well. IF you are the person on the bottom that thinks they can catch it, should you be stopped from making that choice?

DM

[DevilMan]

hehheheheee.... okay... so people who take PRESCRIPTION meds are NOT WEAK huh?

You know of any diabetics?

I guess treatment for cancer or even something as simple as aspirin is a sign of weakness then.

For once I think we agree on something John... I think we should mark this down somewhere.

So tell me.... why is it ok for the gov to tell you what you do and don't need in this life? But not alright for you to choose yourself?

And there is a difference in anarchy and common sense.

It's mentioned "what about the smoke particles on my food" Guess what? THEY ARE AFFECTING YOU correct? which I think is wrong. But you don't eat "second hand smoke"

Everything you do effects someone else? Yeah, okay sure... that steak I ate... killed a cow... that cow... was someones' property that they sold for slaughter.... that person got money from it. Yup... I affected them.

DM

[DevilMan]

Hey John.... how many pill bottles are in your medicine cabinet?

DM

[going_home]

Hey John.... how many pill bottles are in your medicine cabinet?

DM


Mercy goodness guys.
How is any of this even remotely related to the fingerprint drug test ?

This thread has veered off the road across the ditch into the pond.


:nono:

[hill160881]

Personally I deplore anyone that needs to alter their current state of “being” with outside sources on a regular basis. Whether it is a stoner, drunk tweaker or whatever the vice, when someone needs to chemically alter their current state, in my opinion it shows weakness!! Anyone willing to allow a substance to RULE them is weak. I have little respect for WEAK people.

Tell that to a war vet that saw some real bad stuff. Better yet call him a pussy while your at it.


There are many forms of weakness, addiction, obesity, poor cardiovascular condition, lack of empathy........

Everyone has a weakness, and some more than a few. ;)

[DevilMan]

Mercy goodness guys.
How is any of this even remotely related to the fingerprint drug test ?

This thread has veered off the road across the ditch into the pond.


:nono:

I agree... which is why I keep stating that taking something from you without your consent should be illegal, whether or not you have anything to hide, or are clean or not... it's still not right.

Now should/could it be implemented to be required for welfare? It could. But why not just do a whiz quiz? Do it at random. Come in pee in a cup, leave. If it comes back positive don't expect another check.

DM

[maniacmechanic]

For the record DM does not drink or smoke, ever. Not a drop or a puff EVER for as long as I have known him.

HEY. quit pickin on DM , remember he's the BAD guy , he's the one wanting to take away all our personal freedoms , no booze , dope , cigs , don't take away my H , i'll go crazy without it ( :rolleyes: , all in fun :rolleyes: , DM is a great guy )

For the OP , fingerprint drug test ?? sounds a little wacked to me , especially without consent

I loved this thread , I think the best is over

[sjrtk]

I started reading this when the popcorn finished popping. It was quite interesting.

I don't think I have seen DM post this much ever.

People are all weak, the Govt DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING. They will take everything they can from you. The moral of this whole thread has become, We as people will never get along as a whole, no matter what the rules are. It is simply against human nature.

If you don't like something vote or shut up, mabey you can run for office your self and try to fix things. Good luck to both sides my popcorn is finished so i must retire.

[OPBN]

It's mentioned "what about the smoke particles on my food" Guess what? THEY ARE AFFECTING YOU correct? which I think is wrong. But you don't eat "second hand smoke"

DM
Sorry Mr Literal. I was referring to having to inhale smoke while eating my food. Maybe less emphasis on nitpicking?

[OPBN]

Also if you notice the one thing I say is that you should have the right to do what you want AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT AFFECT OTHERS.

So which part of this is hard to understand?

A private business is private and should not be made to follow each and every regulation that someone thinks is new and improved.

Think of it this way....

If a business has a catwalk, that is missing a section that ANYONE who walks normally is going to fall through is it a safety hazard? YES

Now... does that mean that someone who is not smoking will fall through it, but someone smoking won't?

That is not a choice about whether or not someone WANTS to do something. It's about a work place safety hazard. Is there a fine for the person who goes up and puts a board down over and crosses it and picks the board up? Was it unsafe? Maybe. Did that person choose to do so? YES. What if it's taped off, blocked off, marked off, chained off and yet a person climbs over all of that and walks and falls down the hole? Is it the company's fault? NO. Should the person be able to sue or prosecute the company? NO. It's the persons fault plain and simple.

See... these are differences that you all seem to try and tie together... I'm not talking about things that no matter what are going to be painful for anyone... is dropping a grand piano out of the 4th floor window for someone to catch smart? or legal? I bet no matter who you are it's not going to go well. IF you are the person on the bottom that thinks they can catch it, should you be stopped from making that choice?

DM
So you essentially feel it's ok for a business to have unsafe working conditions for it's employees? Since it's a privately owned company, if the employees don't like it, they can just go screw? No government rules on workplace conditions at all huh? So should the company be liable if workers get hurt on the job? Or since they did no wrong, because there are no rules governing workplace safety, is it 'work at your own risk?"

Sorry, but i like to know with a fair amount of confidence that the food I eat is relatively safe and that I am not going to have to work in unsafe conditions to put that same food on the table.

Put a fork, preferably one washed and sanitized as per standard sanitary regulations so I don't get an infection, in me. I'm done.

[DevilMan]

Where have I said it's fine for a business to be unsafe? WHERE?

When I said that it should be the businesses choice to allow or disallow smoking?

YES it should be their choice. It's an option to make. Man... I know I speak english...

I've never said that you should have to breathe second hand smoke unwillingly. I've said that others should be allowed to smoke as long as it's affecting people that don't wish to smell it.

Again...

Try this.

Since this is a PB forum I'll do PB.

What percentage of people in the US play PB?

Do you think it's more than 50%???

I bet it's not over 10%.

Let's say it's 40%.

If the Gov were to say that since PB has no real use and it's going to be banned for the welfare of the rest of the populace what do you think would happen?

60% of the people "don't care, because it don't affect me"

That is how you lose your rights/freedoms.

I don't do drugs, so why should I care if anyone else can?

I don't drink... why should I care if you can go to the store and buy a beer?

I don't smoke, so why should I care if you are allowed to?

I don't snowboard... so why should I care if you are able to?

Why don't you think on a larger scale. Why don't you look and see, that there are MANY more people out there who "don't care" about any one thing you do that could possibly take it away from you.

Do you not get that?

This is about the fingerprint drug test crap... Should it be allowed to be taken from you without your consent?

"I don't care.... I don't do drugs!"

hmmmm.... I wonder how you would feel if you just got finished handling something that was tainted and then had to do that and ended up getting arrested and convicted when it clearly shows that you had drugs in/on your system. How are you going to explain that away?

I bet your "I don't care, it don't affect me" line of thought would go right down the crapper.

DM

[wetwrks]

Since this is a PB forum I'll do PB.
If the Gov were to say that since PB has no real use and it's going to be banned for the welfare of the rest of the populace what do you think would happen?

That is how you lose your rights/freedoms.

I don't do drugs, so why should I care if anyone else can?

I don't drink... why should I care if you can go to the store and buy a beer?

I don't smoke, so why should I care if you are allowed to?

I don't snowboard... so why should I care if you are able to?

Why don't you think on a larger scale. Why don't you look and see, that there are MANY more people out there who "don't care" about any one thing you do that could possibly take it away from you.

Do you not get that?

This is about the fingerprint drug test crap... Should it be allowed to be taken from you without your consent?

"I don't care.... I don't do drugs!"

hmmmm.... I wonder how you would feel if you just got finished handling something that was tainted and then had to do that and ended up getting arrested and convicted when it clearly shows that you had drugs in/on your system. How are you going to explain that away?

I bet your "I don't care, it don't affect me" line of thought would go right down the crapper.

DM

Ok...closer to the point...paintball...like drugs...once you get a bunch of paintballers who abuse the system and start paintballing homeless and bicyclers...that gives paintball a bad name and gets laws passed.

In that same theme...people doing drugs breaking into houses gets drugs banned or restricted. People who blow smoke towards nonsmokers in a resturaunt get smoking banned in businesses.

Now then...pot legalization...currently in Colorado we have medical pot. I attend a concert at Red Rocks...not a private business, it is owned by the city of Denver. And while there the smell of pot is overwhelming. I was aware of 8 out of 15 people in our row that were doing pot. I and my friend were offered pot. How does this fit with the medical aspect? I don't need it. My friend doesn't need it. Yet somehow we should have it? Should have to breath it? To what...protect the "right" of the individual to do what they want in their home. What about my right to not have to breath it?

http://www.dailycamera.com/420/ci_17891141

So much for this being reserved to "what you do in your home". And as this is a public school and in a public courtyard it affects me. It affects the people who have classes in that area, it affects the people who have to work in that area, it affects the people who have to live in that area.

Per the article: A stoned teenager crashed into a police patrol car at the intersection of Folsom Street and Colorado Avenue as he was leaving the CU campus at 3:43 p.m., police said. He was taken to the hospital because of "marijuana-related" issues, and authorities said they plan to ticket him.

So much for this having no effect on society...guess who has to pay for repairs for said cop car...me and the other local tax payers.

As soon as it is legalized it will no longer be reserved to home use...it will be everywhere.

Oh...and I still hold to the fingerprint test as being overly invasive and too prone to false positives.

[OPBN]

Where have I said it's fine for a business to be unsafe? WHERE?

When I said that it should be the businesses choice to allow or disallow smoking?

YES it should be their choice. It's an option to make. Man... I know I speak english...

I've never said that you should have to breathe second hand smoke unwillingly. I've said that others should be allowed to smoke as long as it's affecting people that don't wish to smell it. Actually you did. You said the people that didnt want to breathe it could go get another job or find another place to eat. ... One of the reasons it was proposed was as a safety issue for people working in restaurants and bars who were having to be subjected to second hand smoke. Here is where your argument is flawed. If rules are allowed to be made to insure the safety of the workers, and breathing second hand smoke is deemed to be dangerous, than it can indeed be banned in the workplace.


Again...

Try this.

Since this is a PB forum I'll do PB.

What percentage of people in the US play PB?

Do you think it's more than 50%???

I bet it's not over 10%.

Let's say it's 40%.

If the Gov were to say that since PB has no real use and it's going to be banned for the welfare of the rest of the populace what do you think would happen? BTW, it isn't the governement saying it, it's the people saying it. A petition was signed, it was put on the ballot and people voted on it. People like you and me. People excercising their rights to vote and pass a law to insure the safety of workers in the workplace.


60% of the people "don't care, because it don't affect me"

That is how you lose your rights/freedoms.

I don't do drugs, so why should I care if anyone else can?

I don't drink... why should I care if you can go to the store and buy a beer?

I don't smoke, so why should I care if you are allowed to?

I don't snowboard... so why should I care if you are able to?

Why don't you think on a larger scale. Why don't you look and see, that there are MANY more people out there who "don't care" about any one thing you do that could possibly take it away from you.

Do you not get that? The only thing that is on this list that is actually banned is drugs and I don't agree with that necessarily. People are allowed to drink, smoke, snowboard, and play paintball. They simply are asked to smoke outside as not to interfere with the rights of others that do not want to inhale their second hand smoke. As mentioned, there are private clubs where they can go to smoke to their hearts content, or failure. And I still have not found a single thing that I am excluded from doing that I want to do. NONE OF MY RIGHTS ARE BEING LOST.


This is about the fingerprint drug test crap... Should it be allowed to be taken from you without your consent?

"I don't care.... I don't do drugs!"

hmmmm.... I wonder how you would feel if you just got finished handling something that was tainted and then had to do that and ended up getting arrested and convicted when it clearly shows that you had drugs in/on your system. How are you going to explain that away?

I bet your "I don't care, it don't affect me" line of thought would go right down the crapper.

DM I am not an expert on how this test reacts to the levels of drugs one would find on money or other items that were "tainted' by drugs. I would imagine that simliiar to a blood alcohol test that it would have to be at a certain level to read as positive. Also, I don't see myself being fingerprint tested for welfare or any criminal activity since I don't live on welfare and I don't commit criminal activities.... It's not like they are going to go out and randomly start taking peoples fingerprints to test them for drug residue as a massaive countrywide sting operation. Much like blood alcohol level tests are used to help convict drunk drivers, they will be used as additional evidenence in cases involving drug sales I would imagine. BTW, it isn't against the law to be under the influence of drugs, just to possess them.

[hill160881]

Per the article: A stoned teenager crashed into a police patrol car at the intersection of Folsom Street and Colorado Avenue as he was leaving the CU campus at 3:43 p.m., police said. He was taken to the hospital because of "marijuana-related" issues, and authorities said they plan to ticket him.



LOLOLOLOL


Maybe you want to read the link I provided you way back in the first page. You can not test for weed like you can alcohol. The cops statements, unless confirmed by the kid, are a guess and not backed up by and test. Unless he has a lab in his back pocket.

Also for most users, THC causes little to no reaction delay up to a point. Try playing PB with me and you will understand this. Did they have any proof he was stoned? No, and it was before the event even started. lol Sounds like a regular old accident to me they blamed on pot with no evidence. "They plan to ticket him" lol meaning they dont even know if they can or not. "He was taken to the hospital because of "marijuana-related" issues" What issues because studies have confirmed it is harmless, so what, did he overdose?(it impossible to overdose) Not even getting him on possession.lol sounds like a story made to sound good to sell the article. Lets get this strait, a DWI resulting in an accident and they may ticket him. something is wrong with this story.


"If it was legal it would be everywhere." Since I dont see everyone leaving a bar getting tested I really dont care. Compared to alcohol it is like coffee.

You know i was rear-ended by a guy who admitted he was messing with his radio. We should make those illegal as well. :tard: they could kill someone. I lost control of a truck in the ice while eating a burger once, those should be outlawed next. Passengers like kids cause accidents all the time, maybe we should make transporting children while conscious against the law.

[cockerpunk]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/Four0oz2Freedom/seinfeld.gif

[JLuke]

Lol i'd be happier if mcdonlads and all fatty food was banned and make weed legal.
hell who cares, i just want to smoke once and a while again and not have to worry about being tested a few days later and getting fired.

Atleast weed doesnt have any long term affect on me, yet fast food can make me fat *runs away now*

Also, do the mods usually close threads here? Im enjoying reading this one very much :D

[OPBN]

Lol i'd be happier if mcdonlads and all fatty food was banned and make weed legal.

What would you eat when you're stoned? I once ate 16 Krystals with cheese and two large orders of fries.

And why would the thread be closed? Other than DM continuing to prove he likes to talk out of his backside I don't see any issues. :rofl:

[wetwrks]

You can not test for weed like you can alcohol. The cops statements, unless confirmed by the kid, are a guess and not backed up by and test. Unless he has a lab in his back pocket.

Did they have any proof he was stoned? No, and it was before the event even started. lol Sounds like a regular old accident to me they blamed on pot with no evidence. "They plan to ticket him" lol meaning they dont even know if they can or not. "He was taken to the hospital because of "marijuana-related" issues"

You know i was rear-ended by a guy who admitted he was messing with his radio. We should make those illegal as well. :tard: they could kill someone. I lost control of a truck in the ice while eating a burger once, those should be outlawed next. Passengers like kids cause accidents all the time, maybe we should make transporting children while conscious against the law.

Looks like the officer probably ran him thru this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_Recognition_Expert#12_Steps_of_the_Drug_Evalu ation_Process

http://ohmygov.com/blogs/general_news/archive/2009/02/09/riding-high-a-look-at-marijuana-use-on-the-roadways.aspx

“A DRE is a police officer trained to recognize impairment in drivers under the influence of drugs other than, or in addition to, alcohol,” said Lt. David Wilson of the Massachusetts State police. “By knowing the symptoms of someone under the influence of marijuana, these officers can perform [lab] tests to determine how under the influence the person is.”

Looks like the police are on to you and have a way to tell...I would also bet that that little visit to the hospital included tests to prove it too.

As for distracted drivers...already illegal.

Distracted Driving
At the U.S. Department of Transportation, we heard America’s call to end the dangerous practice of distracted driving on our nation’s roadways. Distracted driving is a serious, life-threatening practice and we will not rest until we stop it.
We are leading the effort but you are the key to preventing distracted driving. The message is simple – Put it down!
We will work across the spectrum with private and public entities as well as advocacy groups to tackle distracted driving, and, we will lead by example. We have taken first steps -- The President’s Executive Order has established a new way to approach driving – by putting your device down and paying attention to the task at hand.

and

Stepped-up police enforcement of distracted-driving laws coupled with publicity campaigns can dramatically reduce cases of drivers who aren't paying attention behind the wheel, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said today.

Under the pilot program, Syracuse stepped up ticketing of distracted driving, even assigning officers to overtime to ticket as many driving texters as they could and using DUI-style check points. There was a public awareness campaign with snappy slogans like, “a cell phone in one hand, a ticket in the other.” Hartford had a similar program.

Both cities issued almost 10,000 tickets during the past year. Hartford saw a 57 percent drop in talking on the phone while driving and a72 percent fall in texting while driving. In Syracuse there was a 33 percent drop overall.

[DevilMan]

I talk out of my backside?

Which of us typed this ~>


BTW, it isn't against the law to be under the influence of drugs, just to possess them.

Do you know what DWI and DUI stand for? I guess not.

It's not illegal to be under the influence of them when?

You can't seem to understand anything that I am posting up here and are truly just a blockhead when it comes to this stuff. You can't seem to grasp anything I'm saying in relation to other freedoms that could easily be "outlawed" on a whim.

You brought up paintball... and idiots that go around shooting bicyclists and joggers and homeless and such. It gives paintball a bad image. Really? WHAT THE HELL DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH PAINTBALL???? NOTHING. It has to do with IDIOTS. So say these idiots went around doing the same thing with potato guns? Should they outlaw potatoes? What if they did it with eggs? Should they pass laws against chickens?

Maybe instead of passing laws against things that can be used by most people logically and reasonably they should pass laws against the people that use them to harm others. What a concept huh....

Do you have any idea what a balisong is? Or do you know why they are illegal?

I'll be amazed on this one if you don't have to google it.

DM

[OPBN]

I talk out of my backside?

Which of us typed this ~>



Do you know what DWI and DUI stand for? I guess not.

It's not illegal to be under the influence of them when?


That's because you are getting charged with operating a vehicle while under the influence, not simply because you are high. It is the act of operating the vehicle while intoxicated that is the crime, not the act of being under the influence. You don't get arrested for being high, you get arrested for posession. Unless the laws have changed, and I have to be honest that I havent checked in a long time, being high isn't a crime. Check it.

And I feel you are being similiarly obtuse in your defense of your position, resorting to name calling is a sure sign of the inability to defend your position.

Have fun with it.

Peace. I'll go back to enjoying my freedom.

[DevilMan]

You logic/freedom will be short lived with that thinking.

You are saying that it's fine to be (Whatever you want to insert here) but you can't Buy, Sell, Possess, or Produce anything that allows you to do such.

So let's say that you can paintball all you want. Not a crime, not something to worry about. But you aren't allowed to buy, sell, possess or control, or manufacture a paintball marker or paintballs.

LOVE YOUR LOGIC!!!!!

This train of thought is what is going to be the demise of this country.

Enjoy YOUR freedom..... while you can.

This is NO different than all of the people that are just fine with the 2nd amendment and your right to bear arms. Sure you can have ALL THE GUNS YOU WANT!!!! But to buy, sell, produce, possess ANY ammunition is illegal.

Think that is something I'm making up? Try doing some research on it... or just not worry about it because it doesn't affect you and go back to your FREE life.

So you don't know what a balisong is huh?

DM

[wetwrks]

You brought up paintball... and idiots that go around shooting bicyclists and joggers and homeless and such. It gives paintball a bad image. Really? WHAT THE HELL DOES IT HAVE TO DO WITH PAINTBALL???? NOTHING. It has to do with IDIOTS. So say these idiots went around doing the same thing with potato guns? Should they outlaw potatoes? What if they did it with eggs? Should they pass laws against chickens?

Correct...but iddiots abusing things get things outlawed...like the iddiots in CU, like the iddiots at the concert.


Maybe instead of passing laws against things that can be used by most people logically and reasonably they should pass laws against the people that use them to harm others. What a concept huh....

And when that accomplishes nothing...they outlaw the item. And iddiots like CU and the concert do nothing to aid your case.


Do you have any idea what a balisong is? Or do you know why they are illegal?

I'll be amazed on this one if you don't have to google it.

DM

No google necissary...I know about butterfly knives. And I know the story behind them...and switchblades too.

[DevilMan]

Correct...but iddiots abusing things get things outlawed...like the iddiots in CU, like the iddiots at the concert.

And you think that is the proper response? A few people mess it up so EVERYONE else gets restricted?

And when that accomplishes nothing...they outlaw the item. And iddiots like CU and the concert do nothing to aid your case.

No doubt... and did you do anything for your side of it? Did you file a complaint or go notify security? Or tell them that it wasn't allowed and to put it out or you would notify security? Or ask them not to smoke around you???

Or instead did it just piss you off and you come here to complain about it and try and make it sound like it's all my fault?

And it accomplished NOTHING because the restrictions WERE NOT ENFORCED. Who's fault is that? The smoker? Or the law enforcement? hmmmm...



No google necissary...I know about butterfly knives. And I know the story behind them...and switchblades too.

So why don't you try and explain why it is that balisongs are illegal? Because I'm just dying to hear this!!!!




There ya go man... and for the record "idiots" only has 1 "D". I don't often get into spell checking people but I thought that since you were so fond of using the word I think you should know how to spell it... I mean it's not really "necessary" for everything to be exact, but just the same.

DM

[OPBN]

So you don't know what a balisong is huh?

DM Apparently some sort of switchblade or butterfly knife, and no I didnt know that exact term.... or really care. I guess that makes you more of an internet tough guy than me. :hail:

And just because I don't agree with what you are saying doesn't mean I don't understand it. I think your logic is the one that needs work my friend. I was interested in some friendly banter, but you apparently feel the need to increase your E-peen by insulting me.

I think people like YOU are going to be the demise of this country personally.

[DevilMan]

Apparently some sort of switchblade or butterfly knife, and no I didnt know that exact term.... or really care. I guess that makes you more of an internet tough guy than me. :hail:

And just because I don't agree with what you are saying doesn't mean I don't understand it. I think your logic is the one that needs work my friend. I was interested in some friendly banter, but you apparently feel the need to increase your E-peen by insulting me.

I think people like YOU are going to be the demise of this country personally.


hehehehee... okay... so why don't you tell me and the rest of the folks here exactly how ~>
Other than DM continuing to prove he likes to talk out of his backside I don't see any issues.

is relevant/pertinent to the discussion and how it's NOT considered an insult directed towards me.

Increase my E-peen and internet tough guy.... :rofl:

Sure thing man.

DM

[going_home]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y51/Four0oz2Freedom/seinfeld.gif




http://www.epsilonminus.com/somethingawful/internetchampion.jpg




:clap:

[Dover]

I hope ever state does it. I for one don't want to support some junky pot-head who would rather get high then use the money for what it's meant for, their family.

...And Dover, they have those in vehicles already. Mandatory for those habitual offenders.

no not for hiabitual offenders, or even offenders at all. EVERY SINGLE VEHICLE should be equiped.

and the results should be reported instantly to Law Enforcement via satellite such as OnStar.

the vehicle becomes disabled and the locks are engaged, the driver is read their Miranda rights and is informed that the authorites are on the way to sentence, judge and execute the subsequent charge of DUI.

GUILTY! I KNEW YOU"D SAY THAT!!

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/6363/greg.jpg

[hill160881]

This thread is fun :D

[wetwrks]

There ya go man... and for the record "idiots" only has 1 "D". I don't often get into spell checking people but I thought that since you were so fond of using the word I think you should know how to spell it... I mean it's not really "necessary" for everything to be exact, but just the same.

DM

You keep pushing that people should be able to do whatever they want within their own homes. My point in all of this is that these people won't restrain (and haven't restrained) themselves to their own homes.

You state that it is a few bad apples spoiling it for you. My point is that 10,000 people at CU isn't a few. That about half the people in a row at a concert isn't a few.

Can't blame the item for its misuse? Sorry but at some point the government has to step in and remove the toy from the spoiled child who refuses to play nicely. And sometimes that means that the other children have to do without. Thus is the case for restricting alcohol to adults. Thus is the case for restricting driving to adults. Thus is the case for restricting access to sudafed.


Or instead did you come here to complain about it and try and make it sound like it's all my fault? <---I chose not to copy it exactly as stated as one word *may* be grounds for time out here. Not going to risk it.

DM...you are the one who went after me over all this not the other way around...refer to post 14. You wanted in the middle, you got it.

And keep in mind...if the liberals can blame forearms for crime, I can blame the keyboard for misspellings. As this isn't being submitted for a grade I don't give a rip if the spelling is correct. Maby you need to change your signature from DM to SN...Spelling Nazi. :rolleyes:

[Hilltop Customs]

I hope ever state does it. I for one don't want to support some junky pot-head who would rather get high then use the money for what it's meant for, their family.


Hell yeah man, every state should jump on.

I've been thinking, we should include a reading test too, that will keep your money from going to parents who cant teach their kids how to read.

[Ando]

I've been thinking, we should include a reading test too, that will keep your money from going to parents who cant teach their kids how to read.
I could care less if they can't read. Possibly putting them through some kind of schooling (which some states already do) so they can get their GED's and get off of welfair. I would be more interested in the parents teach their children some manors and right from wrong so I won't have to do it myself.

HEART PUNCH!!!! :p

vvv You...Look up here^^^

[Hilltop Customs]

You edited so I guess I have to as well....so you didnt catch the sarcasm in my post, thought it was pretty obvious.

[Ando]

I'm not the smartest peanut in the turd so no I didn't :D

[DevilMan]

I could care less if they can't read. Possibly putting them threw some kind of schooling (which some states already do) so they can get their GED's and get off of welfair. I would be more interested in the parents teach their children some manors and right from wrong so I won't have to do it myself.

HEART PUNCH!!!! :p

vvv You...Look up here^^^


It's a good thing...

DM

[sjrtk]

I could care less if they can't read. Possibly putting them through some kind of schooling (which some states already do) so they can get their GED's and get off of welfair. I would be more interested in the parents teach their children some manors and right from wrong so I won't have to do it myself.

HEART PUNCH!!!! :p

vvv You...Look up here^^^

That was a good story of that fate full day.

Burt these people don't need GED's they need to be told this is a shovel, since people like you won't let us use chain gangs, you will dig out the ditches on the side of the road. This is a mop your a janitor, ect.

No this is not a glamorous job but it needs to be done so shut up and go to work.

[cockerpunk]

http://www.epsilonminus.com/somethingawful/internetchampion.jpg




:clap:

that gif is quickly becoming one of my favorite responses to absurd threads. :cheers:

[OPBN]

That was a good story of that fate full day.

Burt these people don't need GED's they need to be told this is a shovel, since people like you won't let us use chain gangs, you will dig out the ditches on the side of the road. This is a mop your a janitor, ect.

No this is not a glamorous job but it needs to be done so shut up and go to work.
Somewhat agreed. More leaning towards forcing them to take the jobs that are currently held by illegals though. Not sure why we need however many millions of illegals to take low paying crappy jobs when we have a perfectly good workforce warming couches and collecting welfare.

[Ando]

Somewhat agreed. More leaning towards forcing them to take the jobs that are currently held by illegals though. Not sure why we need however many millions of illegals to take low paying crappy jobs when we have a perfectly good workforce warming couches and collecting welfare.
U can't get them off the couch, you expect them to work in a field? That experiment is already in the works, ask the Georgians how its working out for them.

Wow this thread went way off track :rofl:

[OPBN]

U can't get them off the couch, you expect them to work in a field? Call me wierd, but I would think if given the choice between starving to death or working to get money for food regardless of the job, people would choose the latter.

And yeah, this thread has gone screaming off of the tracks.

[Ando]

Call me wierd, but I would think if given the choice between starving to death or working to get money for food regardless of the job, people would choose the latter.

And yeah, this thread has gone screaming off of the tracks.
Hmmm....no.

I really believe they would rather starve just to justify the looting they'll be doing and then top it off with playing the "I'm a product of my environment" card.

I'm more a environment being the product of me kind of guy. That what's wrong with these "Americans", more of these "Americans" need to learn how to catch fish.

[cockerpunk]

need to learn how to catch fish.

and yet your against them becoming educated?

:spit_take

[Ando]

and yet your against them becoming educated?

:spit_take

I hate having "discussions" with you, your psychobabble makes me ill and no. I'm not against it, more power to them if they step up to the plate. You don't have to be school educated to work. Jobs are out there, "Americans" are just lazy. Manual labor for some reason is frowned upon in this country. You don't need an education to cleaning up s***ters, be a garbage collectors, pushing a mop and bucket, working the fields...etc...NO "American" want's to do it, though they're the first to place blame on an illegal performing the job and yell...

"Your stealing American jobs and I ain't gonna have it"

Now that's BS.

It's BS that those illegals are here in the first place. It's BS that businesses higher them. It's BS the government has waited this long to do something about it.

[going_home]

It's BS that businesses higher them.



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_X6bfacAhmsU/TJJOCteovuI/AAAAAAAABbs/qW68mbk4Y5M/s1600/Grammar-Nazi-2.jpg



http://www.forevergeek.com/wp-content/media/2009/07/grammar-nazi.jpg




:rolleyes:

[wetwrks]

"Americans" are just lazy. Manual labor for some reason is frowned upon in this country. You don't need an education to cleaning up s***ters, be a garbage collectors, pushing a mop and bucket, working the fields...etc...NO "American" want's to do it, though they're the first to place blame on an illegal performing the job and yell...

"Your stealing American jobs and I ain't gonna have it"

Now that's BS.

It's BS that those illegals are here in the first place. It's BS that businesses higher them. It's BS the government has waited this long to do something about it.

I agree and disagree with your statements...

You want to come to the US...do so legally. We will welcome you here with open arms. Come in the dead of night illegally and you deserve to be sent packing and banned from ever becoming a citizen.

As for Americans being lazy...I don't think (for the most part) that that is the case. The problem as I see it is that these companies arn't paying an appropriate wage for the work. And why should they when they can get some criminal (read illegal) to do the work for less than it should pay.

[OPBN]

The problem as I see it is that these companies arn't paying an appropriate wage for the work.
Because no one wants to pay $5.00 for a head of lettuce. We have become a generation, or 2, of Wally World enthusiasts that think you should be able to "buy more and spend less".