Search found 3 matches

Return to “Ballot Initative”

by Superman
Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:38 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3585

Re: Ballot Initative

stroo wrote:Superman,

The "opt in" principle you propose is in fact very dangerous.

What if instead of welfare, we considered use of tax payer paid for roads. You don't have to drive on them; you could walk instead. So since the taxpayer funded the roads, and you opted to use them, under your "opt in" principle, your use of the road could be conditioned random searches of your car.

I hope most of us would agree that that would be a violation of our 4th Amendment Rights. That and worse is where the reasoning behind the welfare proposition leads.
I don't think my suggestion is dangerous. I think it's more dangerous to confuse the differences between a public service (public roads, fire / police services, national defense, etc.) vs a public benefit (basically any means tested social program, including welfare). Means tested social programs could (and should) include drug testing in those "means tests." :tiphat:
by Superman
Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:39 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3585

Re: Ballot Initative

stroo wrote:Superman,

I think you misunderstood me. I certainly don't believe that welfare is a right and I am not concerned about them losing their welfare.
Ya, looks like I misunderstood you then :tiphat:
stroo wrote: While you may think random drug testing in normal for jobs, it isn't. I don't think I have ever been randomly drug tested on any job I have ever had. That said, if you are operating machinery or in sales of some types, it is pretty typical.

However, when the government starts random drug testing without consent or probably cause, it is a violation of your 4th Amendment rights. That is what I have been talking about.
I would agree with you if welfare participation was required. If you were eligible for welfare and were forced to take the handout, then I'd agree with you that there is a 4th amendment issue there. But participating in welfare is a voluntary action (even if you are eligible, you don't have to go on welfare if you don't want to) and so I think it is reasonable to make random drug testing a condition for that benefit. I don't think the 4th amendment applies here because of the voluntary aspect of welfare. You "opt-in" to the program, so you know and accept the conditions before entering into the program.
by Superman
Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:01 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Ballot Initative
Replies: 42
Views: 3585

Re: Ballot Initative

stroo wrote:Charles,

It didn't read as limited to welfare. Moreover, if they can take rights away from welfare recipients because they have accepted tax payer money, they can take rights away from anyone who receives any tax payer money, which in one form or another at some point in our lives includes most of us.

And while it clearly is not any kind of legislation it is still shocking to me that people on this board and in Texas for that matter are so willing to give up their rights.

It is just bad precedent.

Like I said I don't want welfare recipients to use that money to support illegal drug use either. But taking away rights on this basis is not the way to attack the problem.
I guess I look at welfare differently than you. I do not see it as a "right." I see it as an act of compassion from a sympathetic citizenry and as such, welfare can and should be dependent on the recipient participating in reasonable fraud safeguards.

I've had to take a drug test for pretty much every job I've ever had...so people who get "free" money can live with that minor inconvenience too.

Return to “Ballot Initative”