*
just say no.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
The RealTruck AMP Research Bedsteps give you easy access to your truck-bed storage.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
J D;
My sources have used "powdered urine"from Bryd Labs.225 Congress Ave.,Suite 340,Austin,Tex 70701;two vials for 19.95. Good luck !
Don
*
Is that true about the poppy seeds? I had a couple of poppy seed bagels last Sunday, 10 days before my test. Other than that I'm not worried about a thing other than the greatest threat to America in a generation, Tobacco. Yes I admit I smoke Cigars when ever I can. Good ones though.
*All the employees at Home Depot are required to pass drug tests.Look where it got them! It's probably the only test they could pass.I'd have to agree with the Blue (red?) Eyed Devil on this one...
*Any truly competent lab has someone listen for "peeing noises" and then immediately sticks a disposable thermometer in the cup to test for body temperature. be forewarned.
*
You know if its nothing more than a piss test (just like in the military), you won't have to study too much. Drink a glass of water a half hour before the test and you'll pass flying color(s), (no pun intended).
*Hope this is being done on company time. The large Police Dept. I worked for (before retiring and started to work for a living) ordered me to take a piss test after working a midnight shift . The overtime rate ,being $38 an hour, I sat with my legs crossed from 0800 a.m. till 2015p.m. before filling the cup . P.S. They never called me down for another test.
*
My wife & I have a friend who "draws blood", for alcohol & drug tests. She used to work part time, especially the "busy hours" on weekend nights, holidays, weekend after "mother's day" (welfare check day) etc. The worst time to be on the road. One night, a few months ago, she was driving back from work on a lonely road probably 3:00 AM on a Sunday morning and got hit by a drunk driver, wrecked the car. She knew and had worked with the two CHP guys that arrived to help out and investigate. They joked that maybe she should get a "blood sample" from him and they'd watch...
She says she's heard all about the poppy seed muffins that supposidly cause a positive test for opiates, and all the other foods and perscription drugs that people try to claim they've recently used, to mask the results. She says the levels of illicit material in those items is SO small that it makes the people look naive. And it arouses suspicion.
The testing is not black and white, they can test a range of levels and spot very low amounts of suspected drugs, and would not be fooled by a few poppy seeds.
*Bill;12 hours after finishing a night shift with all the requisite coffee? You must have filled a wheel barrow for them.
*All those donuts soak up a lot of coffee
*So if you ate about 5 lbs. of poppy seeds? I assume the poppy seeds have some trace amount of opiates in them, so seeds wouldn't explain away THC or cocaine metabolites. Or whatever it is people take these days ... I hear inhalants are hot, wonder if a drug test would catch that, or maybe they'd just pick up on your vacant expression.
*
One of my wealthiest clients gave me some advice about 8 years ago when I was going through a rather nasty divorce. He told me to never, ever under any circumstance subject yourself to any kind of testing. If the test results are botched and you are accidently labeled something that you are not it could have a profound impact on your future.
*
... but if testing is a precondition to (needed) employment, then what?
Incidentally, i think the testing has gotten extreme. A major federal case was litigated where a public school wanted all its basketball players tested ... it was attacked on 4th Amendment grounds ... the school won! on some vague justification. So much for rights against unreasonable search & seizure! Private companies are not restricted by the constitution; at some point privacy legislation will be needed to cut down on this. Pretty much anyone can be required to take a piss test as a prerequisite for something else.
The only defensible reason for the tests I've heard is that there is a supposed coorelation between drug use & absenteeism. The war on drugs or the war on privacy?
*
Andrew D
I think a 24oz framing hammer would beat a poly graph test just fine. It is in the wrist action. When do the employees get to administer a drug test on the bosses? Seems like if I am there and the boss is there than it is our time or our space or our company. I sure don't want to work for a boss who is on drugs!!!! What about clients? What about the police? Drug testing seems like another way for the managers to not have to do their job. If an employee is doing drugs fire him/her. It is just that simple.
*
You're preaching to the choir. 'cept I would add if the employee is doing anything that impairs his work performance, fix it or fire 'em. I'm not real interested in what people do in their off-hours, with safety-critical exceptions like pilots, engineers, oil tanker captains...
*hee, hee, ha
*Agreed, Andrew, but the problem lies in the lawmakers defining "safety critical;" driving is a right, not a privilege, so if you drive (or fly, or captain), it's a given that you can legally be tested for drug use. Carrying this a step further, is a syringe in the hand of a drunken doctor, nurse, or EMT a "safety critical" issue? Likewise, is a prescription in the hand of a pharmacist who's high? Or how about that stoned electrician who's wiring a building? The list could go on. Where does one stop?I can't remember who said it, but I'll quote someone who pretty much echos my beliefs: "That which governs best, governs least." I thought this was Franklin, or maybe Jefferson, but I could find no references, and I didn't want to get lost in the web/history sinkhole. ; )Patty
*
> I can't remember who said it, but I'll quote someone who pretty much echos my beliefs: "That which governs best, governs least." I thought this was Franklin, or maybe Jefferson, but I could find no references, and I didn't want to get lost in the web/history sinkhole. ; )
Well, what's one more sinkhole? It was Jefferson who said it. He also said, "We have failed if there is not a rebellion every twenty years" (speaking about the entrenchment of power and class).
*
Argh! no, no, no the right/privilege dichotomy things is deaddeaddead (though anything goes in hidebound state courts). Modern legal thought leans toward straight-out balancing of interests, rather than a hidden frontloading of the balancing in the beginning by categorizing a laundry list of interests as rights (protected) or privileges (nuthin'). Anything you have any privacy or property right in (still controversial) must be considered case-by-case. Not to go ballistic, it's just that we lawyers are so ... misunderstood. [At last check in Calif., driving got slotted as a privilege.]
Dang, there was a state that decided to drug-test its legislators (down south?), and i don't know what the outcome of the lawsuit was!
As for finding one's way through murky gray areas, that's what lawyers are for! Seriously, you posit the "slippery slope" argument, where does this stop. "Where does one stop" more often than not is a judgment call lawmakers, judges, and individuals are capable of making. Does setting the highway speed limit at 65 mean it might eventually be lowered to zero? No. The big fights erupt over where to set down in the gray zone -- consider abortion -- but these rights aren't over whether to regulate, just how finely to tune it.
My aphorism is more "that which governs best, governs no more or no less than necessary." Not a libertarian, I. Tautological, yes. And comfortable with drug tests for nuclear missile silo operators (surely you're happy with it at some point?). But not for everyone -- suspicionless searches (drunk driving checkpoints for example) diminish us all.
BTW, there is a Jefferson quote for nearly every occasion because ... he was a corrupt nutcase! He was later talked out of the careless revolution comment. He was also the slaveowner who wrote of slavery "I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just." What a wonderful ... writer! (Anyone follow the Sally Hemings DNA story?) Check out his Aaron Burr persecution as President...
I lean towards Lincoln for my quotes. Wow! No one writes like that anymore. He barely even came up for air in the brief Gettysburg or Second Inaugural Address but there is little in American literature more powerful.
Sorry, this touches on a lot of my OTHER interests. Now, about framing...
*Poppy seeds are a source of opiates and had presented problems in the past. Newer testing can differentiate between opiates found in poppy seeds and those from an "illegal" source. Testing is sensitive enough to show positive from the equivalent of 2-3 poppy seed muffins.
*When Ted Kennedy pees in a bottle before each vote, then I'll agree...
*b ACK! Major screw up!I meant to say"Driving is ai privilegenot ai right."First of all, Andrew, I am no match for you when it comes to knowledge of the workings of the law, but as a citizen, permit me a couple of opinions, without too much backlash. ; ) Get ready for a stream-of-unconciousness...Now, are you doing some of that lawyerly fence-sitting? ; ) What the heck does that mean, ""that which governs best, governs no more or no less than necessary?" Define "necessary." The slippery slope argument will always be around, and I believe it helps to keep us aware of where we could end up.How many people convicted of breaking a state law appeal through the federal system? And doesn't the federal system still pretty much try to stay out of the states' business? I'm aware that the big laws are made on a federal level (slavery, abortion, etc.); of course, these cases are brought by individuals/states, but they are few and far between that end up making a real difference.As far as Jefferson, nutcase, misogynist, slave-holder, or not, the man was brilliant - brilliant, not perfect. I agree, there can never be another Lincoln, or Ben Franklin, but I can't justifiably completely trash anyone who made a great difference, in any way. Oh, that we could looki thoroughlyinto the lives ofi allthe great people!I think it's difficult to get caught up in the law, and lose sight of what some may call an overly simplistic goal: to see justice served. From the little I know, this is for what the great lawmakers and justices were remembered.Andrew, one more thing: why you wanna go and degenerate this thread withi framing!?Patty
*
You know, after spending a lot of years working at various levels in various types of industry (service, business, academic, manufacturing) I have come to the conclusion that I need to look for the PEOPLE I want to work for, not the job. A job is a job, even when it is doing something you love. But the best job in the world with a nasty/corrupt/stupid/etc boss(s) is really the worst job in the world.
I am HIGHLY suspicious of any company that would require me to take any kind of substance test as a precondition of hire. I might take it, if I needed to feed my family, but I would be looking for a better place. I would go in with the understanding that these people will show me no loyalty, consideration, or honesty, and I had better expect to get F****d, and plan accordingly. The fact that places like that have extremely high turnover is their problem, not mine. Trust is a two way street and it has to be earned (something never taught in business schools).
I think that people have a responsibility to be safe when they have the lives of strangers in their hands, and there are two ways of enforcing this, societal pressure or regulatory invasion of privacy. If we want to just use societal pressure, and tell the government to stay out of it, everyone must agree to the consequences. If someone kills someone(s) due to drugs, drinking, lack of sleep, etc, then they have to pay the penalty. In some cultures that is beheading, blinding, loss of limbs, enslavement to the victims family etc. It takes these kinds of extreme measures to make societal pressure work. Lesser measures don't, as we have seen in our own culture. That is why we have mandatory drug testing, driving checkpoints, regulations etc. So we have to decide, loss of privacy, or loss of "civilization"? I don't know the answer. I don't like either solution, but for the life of me, I can't see any others.
*
Hee, hee. Gotcha going, eh?
The federal system is coming to more and more dominate the states, a nice thing in terms of predictability (like whether you have to wear your darn seatbelt or can turn right on red) but perilous as well. The federal courts have the advantage of being quite small -- fewer judges nationwide that the California trial jusges -- and an obsession with consistency. i had to probe state law from time to time -- many ordinary "state" cases may be brought in federal court under "diversity jurisdiction," that is, suits between citizens of different states -- and it was scary stuff. The state courts are more politicized than the lifetime-tenured federal.
Jefferson was good with words, i won't grant him a lot more than that. That his reputation has been grossly inflated is not mere revisionist carping. And his moral standing in light of slavery and other issues (some REALLY corrupt financial dealings and efforts to meddle with the courts) is of course debatable. I don't mean to trash him, but his deification is grave error. We Americans focus so much on hero-making that we fail to acknowledge the profound failings -- particularly slaveholding, a harshly criticized practice even in 1783 (the Constitution delicately never mentions it by name) -- of many of our historical leaders. Slaveholding is more than a minor deviation from perfect, by 20th and 18th century morals. It does not diminish their historical significance to teach the truth, and who cares whether they're "heroes." This is still a fine country.
Sorry to sound preachy! I just bristle at the Hollywood-ization of history. My philosophy is that there are no non-mythic heroes, but there are many who perform heroic acts.
*Lisa,Briefly, companies institute drug tests as a way to cover their ass in the event of a lawsuit. Lawsuits of every size shape and color in in high fashion these days. For instance "they unwittingly let me work while I was high and I injured myself and want compensation. they should have known I was high" Sounds stupid but it happens.On the lighter side, all this talk of urine tests reminds me of a joke.A fellow goes to the doctor to have his elbow checked out. The doctor has him piss in a cup and pours it into a computer. The computer whirrs and beeps and pops and then spits out a tape which reads " you have tennis elbow". The doctor gives the man instructions to take it easy for 2 weeks and then return to see him. The doctor gives the man a cup and says to fill this the morning of the next visit.Two weeks go by and on the morning of the mans return visit he decides he'll throw the computer for a good loop. He takes the specimen cup and has his wife piss in it, his daughter piss in it, he adds some oil from tha garage floor and to top it off he jerks off in it. At his visit he turns in the cup which is quickly poured into the computer which whirrs and beeps and pops and spits out the tape. The doctor looks somewhat concerned as he reads the tape. Turning to the patient the doctor says " this is very odd, the tape says that your wife is screwing the mailman, your daughter is pregnant, your car needs an oil change and if you don't quit jerking off, you'll never get rid of that tennis elbow."It's not Abe Lincoln material but just as good.Pete Draganic
*I pissed in the bottle. I'm not a drug user. My biggest concern was that I bought and drank 3 weeks ago a "micro brew" that's claim to fame was it was brewed with Hemp Seed and it was local to me so, not knowing about any testing I boughrt and drank the 6 pack one weekend. This has gone philophosical. Jefferson was a giant in the making of this country and we should all bow to him and the founding fathers or we would be pulling the party line here. Several things, 1) this is not verbetum, but I heard it was Franklin who (paraphased) said, " anyony who gives up some of their rights for a degree of safety deserves neither." 2) My pissing in a jar was not a giving up of my rights, it was a pre-condition of them paying me money. They also require me to be on call after hours. I could tell them to kiss off on either, but as a former self employed and employer I think that they have the right to make rules and it is my right as someone who has to live under them to tell them "No Thanks"3) I re-read the 2nd ammendment of the constitution and grow up and leave my guns alone. Those guns and rights are not to kill dumb high school students, they are to keep an over zealous Govt. in check. We are armed privately to keep the Govt. at bay if it was ever to come to that. P.S. I'm really a normal reasonable guy.
*I am admittedly out of shape but I would welcome the chance to test some modern drugs! - yb
*Pete, great joke. My rant came before seeing the entire list, but it still stands.
*I'm sure you're a normal reasonable guy. But do you think anything you're packing would slow down the military? Fish in a barrel. Could it happen? Yes. Will a bunch of middle-aged guys with Colt .45's hold the fort against M-16's, tanks, and attack helicopters? No. Will the prevalence of guns and the glorification of violence hurt many more innocent Americans? Yep -- we lead the world on gun violence.The 2d Amendment was a reaction to the British prohibiting colonists from keeping weapons (with good reason it turns out), but the main thing the Framers were mad about is that this left them vulnerable to Indians, poachers, etc. Hence the preamble "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..." It was if anything about the rights of the STATES against the federal gov't, not about unregulated gonzo individuals. for exampleWhatever guns and rights were meant to do, the gut-wrenching violence that Americans put up with has to stop. If the Constitution actually does stand in the way, well we've fixed it before and we can fix it again. I can't look at all those funerals and think those kids died for a good cause.The piss-in-the-bottle was a waiver of your privacy rights, you just thought the price was reasonable. I don't break the law and i don't have to prove it to anyone.Pete, goo djoke -- I've heard it before. Now, what's the moral? You can't beat modern science?
*The world is much different now then the days of the framers, but I still believe that the framers meant the 2nd to keep a goverment, be it British or our own from getting to powerful. I can't stop a tank with a shot gun, but they can't control a couple of hundred million gun owners. Sounds dumb, but I guess I am. Those little bastards in CO could have done more damage with their bombs had they gone off than they did with their guns. It is an old arguement, but, the guns didn't take themselves to school and shoot the place up on their own. What happened to the days when we were taught the basics (So we could learn later) and were sure the principle could spank our asses if we screwed up. It kept me in line.
*Hey, we made it back to the subject of this Board! Framers, get it? :)PricipAls -- you had me confused there! I think there was more going on with these kids than lack of a good whipping. All that would have accomplished here is that the principal would have gotten on their visitation list. Does anyone know how many, if any, of the 50+ bombs detonated? Or how they learned to construct them?
*
Has anyone else noticed that all these terrible massacres in schools have occured in middle or solid working class schools? None have occured in the notoriously overcrowded, understaffed inner city hellholes, where gang violence, drugs, and unemployment are rampant. Perhpas it is the difference between vicarious violence and living with the real thing and it's aftermath.
JD, I am afraid that I have to agree with Andrew. Millions of armed citizens are not going to hold off any determined army on pure firepower or guts. What will hold off our OWN army will be the flat refusal of our servicepeople to combat their fellow countrymen on a large scale. This is something we should rejoice in, it is perhaps the best thing that we have to offer the world, an example where we can fight amongst ourselves without resorting to slaughter.
*
J.D. & Andrew,
I don't know how this conversation went from pissing into a jar to gun control but as one who's stand is somewhere between the two of you,I would like to add my observations for your comments.
Fact is, regardless of the country, US, Canada or Britain, regardless of the level of gun control, very little (US), Total registry (Canada), or Total Control, (Britain), all have experienced massive killings in schools and places of employment without exception.
Logic would indicate that obviously, gun control has little effect on curbing violence.
Here in Canada, I read about some good citizen, making headlines because he has turned in his old shotgun over to the police for disposal, because it kills people. He keeps his car, knives, blunt instruments, hands etc. also instruments that are used every day of our lives to kill someone.
Again logic would indicate that we have all missed the boat, it's the violent attitude that prevails in all of our modern societies.
Society, excuses, assaults in the schoolyard, the home, the workplace and more importantly in sports.
But society has a knee jerk reaction to a tragic shooting with gun control as the answer.
We all apply one logic when we analyse a problem in a house. We normally agree that it's better to solve the cause first, before doing the repair. Why can't we do the same with violence.
Gabe
*sorry - just couldn't let that pass. "...it sure kept me in line." That was originally and still is, the agenda of what we call "schools", to teach us to stay in line. To identify for industry who will and who won't - so that the personnel needs of industry can be met. So the companies can "prosper" (read proffit) Originally invented as a crowd controll device for the children of workers who "left the farm" in an industrializing nation at the end of the 19th century, schools have not changed much since. Now we expect them to feed our kids breakfast and lunch. We expect them to provide after school activities for anyone with any interests. We SAY we expect them to "prepare" our kids to meet the demands of the next century. In truth, we really want schools to keep our kids from 7am to 5pm while we adults go about our lives. If schools, or even the idea of schools, were worth a damn, we wouldn't have laws to make people attend - you wouldn't be able to keep people out! They are what they started out to be, a socializing experience for children, teaching them to "stay in line". pittiful - yb
*Andrew, Lisa et alPardon the interjection of a "ferner" but don't forget your own Kent State shootings (CSN&Y "Four Dead in Ohio")where your National Guard followed orders and fired on their own people. . . and if you think Tiennamen Squarei couldn'thappen in the U.S. you're very naive.The basic tenet of all military training is to i follow ordersI'm sad to say that here in Canada there have been two incidents lately, in Toronto and in Vancouver, where riot police pepper sprayed and clubbed mildly protesting citizens. The fact that riot police in full gear even exist in this country was a shock to many including myself!!! You can at least take heart that there were individual acts of bravery during the Colorado massacre. . .the same can't be said for the killing of a number of young girls at the Ecole Politechnique in Montreal a couple of years ago, where all the male students obeyed the single gunman and left the building, so he could terrorize and murder his victims in peace!!! We already have our own copycat of the trenchcoat twits. . .A single student shot two students, killing one at a school in Alberta yesterday before being disarmed by a staff member. . . and we have serious hand gun control here. . . but little for hunting weapons.-pm
*Just a note to Andrew, I'm not a normally reasonable guy. Haven't you seen my posts?
*I'm not saying a massacre couldn't happen here ... but what does this have to do with gun control? An isolated riot is a far cry from a police state.Kent State and, believe it or not, Tiennamen appear both to have sprouted from training and command failures. Only one of the Chinese units converging on the square fired on protesters, at some distance from the square (no one was killed there). Had the protesters been armed, if that is what you suggest, the carnage would have been far worse, mostly on the civilian side (remember the tanks?). And the extra killing would have been justified -- no soldier is obligated to stand there and get shot.Shocking killings can be found in most countries. But ours are worse and more frequent than in most other countries. America now has the prestige of the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world -- finally beat out Russia -- and we're #3 on capital punishment but gaining ground. This, is the most prosperous and powerful country on earth? We (speaking generically) embrace the cowboy and Dirty Harry mentality, cheer when the bad guy dies horribly, and refuse to categorically condemn violence (when it is for a "good reason," like "he started it!"). It is self-destructive behavior contradictory to our ideals.BTW, in tepid defense of the "Trench Coat Mafia," that's not what they called themselves ("Gothics" or some such), rather it was an epithet invented by their foes. The two who did the bulk of the "work" appear to have been quite ... special. The police have questioned their associates but little has come from it except that nitwit girlfriend who bought the guns.I'm fed up with the attitude and the guns.
*Ah, you underestimate yourself. :)
*Guns work very much like transistors (amplifiers of signals)...They can very handily turn the need to slap someone side the head into a huge hole in he head!!!Bottled up ill feelings and guns make for work on my "ducking and playing dead" skills.Near the stream, thinking all people need to feel needed and valued, hugged and smiled at.J
*I'm for that to(o)...near the stream and not streamin for noone,J
*Watched cartoons this am at 6 or so, and wow are they about violence...Almost portray that the bad guys are OK and that someday they will finally win...They only just barely lose and then their attitude is like.."We'll just have to try to outsmart them tomorrow!!!"TV violence, game violence, movie violence is real bad for kids and adults and freedom and attitudes of fear of punishment....And while I'm ranting, I'm so against "Action Entertainment" that's to do with violence!... verses action like hang gliding or rock climbing or kayaking rapids....No need to kill in a video game is there?!I am for it all being banned. And for that matter take cigarettes out of stores and stick em in Drug stores in a back room hidden from view with no advertisement what so ever...Why do I have to look at them when I buy a paper or soda or milk or bread? And wouldn't it be nice to be on one square inch of the planet and be able to look down at it and not see a butt!? RJR make those butts self destruct in a couple of minutes contact with our great Earth....All hale our great Earth! The Indians have it right...The Earth is the Mother ship and should be worshipped as such.That's it, by the stream,J
*I, 1) can't believe how I lead us down a path from drug testing to gun control, maybe the drug testing has merit. 2) believe that guns aren't the problem and know it is my opinion and I probably won't change minds. 3)Don't in my wildest dreams think a or a hundred shotguns will stop a tank. I think that it would be geurilla warfare and we all know how well that goes.I had a major fire in my house one night and with all the neighbors standing around, the Fire Chief asked me if I had any weapons in the house. I thought about it and said no. I didn't have any weapons in the house. Just then a line of firemen came walking out of the house holding my shot guns. The neighbors must have thought I was starting a militia. These weren't weapons to me. they were Shotguns, most of which I got when my dad died. Some were "semi-automatic" god forbid. These guns and more have been with me all my life and as unreasonable as I am, I would never have pulled a stunt like those 2 kids. Those kids had even bigger plans with bombs, but where is the out cry to ban gas grills?As I said before, this is a no win arguement, let's solve the abortion issue, it will be slightly easier.
*What ever happened to Bugs Bunny where we learned cultural stuff while they blew each other up? Who can forget the classic where Elmer Fudd sang "Kill the Wabbit, Kill the Wabbit" opera style. Have we lost our sense of humor?
*Abortion is far easier...It's an individual thing.Guns are not for oneself unless committing suicide.Near the stream, doin my thing,J
*Bugs Bunny and the Road Runner to(o) with a million anvils dropped from a million cliffs...!!!Near the streaam and smiling just remembering the good ones!!J
*What about us poor bastards that just want to shoot birds? Near the Dump!
*Get a sling shot...
*AndrewIs this the U.S. take on the Tiannemen massacre: >"Only one of the Chinese units converging on the square fired on protesters, at some distance from the square (no one was killed there)" ???Our information was that many hundred (400?) people were killed there that day. And no I wasn't suggesting anything about "armed" protesters.I share your disgust!-pm
*Hey, after gun control and abortion let's talk religion, I'm sure there is common ground there.
*Very challenging. Or a boomerang (one of the attack ones, not the fly-in-a-circle toys). I'm sure our Aussie friend can provide some tips.
*Yeah, which one is best anyway? Need to pick one, not much time with Y2K around the corner.Who wants to talk about sex?
*I -love- watching Roadrunner with my preschooler. He gets to say uh-oh a lot. I point out that the coyote is a bit "naughty". Doubt I'm ruining his mind, as we curl up un the couch together on a Saturday morning.
*Sex is bad, the Govt. says so and will be very mad if it shows up on the internet. I vote for the religion with a Supreme Being. That should just about cover it.
*I -love- watching Roadrunner with my preschooler. He gets to say uh-oh a lot. I point out that the coyote is a bit "naughty". Doubt I'm ruining his mind, as we curl up un the couch together on a Saturday morning.
*I shouldn't have said "unit," more like a battalion (if I have my terms right). And yes, the killings were probably in the thousands -- a massacre. I think it's interesting that in part it was a f***-up. the kind of f***-up a despotic gov't is more likely to make. Still want to know more about the Soviet KAL downing.My gripe is with lazy reporters -- most would probably say yes, the students were killed in the square. We saw a news report before Clinton's recnt visit, where there was controversy over his appearance in a ceremony at the edge of the square. The piece gave considerable detail about what happened, as best we know. I'm pretty sure this was CNN ... maybe 60 minutes ... I don't watch a lot of TV. Of course, these details hardly matter much, but the more I know the more mistakes I catch reporters making. When they report on legal stuff, ug. No wonder everyone thinks the courts are nuts. (They have their problems, just different ones.)I view Chinese gov't as our most worrisome potential enemy, one we can't ignore. BTW, in a piece I saw about Chinese development, they had a shot of workers constructing a commercial bldg -- using crude handsaws. (see how I tied this into a Breaktime topic)
*Maybe we should all head over to Fine Woodworking's board (Knots something?) so we can all be reasonable, loving, and civilized.....I didn't think so.
*Oh, go to h*ll:-//
*J. D. This seems kinda one sided so I'll weigh in on your side . I might feel different (but I doubt it ) if there were no guns in this country , but thats not the case and I dont think ever will be. I know this is cliche but a gun is not inherently evil any more than a hammer or a baseball bat or a rock. Its the person holding any of the above that makes the choice to do evil or not .I'm not even a hunter but as long as bad people have access to guns , I'll keep mine thanks. Chuck
*HiJackI was going to comment, but couldn't find anything that made sense enough, to comment on, in your tread.GabeAs I watch the debates on gun control, I remember as a teenager, waiting for the bus in rural Ontario, holding a Mossberg 22 semi, getting on the bus with it, putting it beside the bus driver for safe keeping, getting to school and carrying that same gun to my locker and then downstairs to the gun range, where it was stored until target practice that afternoon, later the process was reversed as I brought it home with me.The thought of hurting anyone was the fartest thing from any of our minds.Can you imagine what would happen today, if a young person was to stand beside the road, waiting for the school bus with a semi. rifle.......I think I'll keep my guns, if for no other reason, but to remember what freedom is worth.Gabe
*Stand between us and get shot, at least from my end. If we stuck to building, Andrew is probably on my side. As to how this went from a screw around subject to what it is is beyond me. I was just kidding about being nervous about the test. Actually, so I wouldn't have trouble I held it. This was a good idea until at the clinic they made me wait 40 minutes. The last 10 were a lot of pacing and pinching it off. As they say, its in the can, although if anyone faces a simular situation I would tell them my story.
*So ... did you pass the test?
*I had a kid see my portable table saw w/o a guard and he commented on how dangerous that was. I told him that I had sent a finger through a table saw, but that the first thing in the trash is the blade guard. I think tools are like guns, you can definitely get hurt, but you need a respect for them.
*The information I got about Tienamen (sp?) Square killings is that the local military wouldn't shoot the demonstrators, so they brought in army personnel from the outlying provinces. Shot them up with amphetamines in the subway below the square, telling them it was a vaccine to prevent them getting the plague that was infecting the crazy people above. They then went on a drug-induced frenzy, shooting demonstrators. Doctors treating wounded army men, probably wounded by friendly fire, reportedly found high levels of amphetimines in their blood.Maybe that's the drug test/gun connection we were looking for...I think the 2nd ammendment is the second most important ammendment. The gun is the thing that in the final analysis protects the vote. Not the pen. Ballots are more civilized than bullets. But the government doesn't follow votor's wishes just because it is the right thing to do. They do what they're supposed to do to some extent out of fear of the public if they, the government, goes too far with their own agenda. And we get what we will put up with.It sounds cold, but the killings in Colorado are statistically insignifigant compared to a country of about 280 million. Both guns and cars create freedom, and can kill people. The real problem was they were rich kids with too much money (hundreds of dollars), way too much unsupervised time on their hands, raised on t.v. and violent video games and videos, with adult bodies and children's minds and children's social understanding.
* Denver Braces For Anti-Gun Protests At NRA MeetingHowever much y'all respect the 2nd amendment, it honestly has no relevance to ownership of guns. This is a legal not moral point, and i'm not arguing politics.First, as the Supreme Court ruled decades ago the 2d A. restricts the federal gov't and not the states. Second, gun restrictions abound even with gun owners' support -- prohibiting weapons for violent convicted felons, children, etc. Consider also the prudent restrictions on exploding and armor-piercing bullets, automatic weapons, etc. So the question is how much regulation, not whether to regulate. Gary's analogy to cars is perfect -- cars and driver's licences are thickly regulated and can be taken away altogether. The NRA argument that regulation will soemehow lead inevitably to prohibition; and to follow there logic we would have to have a world without speed limits, age limits, criminal laws, licenses, crosswalks, building codes... Third, the A. has that maybe-relevant-maybe-not preamble about well-ordered militia and state security, which I've never heard the NRA even mention.The Constitution is not a suicide pact. It contains no absolute rights, and almost no one thinks gun ownership is an absolute right. It can be lost or regulated consistent with the health, safety, and welfare of society. You may argue for the wisdom of gun rights, but they are not found in the amendments to the Constitution. What protects gun rights is money and political power.The kids in Colorado had problems beyond the media and inadequate supervision. Plenty of kids have that but don't want to mass murder. Their story is about serious mental illness -- one was being treated already -- coupled with access to horrible firepower. The deaths are even more statistically insignificant compared to a planet of six billion, but why is that comforting?So there is no romantic right to own a gun that is any greater than the right to own any other type of property. Some may argue for a God-given right, but it is not and has never been a part of American law.Finally, I challenge anyone to come up with even one instance where an armed citizenry has saved American democracy (excepting the Revolution of course). Or in which the 2d A. has defeated a gun control measure. Important provisions of the amendments are due process, equal protection, the freedoms of speech/religion/press, and so forth. Ownership of guns must be defended on other grounds; I suspect that promoters of the 2d A. fear that the other reasons like "guns are fun" or "me first" won't sound as good in opposition to public safety.The objective all the while is safety, not regulation. Regulation alone is never enough, but it is an essential part of reform. I would draw a parallel to drunk driving; the regulation of which cut into one's rights to drive and to drink. The laws have helped, but sweeping public disapproval has helped even more. Now the old "have one for the road" sounds perverse. As ADK pointed out, a car or a gun acts an an amplifier for irresponsible behavior.
*Good Morning Andrew,Gun control remains a knee jerk reaction to a more serious problem of violence.To waste time and tax dollars chasing after a tool as the evil, while ignoring the fundamental issue is irresponsible in the very least and will not accomplich anything other than divide and fuel arguments for and against.Just as the two murderers were able to acquire guns, because they had money to bypass the usual channels, should we regulate money and the use of it. Of course not.If we look at parental responsibility and examine the parents being charged for criminal neglect in the killings, what do we do about the police being notified that there was a possibility of this happening and they making the consciencious decision to ignore it? How about the school administrators not recognizing the signs also?In your challenge, you forget that the reason Canadians and Americans were effective as ground soldiers in both world wars and the Korean conflict was that the majority of them were already trained in the use of firearms.The same cannot be said of our new troops, we have to spend fortunes showing them which end is the dangerous part.Gabe
*Good afternoon, my good ally. Everyone, even you I hope, supports gun control. The argument is not over WHETHER to regulate, it is over HOW to regulate. Gun control includes common sense issues such as that guns should not be in the hands of children, visitors to the White House, convicted violent felons, passengers on airplanes, etc. So c'mon, say it, "I support (prudent) gun control." :)Fundamentally, which path to choose depends on evidence and not argument. I believe the evidence bears on the practicality of my support for INCREASING gun control in combination with all other good sense measures for the reduction of crime, and that if I re-researched the issue I could demonstrate the same. Of course I may be mistaken.Gun control is an evolutionary process of many decades, not a knee jerk reaction. Machine guns were first regulated by Congress in 1934 ... sorry I don't know much Canadian history. While working for a Chicago federal appellate court, I researched and wrote extensively on a recent American gun control law that regulates the number of automatic weapons to approxiamtely 100,000, upholding both a conviction and the constitutionality of the law itself. I think it up to the pro-gun lobbies -- who argument that the solution to gun violence is more not fewer guns is frankly peculiar -- to make their case."Gun control" won't stop violent crime. But it has and will help, as it has helped others. That gun control in Chicago and D.C. hasn't halted shooting deaths does not standing alone prove that gun control has no effect, any more than it proves that laws against murder do not deter. Both laws failed in Colorado, we must determine why.Help, I'm drifting into lawyer mode.Curiously, from what I have read it appears that in Colorado it is illegal to sell a firearm to a minor, but not illegal to provide a firearm to a minor. Probably an artifact introduced by the hunting lobby. So the girlfriend who bought the weapons apparently broke no firearms law. But here the gun control legislation did work -- it prevented the boys from buying the weapons themselves -- but its shortcomings permitted the transfer. Betcha Colorado will close this loophole. In any event, would you push to legalize gun sales to minors? This law is both prudent in itself AND it impeded the acquisition of the weapons. (I'd still try to prosecute the girlfriend for conspiring to violate the firearms law -- assuming they don't get her as a straight accessory or accomplice, which could draw her into the big league murderer category.)
*Good Afternoon Andrew,We all agree that "gun control" is part of the world that we live in.What I oppose with all my strenght, is that "gun control" will solve crime and violence. (Hence the term "knee jerk reaction".Canada has had handgun restriction and registrations since the war. I have legally registered handguns to this date.Canada has now begun the billion dollar task of registrating all long guns, because someone in government said that it wasn't enough.Canada has now listed a whole catagory of guns as prohibited, because someone in government said that it wasn't enough.Canada will be confiscating these guns without compensation, because someone in government said that it wasn't enough.Now the word is that the government is talking about central storage for firearms, because someone in government said it wasn't enough.Now for some interesting facts:20 years ago, a little punk, walked into an Ottawa school and shot students before commiting suicide, sound familiar.Prior to that date, all the Ottawa Police who were shot in the line of duty were shot by their own weapons.During that same period, Ottawa had the toughest gun laws in the land. They had the lowest firearm training for any police force in Canada. They still do not have to qualify with their firearms. They now have the highest number of shootings of innocent bystanders in Canada.Somebody said only the police should have access to firearms. No Andrew, what I want is a return to sanity. Gun control is one issue, BUT it is not to be confused with crime or violence.When we stop desensitizing our kids to death and violence and start encouraging values again, we may have hope for the future, not before.I once told you that my hobby was law. In fact, I'm an activist for an end to corruption in government. When I see our civic leaders stealing millions from the people of this country, I want to know what do you tell some punk who robs a milk store that he's a criminal and the crook at city hall is not.Let's band together, across all borders and let's talk openly about violence in the home, school, media and sports. Let's talk about getting to the root of the problem and making it as distasful as drinking and driving in this nation.Gabe
*Gabe,I've read every post here and your last post made more sense to me than any other. I am an adament believer that the media is the primary source of decay in values and morals and common sense. The liberalization of television has done so much to desensitize all of us towards and glorify violence, drugs, sex, "gangstas", etc.Whatever happened to good old Blue Blooded America? Seems to me the Liberals have run them underground. Remember that when the shit hits the fan with Clinton's draft dodging, trigger finger, defense finance-cutting, selling nuclear technology to the bad guys, opening us to an attack, policies.....The liberals will be scrambling for there shovels to dig up all the Blue bloods they can.A note on the explosion of anti-tobacco behavior. Why hasn't anyone breathed a word about Alcohol during all of this. Alcohol kills, by far, more Americans than cigarettes every did or will. Too many drunks in Washington I suppose.Pete Draganic(PS I think a few posters here are trying to turn this nice political board into a construction discussion board)
*I don't know. I should have as I haven't inhaled in years. They get the results and insisted on at least 5 days prior to the start date so next Wednesday should be a drop dead date. I don't know if I mentioned or not, but I got a micro brew that is local for me (support the home team rah, rah). THe damn thing is brewed with Hemp seeds, so I may be a drug free failure.
*You are right about it pertaining to the federal Govt. and you also stepping into the 10th ammendment. This issue is unwinnable either way. I feel more comfortable being armed or locked and loaded agaist any govt funny business. I know that it will probably never come to that, but I think we slide further away from the founders everyday. It would be a patriot that would fight an out of control govt. You can read my manifesto at http://www.nutcase.dumb/
*The bumper sticker I see that you would like is "Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun". When I was a kid I watched Gomer Pyle, Mayberry RFD, The Brady Bunch, etc after school. Now it's Jerry Springer or some other "excuse bad behavior crap".What will be the fair when my kid is 10. When I was 10 there was a Brady Bunch episode where one of the kids called another a "STINKER" and the mother said she didn't like to hear that kind of language.Now, it is a string of obsenities. I'm no prude and don't want to censor, but geez.
*J.D.a bumper sticker for you (and me):b 'No matter how jaded I am it's never quite enough'-pm
*Cynical isn't an attitude, it's a way of life.
*
The part about not looking to smart, I dont think you have to worry about it !!!!!
*
You're probably right but thanks for cross flaming me.
*Haven't seen this much passion at this site for awhile...How does a drug test get to gun control? Moses and I both have guns and we (gun owners) must be right. Right?Too Smart too!
*
Peace Brother. Just let me know when you got time to join me on the Beach for a Drink, My Treat!!!!!
*
I'll drink to that. I'm a hot head knuckle dragger, but just as I'm sure fencing is fun, it livened the night and I openned spell checker.
*Actually, the Tenth Amendment... well, never mind. But that came up in our gun case too, United States v. Kenney.
*Actually, the Tenth Amendment... well, never mind. But that came up in our gun case too, United States v. Kenney.Anyone who's against corruption has my vote.
*Hmm, the original patriots, the Framers were ... liberals, right? Pro-rights, kick out the blue bloods. Hmmm... Then there was that traditionalist Abe Lincoln, what a disaster.Never fear change.America: love it or leave it. What a thrill for liberals to be able to say that finally! A liberal before and since it became an epithet, and good-natured about it, Andrew
*Assuming the hemp was a legal variety, the amount of THC should have been negligible.I wonder what good a drug test with advance warning is? Remember when reputation was enough, for all they know you're a drunkard.
*Anrew,Please note that there are two kinds of liberals...(sounds like an opening line for a joke)...There is the dictionary defined liberal and the modern day commonly known liberal. The liberals of yesteryear are far from what liberals are considered today. Those old liberals would be tagged as right wing extremists today. What do you think our "liberal" founding fathers would have thought of Jerry Springer & Bill Clinton? We know what today's liberals think of them.Pete DraganicP.S. I am strongly considering hanging up my hammer, at least temporarily, to enter the world of politics as a big city councilman.
*Liberal is the sense of Rawls and Madison ... seeing individual freedom as an important tenet of a pluralistic society, while remembering that tolerating other's freedom is not the same as endorsing it. So Jerry Springer I criticize, even campaign for his dismissal, but I'd not for a second ask the gov't to take him off the air, indeed would campaign against such an attempt! The damage would be grave.A Chicago TV station decided to hire him a few years back as a commentator on its evening news. The well-regarded anchor, Carol Marin, resigned in protest and the show's ratings plummeted. I had no idea what a rotten egg he was and now respect her decision all the more. But as for his show I'd rather the ugliness in our society be out in the open than forced underground, it then requires us to think about it and deal with it in a democratic way. (But WHY does it have to come on right after Star Trek (in our market anyway)???)As for Bill Clinton, he is not a diehard liberal but a skilled politician. He has significant personal failings, but also significant achievements against a wildly antagonistic Congress. Remember the gov't shutdown? It could have gone either way and he won. He also won the impeachment battle with the public. A lesser politician would have crashed and burned. Ronald Reagan was an even more talented politician with a very different agenda; he skillfully went over the heads of the media, which at first wanted to eat him alive, and won the hearts of the public. I respected his skills while condemning his goals. And any attorney will tell you that fellatio in the Oval Office is a farce beside the crimes of Iran-Contra. Clinton's darker crimes are unproven despite an investigation of unparallelled ferocity, it's time to move on. We may not respect Mr. Clinton but we must protect the Presidency.Go for public office! I think it is wonderful that people of conviction still run for office in such a bruising environment. I doubt i could do it.
*Gotta respect a poster without a valid email address. Wow, what an example of righteousness for all to follow. And to think that Gabe had my dogbones, 'til now.One more thing "G"... if you're such a Mensa Member, how many "o"s in to? too? two? pick one, so we can have a laugh.
*Hi George, You're not saying that I don't have a valid E-mail address, do you?Whoa, spoke too fast. Just checked it out and I had forgotten to update my Email when I was visiting Florida.Sorry George, all is okay now.Gabe
*Who are you calling a drunkard? I'll have you know I'm not as think as you drunk I am. Besides, I prefer "Fine Wino" as I enjoy only those things sealed with a cork.
*
Any one know what kind of questions I'll face? I think there will be trick questions like: Crack is, a) a highly addictive form of cocaine, or b) someting we'd rather not see, but a thing most plumbers display proudly.
My wife says to be careful and not get to many correct as this might seem suspicious. I thought that was a good point, but I really hate to not do my best.
Any questions you can think to look out for or suggestions on how to not look to smart would really be appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
*J.D.Don't froget to wash your blood carefully the morning of. . . scrub carefully behind the ventricals. . .
*JD, Marion Barry's book: Crack has been a Friend to Me is a good start. Shows you're erudite too. Of course for us older types, humming the Moody Blues "Timothy Leary's Dead" would be a nice touch as well.
*JD, make sure you tell the people that you stayed up late to study before taking the drug test
*We'll let people rummage through our bladders but not our underwear drawers. Go figure.JonC
*What usually works for me is writing down some of the most probable answers (like who invented penicillin) on the inside of my underwear waistband. This comes in real handy for when you freeze up during the test. Maybe you'll luck out and it will be multiple-choice. Be sure to ask if they grade on a curve.Good luck son,Pete Draganic
*Yes, Patrick's advice is excellent! And don't forget to clean out those kidneys and that ureter!I've never heard of ai writtentest for drugs... my daughter, who is a therapist, hasn't either, but she gives general advice on testing: tell the truth, don't try to second-guess the test. Most tests have all kinds of built-in stuff that you don't even know about. But I don't really know if this applies to drug tests...How come the cute young plumbers never show their butt cracks??In any event, good luck, J.D.!
*Smoke a joint before you take the test. This helps you to relax. Blue
*Patty'Tell your daughter that you know someone who can take an MMPI, present any Axis I or II diagnosis she requests, and never trip a lie scale. Hand scored alot of those puppies and got a natural gift.JonCP.S. I can play a tune on the quick and dirty Millon.
*I don't know what type of test this will be, blood or urine, but don't make the mistake I once did. Told to report for testing at 8:00 AM the next day, and, without thinking, went through my normal wake-up routine the next morning, including you guessed it. Was there for three hours downing coffee until I could fill the cup.
*just say no.
*Some drug test questions:How many lids in a pound?How many dime bags of crack do you have to sell to raise a bail of $5,000.00 for your girlfriend on prostitution, if the police are demanding a 20% cut on your sales?
*I could tell you some good stories about drug testing. My favorite is the time a guy came in for a urine drug test and had a plastic bag full of his girlfriend's urine strapped to his chest. It was connected to a small tube taped to his penis with a stopcock on the end. He probably would have gotten away with it except that his stopcock broke and his girlfriend pissed his pants, so to speak. Needless to say, his marijuana problem was uncovered.It has been suggested that the nurses should collect the specimens personally but they say they don't get paid enough.
*Jim,What if the guy's trick had worked and the girlfriend had turned out to have been pregnant?
*And to think that there are those who think we talk only about plywood and power tools... all these posts set me to laughing out loud!Jon, I believe ya! I know a kid's psychologist who hand-scores everything; says she has a "knack," and I believe her - she's fantastic! My daughter tends to have a knack for one-to-one diagnoses, sans tests - the tests always bear her out. (Try raising and living with a child like that, lol!)Patty
*I just said no to drugs, but they just wouldn't listen.BB
*Try having a time with your girlfriend (or your hand friend) just before your test. The large semen content should throw them off the trail, or at least give you something to laugh about when you flunk the test.I bet they never discussed that at KNOTS!!!!!!
*Don't make the mistake my younger sister made before her drug test.... Stay away from the lemon poppy seed muffins!Jon
*Barry, you've been watching those old Cheech and Chong movies again haven't you?
*Really?!? I thought you had to eat like 20 to flunk!Anyone know how to beat a polygraph?