On Dec 12, 1:48 am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Dec 11, 12:39 pm, Gunner wrote:





On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:03:03 -0800 (PST), Millwright Ron

wrote:
Like a lot of folks in this country... I have
a job. I work, they pay me.I pay my taxes, and the government
distributes my taxes as it sees fit.
In order to get that paycheck, I am required
to pass a random urine test, with which I have no
problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes
to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare
check,
Because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get
back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with
helping someone sitting on their butt and using drugs.
Could you imagine how much money the state
would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a
public assistance check?

Millwright Ron

And when they don't pass a **** test, then what?

The kids starve, so the State takes em away. Then what?
The kids get farmed out to foster families? There are only so many
available. So the kids have to be stockpiled in a government
institution, of which there are limited numbers...so we have to build
new ones, staff and maintain them.

Its cheaper to simply send them a check, put them up in Title 8
housing and let em live or die.

Id rather see mandatory contraceptive implants in any woman receiving
welfare.

Gunner- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you have the right to bear arms, doesn't she have the right to bear
children?

TMT- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

NO!!!! Children are far more dangerous than guns.

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:40:15 -0500, John Husvar
wrote:

In article , Wes
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Do you think ^ the boss ^ has advanced knowledge of 'random drug
screenings'?

Wes

Of course they do.

Alcohol and drug usage is common in management.

Well I knew that. Everyone that ever worked the floor knows the front
office is high on drugs.

Wes

Watch out if you:

A) Have to take **** tests at work

and

B) take Protonix -- It gives false positives for marijuana.


Having a roll with poppy seeds on it, false positives you for opiates
such as heroin or morphine.

Gunner

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:40:15 -0500, John Husvar
wrote:

In article , Wes
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Do you think ^ the boss ^ has advanced knowledge of 'random drug
screenings'?

Wes

Of course they do.

Alcohol and drug usage is common in management.

Well I knew that. Everyone that ever worked the floor knows the front
office is high on drugs.

Wes

Watch out if you:

A) Have to take **** tests at work

and

B) take Protonix -- It gives false positives for marijuana.


Having a roll with poppy seeds on it, false positives you for opiates
such as heroin or morphine.


Yep. Those too. Googling for false+positive+drug+test is quite
revealing. Anyone who tests positive for anything should ask if the lab
followed the urine test with a mass spectrometry or gas chromatograph to
confirm and demand one if it did not.

The list is quite long and it seems the basic screening test is very
inaccurate.

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:17:45 -0500, John Husvar
wrote:

In article ,
Gunner wrote:

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:40:15 -0500, John Husvar
wrote:

In article , Wes
wrote:

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Do you think ^ the boss ^ has advanced knowledge of 'random drug
screenings'?

Wes

Of course they do.

Alcohol and drug usage is common in management.

Well I knew that. Everyone that ever worked the floor knows the front
office is high on drugs.

Wes

Watch out if you:

A) Have to take **** tests at work

and

B) take Protonix -- It gives false positives for marijuana.


Having a roll with poppy seeds on it, false positives you for opiates
such as heroin or morphine.


Yep. Those too. Googling for false+positive+drug+test is quite
revealing. Anyone who tests positive for anything should ask if the lab
followed the urine test with a mass spectrometry or gas chromatograph to
confirm and demand one if it did not.

The list is quite long and it seems the basic screening test is very
inaccurate.

Indeed. At one period of time, I was responsible for drug testing
contractors and staff, and demanded a follow up report using those
methods before taking any action.

We did indeed find a lot of illiciet drug use, but even more false
positives from common substances.

Gunner