Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Poll: Should welfare and/or food stamp recipients be subjected to drug testing?

Toe Jam

By Toe Jam
in The Tailgate

What do you think of the new site?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think of the new site?

    • Amazing
      30
    • Cool
      24
    • Could be better
      5
    • A letdown
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

Stew

Stew

Posted
Posted

I think so.

I think any illegal drugs should be tested for. I have witnessed people trade food stamps for drugs and alcohol before, and that is not the intent of the program. Being drug free would go a long way in helping some of these people get off of welfare. Im not making blanket statements, Im speaking from interaction with people in that exact situation. Watching them haggle and get ripped off by someone just so they can score some herb or two fifths of Aristicrat, with food stamps that come from Govt support programs we fund.

Thats just me though. I think if you want to be on welfare, you should have to have a medical evaluation done, or at the very least illegal drug testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hubbs

Hubbs

Posted
Posted
I think so.

I think any illegal drugs should be tested for. I have witnessed people trade food stamps for drugs and alcohol before, and that is not the intent of the program. Being drug free would go a long way in helping some of these people get off of welfare. Im not making blanket statements, Im speaking from interaction with people in that exact situation. Watching them haggle and get ripped off by someone just so they can score some herb or two fifths of Aristicrat, with food stamps that come from Govt support programs we fund.

Thats just me though. I think if you want to be on welfare, you should have to have a medical evaluation done, or at the very least illegal drug testing.

You think they don't know they're getting ripped off? They're addicted. You say "being drug free" as if it's as easy as just rolling out of bed one day and saying, "You know, I may have done crack every day for the past year, but I think I'll pass on it today."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sportjunkie07

sportjunkie07

Posted
Posted

tough issue for me, to a point, id say yes, depending on the person.

your average people who are just on tough times, lost jobs, lots of rugrats running around, yeah

there are some people that are just really screwed up in the head. they should get support either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stew

Stew

Posted
Posted
You think they don't know they're getting ripped off? They're addicted. You say "being drug free" as if it's as easy as just rolling out of bed one day and saying, "You know, I may have done crack every day for the past year, but I think I'll pass on it today."

Im not trying to argue. Yes, he knew he was getting ripped off, I never said he didn't. I feel bad that he does choose to get ripped off like that. I knew the guy before he became drug and alcohol dependent, and I know what choices that individual made to end up like that. Finding an enabler didn't help him, it sped up his progression of drug and alcohol abuse. Hell, my family had to check up on him and his girlfriend, and fed them from time to time because they would use up their food stamps on other things.

You make a good point though. There has to be a middle ground between enabling and starving people in this situation. I don't think blindly giving people a means to get drugs and alcohol is the answer either though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeaconTheVillain

DeaconTheVillain

Posted
Posted

I say yes. Pass a drug test and then get your check.

Even if they want to still use drugs, they can stop for a lil bit to pass the test. For those that are truly addicted, something needs to be done to try and get them help if they want to stop. I know FL has free detox and free 60 day rehab so its there if they want it. If they are addicted and don't want to stop, then they should not get a check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stew

Stew

Posted
Posted
I say yes. Pass a drug test and then get your check.

Even if they want to still use drugs, they can stop for a lil bit to pass the test. For those that are truly addicted, something needs to be done to try and get them help if they want to stop. I know FL has free detox and free 60 day rehab so its there if they want it. If they are addicted and don't want to stop, then they should not get a check.

This is basically how I feel, but Hubbs makes a good point. You cant really just neglect those who "cant" stop. Its hard to imagine not being able to stop doing something, but that's addiction. It cant be black and white, but there has to be another way then just handing people barter chips that don't get used for their intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted

I can understand people wanting it. (Although I suspect that for a lot of people, the motivation is more punitive and humiliation than anything else.)

But I keep running up against that concept called "probable cause". Meaning that a person is supposed to have privacy, unless there is probable cause (which, to me, means "better than 50-50 chance that he's guilty") that a crime is being committed. (Not "that a crime has been committed some time in the last few weeks".)

I don't think that the government (or your employer, either) has the right to demand that someone prove that they haven't committed a crime any time lately. (At least in most cases. I suppose that there might be certain, specific, exceptions.)

(And no, I don't believe that people give up their basic rights whenever they set foot outside their hermetically sealed, EM shielded, underground bunker.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Busch1724

Busch1724

Posted
Posted

See it also depends on how you view addiction. If you see addiction as something that you decide to stop you probably are for testing...however, if you see it as a disease you may be inclined to say no testing. I'm somewhere in the middle, I recognize it is a disease and needs treatment. So with that said, you turn up positive you must go to treatment. I know it's costly, but I'm pretty sure it'd be a good investment in our future.

Lastly, I touched on it earlier but many of these people are not only on welfare due to addiction problems. Many (not most) are unemployable because of a lack of education.

A combination of treatment and education would give many of these folks some tools to succeed. You just can't pull the rug from under them because mayhem would occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Predicto

Predicto

Posted
Posted
If I did drugs, I wouldn't have a good job. Income=gone.

I don't see why it shouldn't apply to people using my tax dollars.

People don't get welfare and food stamps because they "deserve them." They get welfare and food stamps because they NEED them.

I feel like I am reading "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Madison Redskin

Madison Redskin

Posted
Posted

On the one hand, by providing welfare benefits and food stamps to drug users, the government is indirectly subsidizing the purchase of illegal drugs. On the other hand, it's conceivable that the cost of such drug tests will exceed the amounts saved by kicking drug addicts off the welfare rolls and Hubbs makes a good point that making addicts more desperate may increase crime.

So, to answer the question in the OP, I'm not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LD0506

LD0506

Posted
Posted

Horse****, taxpayer funding for their dope habit is indefensible. You wanna be a drugged out douche? Fine, do it on your own tab.

"But oh dear, then they'll get desperate!" :rolleyes:

Exactly how is it supposed to be "humane" to enable dope addicts? "Here's your free needles and months ration of dope, now don't do anything wrong and have a nice day!" Yeah, there ya go, that's gotta make things much better.

If they are trading food stamps for dope then they don't need it very badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EersSkins05

EersSkins05

Posted
Posted

Originally Posted by Hubbs

No. Making addicts more desperate will do more harm than good.

Originally Posted by SkinInsite

I suppose starving to death is a way to cull drug users.

Originally Posted by Predicto:

Correct.

What a stupid and punitive idea this is.

Yup. By the way, it's easy to support something like requiring drug tests to receive state assistance if you don't have any more details and it doesn't apply to you. Just tell me what happens to the kids in these homes when their only source of support is cut off because dad smokes pot once in a while and I'll be glad to hear what you have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Toe Jam

Toe Jam

Posted
  • Author
Posted
People don't get welfare and food stamps because they "deserve them." They get welfare and food stamps because they NEED them.

I feel like I am reading "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift.

I NEED money, but I choose to WORK for it.

That requires me to be drug free.

I just really don't see what the big deal is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...