Random urine tests

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_seizure

Search and seizure is a legal procedure used in many common law countries whereby police or other authorities and their agents, who suspect that a crime has been committed, do a search of a person's property and confiscate any relevant evidence to the crime. Certain countries, such as the United States and Canada, have provisions in their constitutions that provide the public with the right against "unreasonable" search and seizure. This right is generally based on the premise that everyone is entitled to a reasonable right to privacy.

During a urine test (at your job for example or during a random traffic control) you have to uncover your private parts and empty the content of your bladder. But according to the Wikipidia page:

This means that the officer must be acting within the power of a valid statute, and it must be performed on the basis of there being "reasonable and probable grounds" that a crime has been committed.

So are urine tests actually constitutional?

A question to the American psychonauts here: do you cooperate with random urine testing, and if so, why?

What happens if you refuse? Do you actually lose your job/ stay unemployed?

Does this mean the corporate structure has all American citizens under its control (by funding the elections, and executing random urine testing)? Can we consider this fascism or does that term not apply to this situation?

What can we do to prevent this from happening in Europe as well?

 

[Meduzz]

In high-school I got caught with XTC pills and had to sign a "contract" that I would do a couple of urine tests to prove that I'm "clean" otherwise I would be expelled. I actually was glad I wasn't expelled immediately, as I just had to change school some months before that. The cops were also informed by the principal. (He told them he was going to handle it, they agreed...)
I had to go to my doctor for the tests and was allowed to do it in the bathroom without someone watching. But I didn't cheat.

Later in the hollidays the cops searched my room :roll:
They found a grinder and some weed branches and I had to go to the police station for that. I was still underage, and they asked me who I bought the weed from, I just played stupid and told I bought them from some dude at a festival. They asked hom much I payed and I said 15€ for 3 joints, like I didn't know shit about prices. Setting up an image of a stupid experimenting kid saved my ass, because they sent my file to a youth judge and he didn't think it was worth having a case about.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

In high-school I got caught with XTC pills and had to sign a "contract"

That's different, sorta like being on parole (correct me if I'm wrong).

I'm talking about urine tests for people who have never been convicted of a crime, but having to do random urine tests at their job, or as part of their job interview.

 

[GOD]

In germany random piss tests are illegal . The pigs are only alowed to ask you if there are suspiocious circumstances . If you say no they see that as being suspicious and you have to take a blood test . = catch 22 .

 

[magickmumu]

They are working on a saliva test for cannabis in The Netherlands (for car user)

The problem is urine tests are more reliable then saliva tests.

With saliva test you can trance cannabis for 6 hours max after it's use. With urine it's 1 to 5 day's

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

The problem is urine tests are more reliable then saliva tests.

With saliva test you can trance cannabis for 6 hours max after it's use. With urine it's 1 to 5 day's

More reliable? I think the 6 hours max test is more reliable: the cognitive effects of cannabis last 3 to 6 hours, not 5 days. Detecting cannabis 5 days after smoking is totally irrelevant for determining safety in traffic.

 

[GOD]

"More reliable? I think the 6 hours max test is more reliable: the cognitive effects of cannabis last 3 to 6 hours, not 5 days. Detecting cannabis 5 days after smoking is totally irrelevant for determining safety in traffic."

Thats one of the big problems , and thats the key . A GOOD soliciter would go to court and fight against that and win . An alk drinker is alowed to be slightly drunk and drive . If he is tested for alk and it shows he has drunken 2 days ago nothing happenes to him . If a test shows he has taken cannabis a few days ago he gets big problems allthough he is not stoned and ocasional cannabis consume is alowed .

Why is nothing being done ???

 

[st.bot.32]

A question to the American psychonauts here: do you cooperate with random urine testing, and if so, why?

No random tests here, but I needed a test to get my current job. It wasn't a problem, because I'm an occasional smoker, had a hunch there might be a test, and just took a break for the month leading up to the test.

BTW I'm really not even sure they were testing for drugs, but I didn't want to take that chance.

What happens if you refuse? Do you actually lose your job/ stay unemployed?

Yes.

Does this mean the corporate structure has all American citizens under its control (by funding the elections, and executing random urine testing)? Can we consider this fascism or does that term not apply to this situation?

Yes. The structure claims to welcome all viewpoints but deliberately excludes those who disagree with the status quo from participating. As long as the majority of society agrees or cooperates, it is a tyranny of the majority.

What can we do to prevent this from happening in Europe as well?

Certain "crusaders" jump onto urine tests as some thing that if you want to stop illegal drugs you just have to support. You can help people who are interested get informed. You can show how useless and even misleading urine tests can be. You can protest. But in the end people have to be willing to stand up for their rights. The current generation seems to have a large number of fearful people who aspire to a big-brother type government it seems.

[/quote]

 

[Lion]

"More reliable? I think the 6 hours max test is more reliable: the cognitive effects of cannabis last 3 to 6 hours, not 5 days. Detecting cannabis 5 days after smoking is totally irrelevant for determining safety in traffic."

Thats one of the big problems , and thats the key . A GOOD soliciter would go to court and fight against that and win . An alk drinker is alowed to be slightly drunk and drive . If he is tested for alk and it shows he has drunken 2 days ago nothing happenes to him . If a test shows he has taken cannabis a few days ago he gets big problems allthough he is not stoned and ocasional cannabis consume is alowed .

Why is nothing being done ???

what can be done?

 

[Lion]

In germany random piss tests are illegal . The pigs are only alowed to ask you if there are suspiocious circumstances . If you say no they see that as being suspicious and you have to take a blood test . = catch 22 .

catch 22?

 

[st.bot.32]

here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catch-22

colloqually it means you are basically forced to do something, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[GOD]

"What can be done ?"

"A GOOD soliciter would go to court and fight against that and win "

A better question is why isnt anything being done ? Why dont people organise thermselves and change things ? Why do drug takers just talk , talk and talk ....... and do nothing ?

 

[Lion]

/Why do drug takers just talk , talk and talk ....... and do nothing ?

because they take drugs. which is illegal.

 

[ProStoner]

the problem is often ( besides from the fact that drug users tend to slack a bit )
that we are not going to be taken seriously because we take drugs, our minds are " clouded " so they say

" ooh don't listen to them, they are junkies, ieeeuw dirty "

its the same in drug research, if a researcher takes these drugs themselves, they immediatly are less credible.

the people who can really change things are the people who don't take those drugs, but they have been soooo brainwashed that it would be last thing on their minds to do.

 

[Lion]

the problem is often ( besides from the fact that drug users tend to slack a bit )
that we are not going to be taken seriously because we take drugs, our minds are " clouded " so they say

" ooh don't listen to them, they are junkies, ieeeuw dirty "

its the same in drug research, if a researcher takes these drugs themselves, they immediatly are less credible.

the people who can really change things are the people who don't take those drugs, but they have been soooo brainwashed that it would be last thing on their minds to do.

or people with an influence.
people like Terence McKenna. Although i have my doubts about them. how long have they been trying, right?

 

[ProStoner]

yeah and who outside the people who allready use drugs and the scientists who knew him, have ever heard of him ?

 

[Lion]

youngsters who haven't done em (yet).
hippies that haven't touched any substance..

scarce amount of people
we need politicians...

 

[ProStoner]

we don't need people who ask "what's in it for me? "
we need people that ask "What's in it for us ?"

 

[GOD]

91 % of american firms do regular drug testing .

Most european firms dont do it because its very expensive and doesnt increase productivity .

 

[JustinNed]

I can be randomly drug tested at any time at my job, or probation. If I refuse at either I am either fired/jailed. There really is no way around it.

Like was said before, we need politicians. Let's start running for election!