• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should politcians be legally required to take drug tests?

Should politicians be legally required to take drug tests?

  • Total voters
    28
Paschendale said:
Well it turns out that it's none of your damn business what people do on their own time. No more than is it our business what you do in yours.
Click to expand...

Lol. It turns out that I'm the one that decides who will be hired, and fired in the business that I do own.
 
Montecresto said:
Lol. It turns out that I'm the one that decides who will be hired, and fired in the business that I do own.
Click to expand...

And yet there are still many laws that will punish you if you do so for malicious reasons. What a person does on their own time ought to be one of those reasons that you are not allowed to use. That kind of control of other people is something you do not deserve, especially not merely because you own something. Owning something doesn't make you deserve anything. It's just your name on a piece of paper and a government saying that it will enforce your claim.
 
Paschendale said:
And yet there are still many laws that will punish you if you do so for malicious reasons. What a person does on their own time ought to be one of those reasons that you are not allowed to use. That kind of control of other people is something you do not deserve, especially not merely because you own something. Owning something doesn't make you deserve anything. It's just your name on a piece of paper and a government saying that it will enforce your claim.
Click to expand...

But I don't wish to control anybody. I'm at least as big of a fan of civil liberties that you are. Yes, there are malicious reasons that people have fired employees for, and its good that we have laws addressing that. But firing somebody for using illegal drugs isn't one of them. An employee is free to find employment elsewhere, and as such not under my "control". But our society recognises various forms of discrimination that it has legislated against, and firing drug users isn't one of them.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Personally, I'd say no - it sounds punitive and vindictive, as laid out in the argument and provides no rationale or historical reference for the need to drug test all politicians. Clearly, there is historical reference and rationale for bus/subway drivers, truck drivers, pilots, etc. who have been caught under the influence while operating dangerous equipment/vehicles that can put the general public in peril. I'd like to see some examples of politicians who have been caught in similar circumstances to justify this move.

I would agree, however, with a law that indicated that if a person holding an elected office, whatever the position, was found guilty of being under the influence while performing their duties they would automatically vacate their seat/position. This is similar to laws where a politician convicted of a felony loses their position and a civil servant found guilty loses their job.
Click to expand...
The laws and policies a politician make can effect and put way more people in peril than any bus/subway drivers, truck drivers, pilots,and etc.
 
Paschendale said:
No, no one should be drug tested without a warrant or court order. Private companies shouldn't be able to require it of employees. It's none of their business unless the employee shows up drunk or high to work, and then you can fire them for the behavior, not the result of a test.
Click to expand...

I agree with that and that is how it should be.However until that becomes law (technically it is already law for government workers since the Constitution only applies to what the government may or may not do)these elected officials should be held to the same standard they impose on everyone else.
 
Fiddytree said:
Oh, the self-adulation of populists is on full display here.

I suppose this proposal has a certain allure to those who think that the adage of picking the first few hundred names in a phone book to public service is a good idea.....but it's about as foolish.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean man, how dare people want politicians to he held to the same standards as everybody else is. Don't these people know that politicians are their betters.What country do they think this is? America?
 
jamesrage said:
The laws and policies a politician make can effect and put way more people in peril than any bus/subway drivers, truck drivers, pilots,and etc.
Click to expand...

You're trying to compare the work of a collective legislature with the work of a single individual. Do you have evidence of houses of government rife with drug addled representatives passing such dangerous laws? One pilot or bus driver high on whatever can immediately wipe out the lives of hundreds. Can a single high politician do that in his/her work?
 
CanadaJohn said:
You're trying to compare the work of a collective legislature with the work of a single individual. Do you have evidence of houses of government rife with drug addled representatives passing such dangerous laws? One pilot or bus driver high on whatever can immediately wipe out the lives of hundreds. Can a single high politician do that in his/her work?
Click to expand...

The vote of one elected official can mean hundreds of thousands of people dying in a war, being incarcerated for something that used to be legal, suffering the consequences of something that that used to be illegal now made legal or generations being put in massive debt over a spending bill.
 
jamesrage said:
The vote of one elected official can mean hundreds of thousands of people dying in a war, being incarcerated for something that used to be legal, suffering the consequences of something that that used to be illegal now made legal or generations being put in massive debt over a spending bill.
Click to expand...

So if 220 some sober House members and one high House member plus 65 sober Senators and one high Senator authorize war, it's the two high guys/gals who caused the war, not the other 280 or so who voted with them?
 
Hell yes they should be drug tested, they are Government workers that live of us the tax payers, if they wanna DT Welfare receipents, then fine you have to be tested too, and I bet a lot of them no doubt would fail...

What's good for the Goose is good for the gander...
 
Paschendale said:
No, no one should be drug tested without a warrant or court order. Private companies shouldn't be able to require it of employees. It's none of their business unless the employee shows up drunk or high to work, and then you can fire them for the behavior, not the result of a test.
Click to expand...

The problem here I that you want to avoid people making mistakes and this is why people should be randomly tested if the quality or safety of their work is in jeopardy when under the influence of drugs/alcohol. This also applies to people who work for the government. I remember President Jeltsin with his big red nose. It's pretty scary to think that a man like that is leading one of the most powerful countries in the world.
 
Yeah, sure, it might remove Jeb from positions of power.
 
radcen said:
I'd rather fix the wrong instead of compound it.
Click to expand...

Couldn't you fix the wrong and stop future wrongs by making these politicians adhere to the same laws that they impose on everybody else?
 
Sure. I'd be for that.

Most would have the connections to get Dr's to authorize most precriptions anyway tho. ANd the minute they did that, they would be protected by medical privacy laws and the info wouldnt be available publicly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom