Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

E-mail

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by HailTheLeaf at 2006-01-09 17:04:55

Nate said:

and I don't think it has anything to do with "invasion of privacy". Think about this, would you want a crackhead or heroin shooting junky to work for you if you owned a business? Pot is no big deal in most people's eyes, but crackheads and dopeheads are pretty well known to lie, steal, cheat, etc. I wouldn't want them working for me either, and if I owned a business I sure as would drug test people just for that reason alone.

If a crackhead or heroin addict goes to an interview, and no one at the company can tell that they are a crackhead, then that's the company's problem. I think I'd be able to figure that out and avoid hiring those people. But to degrade and invade the privacy of the other 98% of applicants is retarded.

“If we choose to violate the rights of the innocent in order to discover and act against the guilty, then we have transformed our country into a police state and abandoned one of the fundamental tenants of a free society. In order to win the war on drugs, we must not sacrifice the life of the Constitution in the battle.”
~US District Judge H. Lee Sarokin~

[default homepage]

[print][

11:49:18pm May 28,2024
load time 0.00681 secs/10 queries]

[search]

[refresh page]