Posted on 07/22/2005 1:43:50 PM PDT by Mikey_1962
HOUSTON -- A 79-year-old school crossing guard was fired over a drug test, but not because he failed it, Local 2 reported Thursday. Francis Light refused to take it, violating Houston Independent School District policy.
Light has been a familiar face at Oak Forest Elementary School in northwest Houston for 16 years as the school's crossing guard. He was fired last month after refusing to take a random drug-alcohol test. Light said his system is clean, and after so many loyal years on the job, he was insulted.
"I got to think as long as people know me, long as I've been doing this, then they want me to take a drug test kind of made me mad," he said.
An HISD spokesman said all employees are subject to random tests.
Light signed the form, but did not read the fine print.
"He's the only one with loving touch. He knows you by name," said Kenneth Bonte, a student.
Parents said they would miss Light's presence at the school intersection.
"It sounds like there was a misunderstanding. He should've been handled possibly more gently," said Vonda Bonte, a mother.
"He's as much a part of the school as teachers are," said Ann Zallar, a mother.
Light said he should have just submitted to the drug-alcohol test, but said there are no hard feelings. He said that he will be turning 80 years old soon and he was considering retiring anyway. Light just did not want it to end like this.
HISD considers all refusals to take the drug-alcohol test as a positive test.
It requires employees to submit to the tests immediately. The district has a policy to terminate all employees who refuse to take the test
(Excerpt) Read more at click2houston.com ...
I have read where teachers are not randomly drug tested, and also, the people that conduct the tests, are not randomly drug tested.
I find this very hypocritical. Those in charge of supervising and teaching our children, are not randomly tested, and those performing the actual tests are not randomly tested.
There is something very wrong with this.
Do you really think its the same thing?
The link you provided told about someone already arrested on drug charges. This is about a 79 year old man, not charged with anything. Real similar huh?
No, the officer himself confirms that he Tasered the guy to get a urnine sample. The only B.S. here is your refusal to face facts.
Just curious...is this the same Supreme Court that just did away with property rights?
A drug test is clearly a form of search. Glad I could help.
Drug testing made a huge difference in the quality of our military. I was in the Navy in the early eighties when drug testing began. They brought the drug-sniffing dogs through Combat Information Center(CIC). They found stashes of pot and other drugs behind every console in CIC. It amounted to nearly a quarter-pound of pot, with no individual stash larger than a quarter-ounce.
Needless to say, the Captain was furious. I know for a fact that the number of people that did drugs outnumbered people that did not on that ship (I know because I was one of the ones that did). Can you honestly say that you want people defending this country when they are stoned while at their watch stations?
Drug testing for the military was one of the many things that Reagan did that was right. The quality of our military has improved dramatically since I was in, and it is not just because of better equipment. One of the biggest reasons is because people in our military are no longer manning combat stations when they are stoned.
I would guess due to legal/insurace/liability reasons in this sue hapy world that we live in. Just because you are old doesnt mean that you are excempt from following the rules and procedures that mind every other working individual who relies on a employer for a paycheck.
so then you still want that same old blind man to be in charge of directing children across the street? Pfftttt....you cant have it both ways. Either hes fit to read a contract and do his job or hes not.
I want all POLITICIANS and CEO's and SCHOOL BOARD ADMINS Drug Tested DAILY! That might bring some reason back to this debate. Blackbird.
And "unreasonable" is still a word with actual meaning, and is still in the fourth amendment. Glad I could help.
Thanks. That's what I thought. I cringe every time someone brings them up as a positive in a debate these days as if they are never wrong.
with Teddy in the Senate, they would have a new record for the highest BAC ever....
There is a huge difference in reading very small fine print and seeing a person or vehicle. I wear glasses. Even so, sometimes I have a hard time reading small print. But, I sure as hell can see a damned car coming. Get real.
How about cops? Oh.. nevermind their unions are strong enough to keep them of the table..
"Get the burger flipper in here to pee in a cup!"
You must be real proud. Blackbird.
There are circumstances, such as hot pursuit, under which the warrantless kicking down of a door is perfectly reasonable. Similarly, there are circumstances, such as those bearing upon public safety, under which random drug tests are perfectly reasonable. It doesn't take Kerry-like nuance to understand that.
The courts have indeed sided with you. They also said a slave was 3/5 of a human and that they can steal your property and give it to someone else whenever they want. They are an embarrasment to this country.
Yes, and that should be used to justify making the law whatever you want it to be. And I thought the Freemen were the only ones with do-it-yourself constitutions. You aren't posting from jail, are you? ;-)
Of course ... but that doesn't validate your bogus point about the absence of the words "drug test".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.