Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Saliva test for drugs
The Sunday Mail ^ | 15jun03 | KAY DIBBEN

Posted on 06/14/2003 12:20:24 PM PDT by yonif

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 06/14/2003 12:20:24 PM PDT by yonif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jmc813
Another for the WOD list. And this one really sucks!
2 posted on 06/14/2003 12:28:51 PM PDT by Pern ("It's good to know who hates you, and it's good to be hated by the right people." - Johnny Cash)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
I SPIT on the world...

oops!

3 posted on 06/14/2003 12:31:03 PM PDT by Nitro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pern
I don't have a problem with commercial heavy equipment operators being drug tested. They are looking for speed and benzodiazapams (happy pills) as well as pot. While they mentioned alcohol, it didn't say if tests covered alcohol as well. In other words, they ARE going out of their way not to be the "lifestyle police," as they said.

They should also be looking for, and advising against the use of many over the counter allergy drugs, since some people are very susceptible to falling asleep at the wheel after taking them.

I am generally in favor of legalized pot since it is less harmful than alcohol, but if a heavy equipment operator wants to play it safe by testing for pot, too, that's fine with me.
4 posted on 06/14/2003 12:45:42 PM PDT by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98; MrLeRoy; cinFLA
Ping FYI
5 posted on 06/14/2003 12:53:13 PM PDT by yonif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Abduction Attempt Is One Of Many Strange Occurrences In Vancouver - Prosecutors said that 30-year-old Jeremy Michael Wall was high on crack cocaine when he dashed into the family's Vancouver home early Thursday afternoon.
6 posted on 06/14/2003 12:59:33 PM PDT by chance33_98 (www.hannahmore.com -- Shepherd Of Salisbury Plain is online, more to come! (my website))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Actually I like this test. It only detects usage for marijuana 8 hours before the testing.

This seems alot better than testing somebody with urine, which can detect marijuana usage from 6 weeks back, while one was on vacation in Holland.

If you are employed working heavy machinery, you shouldn't be high on drugs. These tests seem like a reasonable thing. If you smoked marijuana 24 hours ago, no big deal... That morning before work, and you have a problem.

This allows people the freedom to do what they want on their own free time, while still respecting the safety, insurance, and productivity concerns of the employer.

7 posted on 06/14/2003 1:01:15 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pern
Another for the WOD list. And this one really sucks!

Actually, this is a pretty good development. The testing available now does little to measure actual impairment.

As it stands now, you can smoke a joint Friday night, be tested on Monday and fail a urine test, even thought you are not in the least bit impaired.

The test showed a positive or negative result for marijuana used within six to eight hours of the test and other substances consumed within the previous 24 hours – unlike urine tests, which could show drugs used weeks before.

With this system, you could smoke a joint the night before, and you could still pass the test the next morning.

I'm all for it being implemented on a wider scale insted of the current urinalysis.

8 posted on 06/14/2003 1:05:58 PM PDT by ActionNewsBill (Police state? What police state?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: *Wod_list
Wod_list ping
9 posted on 06/14/2003 1:11:16 PM PDT by MrLeRoyForgotHisPassword (The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. - Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoyForgotHisPassword
MrLeRoyForgotHisPassword

What's the deal with the new screen name?

10 posted on 06/14/2003 1:16:37 PM PDT by ActionNewsBill (Police state? What police state?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dane; Kevin Curry; Cultural Jihad; Roscoe
Are you fer it or agin it?
11 posted on 06/14/2003 1:47:14 PM PDT by ActionNewsBill (Police state? What police state?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ActionNewsBill
My guess is that they are against this. This is an accurate test that shows somebody being currently intoxicated yet does not ring a bell if they did their drugs on Friday night as they started the week-end. Why would any freedom hating Drug Warrior approve of this kinda test?
12 posted on 06/14/2003 1:54:03 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: dogbyte12
This is an accurate test that shows somebody being currently intoxicated yet does not ring a bell if they did their drugs on Friday night as they started the week-end.

They will have no argument for keeping drugs illegal with this test.

But they'll try anyways.

14 posted on 06/14/2003 1:58:54 PM PDT by ActionNewsBill (Police state? What police state?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Sounds great to me. I hope they are more accurate and dependable than breathalyzers.
15 posted on 06/14/2003 2:02:28 PM PDT by bjcintennessee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Somebody needs to arrest the people that developed this. How could they possibly have actually tested this without having people smoke pot and use the system?

tsk tsk tsk... bust 'em. :-)
16 posted on 06/14/2003 2:06:28 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: tl361
I was just looking for a reason to use "depharmaceuticalized" in a sentence!) ;-)

hehehe... This may have been your last chance.

18 posted on 06/14/2003 2:23:16 PM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: yonif
If this comes to the US and is put into law as something LEOs could us in a traffic stop, would the LEOs need a warrant before they could swab you during the stop?

I mean a LEO can't stop you and start off w/ a breathalyzer at the benign of the stop.

Doesn't the LEO have to have probable cause before you can be subjected to a breathalyzer?

19 posted on 06/14/2003 2:31:54 PM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson