Mikes Place

By Michael L. Craner

Greetings to all my faithful readers….both of you *Smile* I apologize for not submitting my column last month, and all the others where I have been negligent.  I am not a writer by trade, so deadlines are rather difficult for me to make.  My life involves my family, a career as a network technician for a major telecommunications corporation, webmaster for Pencil Stubs, and last but not least, author and loud mouth, opinionated columnist who enjoys the power of being the webmaster of a site where he can say just about anything he likes because he his the webmaster.  *GRIN*

Now, on this this months ravings...

I use excite.com for my internet start page, as I have mentioned in the past.  It is a great place to get my news, weather, and store my bookmarks.  They also feature the “Harris/Excite Poll” which often gets my attention to headlines that I often miss in the regular news.   I came across one such poll that reached out and shook me rather violently, regarding “should states be allowed to conduct random drug testing on elected officials?”

Excuse me, you mean this is not already done?  WHY NOT?  When I was in the Army I would get woke up at anytime of the morning to go and have some guy watch me take a leak so they would be assured that my insanity was entirely natural rather than augmented by some chemical.  I didn’t operate a nuclear missile launch facility, I didn’t even get to carry a gun (weapon) most of the time, and usually when I did, I wasn’t allowed to have any ammunition.  I was in the signal core, I provided communications support.  Now you tell me why the same rule doesn’t apply to these idiots who represent us when voting how to spend our tax dollars or which laws should be used to take away our rights,  or even those so called “beyond reproach” officials who decide our fate in court?

Most REGULAR jobs these days require that you pass a drug screen before they will even hire you.  Why is it that the powerful aren’t required to be tested?  Because they make the laws, silly!  They are also the same folks who get to vote whether or not they get a raise next year or how cushy their retirement benefits/pay will be.  Makes sense, right?  NOT!

In the article related to the poll in which I voted quoted a federal judge who struck down the testing program, stating it was “unconstitutional”, which was later upheld by 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Constitution's Fourth Amendment generally bans searches not based on "probable cause" to suspect a crime.

In 1997 Louisiana enacted a law requiring elected state officials, except for judges, to undergo random drug tests to ensure they "are persons of integrity, sound judgment, reliability and seriousness of purpose."

Do you see the same pattern I do?  That the people who make the laws, make exceptions to cover themselves so the laws do not apply to them?

Furthermore, the whole idea of random and pre-employment drug screens should be “unconstitutional” unless there is reasonable belief of drug abuse under the Fourth Amendment.  What we have here is a double standard.

I am not a drug user, so I really don’t care one way or the other if I am tested for drug use other than the inconvenience.   I do respect other peoples fears of testing, ranging from being tested for other things besides drugs, such as pregnancy or disease, to plan and simple personal privacy.  I also respect and agree with the argument that proper screening can identify people with a problem.  People whose jobs can expose themselves, co-workers and other innocents to danger.  Nobody wants to be around a security guard on coke, or ride with a bus driver on meth.

So what do we do?  Enact and enforce random testing for everyone?  Ban it for everyone?  Pick and choose those likely to be users?  I don’t know, there are pros and cons for every choice.  How about stricter punishment for users?  Right now it seems our justice departments focus is to coddle the poor users and go after the suppliers.  That is actually a good idea, to go to the source, but since many drugs can be made from commonly available products, like crystal meth, it is a never ending battle.  If we stop being so lenient to users, maybe we can prevent a few more people from becoming users.  Once you eliminate the consumer, you longer have a problem with the supplier.

What’s your opinion in all this?