Urinalsis a form of discrimination

G-Dog

New Member
Urinalysis is a form of discrimination and an absolute violation of your civil liberties. But we accept this in our country to insure our safety.

Urinalysis does not prove impairment. One can smoke some marijuana at a party or concert and a month later show positive for the metabolites that are enough to put a person in jail, cost their job, or be the deciding factor in a child custody battle. It can mean a lot and be the deciding factor in many critical decisions in one's life. But it does not prove one is impaired at the moment of testing.

Suppose you have an accident at work. The old saying, "accidents happen" is something that we have all heard, and they do. If you have an accident at work you are very likely to be required to give a urine sample so that they can blame the accident on you and your abuse of drugs over faulty policies or machinery. In this way liability can be shifted to the employee. It is a business matter. Although urinalysis does not prove impairment, it is proof enough that you are a drug abuser and responsible for that accident.

What is particularly alarming about urinalysis is it's sensitivity to marijuana. One can take just about any other drug, those that we consider hard drugs, yet pass a urinalysis within a couple days of use. Marijuana metabolites can stay in your system for weeks. It is almost as if they are trying to weed a certain type of person out of society. Many responsible citizens are discriminated against because they choose to not be sheep. They are selected out of a many industries via pre-employment drug screening. As a result we are keeping the free thinkers out of key roles that steer our culture.

Who are some of these free thinkers they want out? How about John Lennon, Bill Clinton, Bill Maher, Bob Marley, Bob Dylan, Steve Jobs and myself. The list is far too large for the scope of this discussion and includes tens of millions worldwide.

We talk and talk about the 4th amendment, but allow such an intrusive and unwarranted search of one of our most intimate details. How can such a thing be?

Marijuana use has been around since the beginning of mankind. Evidence of it's use continues to surface in the oldest of artifacts. It's importance placed rather high as it was buried with individuals to use in the afterlife. However, urinalysis appeared in the early1980s. It became a tool to sort out the free thinkers and set them aside. About the same time that John Lennon died.

I joined the US Navy in 1980 to see the world and marijuana was already big part of my life. I wanted to go to places like Thailand and the Philippines to get high with an ancient society. At the point of my joining the US Navy I was asked all kinds of intrusive questions; was I gay, a midget, did I smoke marijuana. My recruiter winked at me and told me that nobody cares, just say what they want to hear. Once I was in the navy I met a lot of great guys. We traveled together and got high all over the place. The leadership at the time turned a blind eye to us as we were positive contributors, easy going, and just nice guys. We were easy to spot, we parted what little hair we had in the middle.


On 26 May 1981, an EA-6B Prowler crashed on the flight deck, killing 14 crewmen and injuring 45 others. Forensic testing conducted found that several members of the deceased flight deck crew tested positive for marijuana. As a result of this incident, President Ronald Reagan instituted a "Zero Tolerance" drug policy across all of the armed services, which started the mandatory drug testing of all U.S. service personnel. The top admiral in the navy, Chief of Naval Operations made a video that all naval personnel were required to watch, stating that nobody in the US Navy would be smoking marijuana. His words were, "Not on my watch, not on my ship, not in my navy." Soon after that video urinalysis had begun. Like robots all navy personnel were required to rat each other out. The slightest suspicion that one was using would result in drug testing. Many sailors were ruined from this policy. I got out of the navy in 1983 badly bruised from the drug policy, but not beaten.

Ronald Reagan was the president and his zero tolerance for drugs reached outside of the armed forces and soon worked itself into the workplace. Federal contracts were denied to any employer that did that toe this line. Soon enough the insurance companies had seen that this was a way to deny benefits to a percentage of their claims and got on board. It was an explosion of civil rights in America and lives on today.
 
Awesome post!! Urinalisis has always in my mind been a huge violation of our rights. They don't breathalize these same people every day at work do they??

I was a forklift operator for many years. Before I got hired I made sure my boss was aware of a few things, namely my driving record (a dui years ago) and my mmj prescription. he only asked me:

"You're not going to medicate before or at work, correct?"

Nope!

"You're not going to drink and drive are you?"

Hell no!!

"Then we don't have a problem."

That boss was a 30 year (and still active) cop. He of all people understood that people make mistakes (dui), and that just because you smoke pot, doesn't mean you are going to use it at work. I take my jobs very seriously and would never even think of coming to work under the influenc of anything. I was one of his best employees until I quit to pursue other career interests. He would have lost out on a lot of hard working employees if he discriminated against them because they smoked pot. Most of my coworkers did.
 
Thanks Jrebel. I hear you. A man's job is his identity, his responsibility and his ability too feed his family. A real man takes this responsibility seriously and a real man is as good as his word. I do not mean to be sexist, as this applies to women too. The point is, we do not need to prove we are all sheep and pee in a bottle to support a dead presidents zero tolerance policy or let insurance companies off the hook when an accident occurs. Absolute impairment needs to be proven beyond reasonable doubt before shifting the liability on someone that doesn't toe the line of the late president Reagan. The current system is unconstitutional.
 
I have been in engineering for 30 years and living a double life. On the outside I am a straight laced man with a nice hair cut, wears Dockers and a golf shirt, and appeared politically neutral or leaning towards conservatism to stay employed. What I want is to be myself. I want to be open with my support of MJ and make my living someway in support of it.
 
I had a love hate relationship with the late great Pres Reagan,,, remember he was part of the Patriot Act and IMO a one world order. Also Mr Clinton was part of this also,,, come to think of it the Bush family was there also.... you can not get to the top unless they open the door,,, club members only ....... If society is scared/paraniod it is easier to control,,,, UA was IMO first step in that direct that the public was aware of,,, how about what we are not aware of...... ALSO the rest of the so called free world is not as supportive with MMJ as the US and just because it is a growing trend does not mean that it will have long future. IMO
 
Back
Top Bottom