• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Missouri College requires drug testing to attend

D

dmcowen674

No Lifer
JASTTTC (Just Another Southern State Trashing The Constitution)

Only Technical College in state of Missouri College requires all students pay for drug testing to attend.

May as well throw The Constitution away, it doesn't exist in the southern Republican states any more.

Do they designate where and what time can take a shit too?

9-8-2011

http://news.yahoo.com/mo-technical-college-begins-widespread-drug-tests-184348810.html

Mo. technical college begins widespread drug tests


A drug-free demand greeted new students Wednesday at Linn State Technical College, a two-year school in central Missouri that has enacted what may be the most far-reaching drug testing policy at a public college or university in the country.

All first-year students — including those pursuing general education degrees while studying accounting, communications, math, and social sciences — must comply with the requirement

The mandatory drug tests are raising the hackles of civil libertarians, who call it a constitutional violation of the Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful searches and seizures, an invasion of privacy and a likely lawsuit target.

The tests cost $50, a fee paid by students.

The tests screen for 11 drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine and oxycodone.

Students who initially test positive but then test negative a subsequent time will remain on probation for the rest of that semester and also face an unannounced follow-up test.
 
Don't like it? Don't attend that college. Seems pretty simple. I don't see how it's a violation of the 4th amendment if you voluntarily agree to the drug test. If you don't, you can attend somewhere else.

Unless they are forcing people to attend that particular school, there's no issue. I'd have no problem attending there.

Since when does the constitution have a clause that prevents a private institution from asking you to submit to a drug test to attend said private institution?
 
What score do you need to pass and how do you cram for the test?

Back in the old days I had a roommate who could have easily aced the test (not counting oxycodone, which wasn't around then). He's been clean and sober thirty years now (after a lost decade).
 
PokerGuy said:
Don't like it? Don't attend that college. Seems pretty simple. I don't see how it's a violation of the 4th amendment if you voluntarily agree to the drug test. If you don't, you can attend somewhere else.

Unless they are forcing people to attend that particular school, there's no issue. I'd have no problem attending there.

Since when does the constitution have a clause that prevents a private institution from asking you to submit to a drug test to attend said private institution?
Click to expand...

If that college gets government funding that makes it unconstitutional
 
If the school wants to test, that's their choice. You can choose to go to a different school if you don't agree with that policy. It would be an unconsitutional breach of privacy if state/federal governments started mandating drug tests for everyone.

Although I'm definitely curious as to what the school hopes to achieve with this new initiative.

highland145 said:
Don't some states require drug testing on welfare recipients?
Click to expand...

Florida just started it.
 
Are you sure the drug test is not just for a particular 1 year technical program?

EDIT: I see the drug testing was expanded from the heavy equipment operator program.. where at least it made a little sense. But if this was like any other college... 75% of the students will fail the test.
 
HomerJS said:
If that college gets government funding that makes it unconstitutional
Click to expand...

If that was true then all the jobs that get said funding or where you work for the government would fall under that area and would not be allowed to do such tests.

So seems to me like it's allowed and is a good thing.
 
IIRC, any job/school/etc can drug test, even if they get public money, so long as the test serves some purpose. When the school was testing heavy machinery operators the test appeared to serve a purpose. If they receive public money and expanded the testing to include everyone because, well fuck it we just want to test everyone, that could very well be a Constitutional violation.
 
sactoking said:
IIRC, any job/school/etc can drug test, even if they get public money, so long as the test serves some purpose. When the school was testing heavy machinery operators the test appeared to serve a purpose. If they receive public money and expanded the testing to include everyone because, well fuck it we just want to test everyone, that could very well be a Constitutional violation.
Click to expand...

It does serve a purpose, it helps prevent the abuse of illegal drugs to keep other students safe. 😉
 
The fact that you posted this shows your total lack of understanding of the constitution, the role of government, and the free market. For one, it is not unconstitutional for you to require that someone do something as a requirement for something else they CHOOSE to do. You are not required to attend this school and have the CHOICE to go somewhere else. Should you CHOOSE to attend this school then you must pass the test. Why is it that every time people disagree with something, somehow its unconstitutional or there needs to be a new law or the government should regulate that? Some things are just the way they are and you can like them or not, that's life, deal with it. Also, should people choose not to attend this school and the school is not able to generate enough revenue because of this rule, then they will either a) change the rule to allow more people to attend or b) close their doors and go out of business. This is the nature of the free market and does not require regulations, laws, or people like you screaming about its constitutionality. People will vote with their pocketbooks and freedom will prevail without any government entity getting involved.
 
misle said:
Since when has Missouri been considered part of the South?
Click to expand...


Let's see, Mizzou was part of the Union and has voted for a democrat president almost twice as many time as a republican, and currently has a democrat senator and several democrat reps. Of course, we don't want the facts to confuse Dave, so we better stop now.
 
xBiffx said:
The fact that you posted this shows your total lack of understanding of the constitution, the role of government, and the free market. For one, it is not unconstitutional for you to require that someone do something as a requirement for something else they CHOOSE to do. You are not required to attend this school and have the CHOICE to go somewhere else. Should you CHOOSE to attend this school then you must pass the test. Why is it that every time people disagree with something, somehow its unconstitutional or there needs to be a new law or the government should regulate that? Some things are just the way they are and you can like them or not, that's life, deal with it. Also, should people choose not to attend this school and the school is not able to generate enough revenue because of this rule, then they will either a) change the rule to allow more people to attend or b) close their doors and go out of business. This is the nature of the free market and does not require regulations, laws, or people like you screaming about its constitutionality. People will vote with their pocketbooks and freedom will prevail without any government entity getting involved.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that this particular school is a public institution and not a private school?
 
CPA said:
Let's see, Mizzou was part of the Union and has voted for a democrat president almost twice as many time as a republican, and currently has a democrat senator and several democrat reps. Of course, we don't want the facts to confuse Dave, so we better stop now.
Click to expand...

Not sure what voting democrat has anything to do with the South. If that were the case then the South would include the Left and East coasts wouldn't it? I thought it was considered part of the South since a majority of it was/is south of the Mason-Dixon line. This, of course, is antiquated and probably no longer used as a guide these days.
 
Darwin333 said:
Are you aware that this particular school is a public institution and not a private school?
Click to expand...

What difference does this make for the basis of whether or not this is constitutional? Again, it is not a requirement to attend this school and you can attend elsewhere. Having to pass a drug test does not make it unconstitutional, just another entrance requirement. That's like saying a school can't require a GED/HS diploma, or even a certain SAT/ACT score to attend. Requirements suck, when you can't meet them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top