Cons: If you support drug testing for impoverished "welfare" recipients, then would you support?

Not a con, but less than five percent of welfare recipients are on drugs. Its the usual class warfare against the poor when they suggest that, and they are so unrealistic that it makes absolutely no sense at all, like most of their solutions about the poor.

Of course crime will increase, they are already essentially criminals if they take drugs, and drugs do nothing for the ability to make good decisions.

Rehab has a low cure rate, even the best, and with motivated people. They won't be offering that anyway.

But still they persist, my biggest problem with conservatives is that they don't have any idea of what to do, what will happen, or who will be hurt, if their fantasy ideas come to pass.

Sure, why not, but what would be the purpose? I find it amusing that you are amused by Anyone Else 2012's and Time traveler's response to your inane question.

Anyone else 2012 challenged you to put your MONEY where your mouth is and ante up and directly financially support one of those that spend their tax payer supported lifestyle on drugs....regardless of the 'complexities'. I am guessing it wouldn't be such an easy thing for you to do without having some level of resentment if you see your hard earned money being squandered away on something that is essentially killing that person (or their family) you thought you were helping. Please, give it a whirl. Right now, you are getting PAID instead, to work with these people. (Hope it isn't a public sector job too boot)

Time Traveler is correct at a certain level. You maybe are forgetting your education/training/experience and are confusing mental illness with character defects ( eg. ego and greed).

I support drug testing for welfare recipients and would not have bailed out bad leadership. Maybe we should test those who think government should be a nanny state..

If we cut off drugged welfare recipients, they might have to clean up and get a job or find a family member to sponge off of instead of the taxpayer.

EDIT: Justagranny points out that less than 5% of welfare recipients are on drugs. How many potential employees does she suppose are also on drugs? In order to get a job, I had to pass a drug test. And in the new version of the drug test, nicotine is also now a reason to fail. Why must job seekers be clean, but people on the public dole don't?

I see what you're getting at, but the implementation of such a legislation would be amusingly difficult to put through, never-mind the social and political ramifications of it.

You might well end up biting off much more than you can chew.

But yes, i think that everyone should be tested for drugs AND be given a free psychiatric clinical diagnosis.

Nothing wrong with having a healthy society imho.

The dead beats on welfare are mostly drug addicts. They are LIVING on government money alone, when they could try to support themselves.

When I was in the military in the early '90's, they started a program to test the soldiers for drugs. If it is good enough for the military to get tested, why not some dead beat people that do not offer anything to society and are leeches.

Really, what is wrong with giving these people a drug test?

Well. how about drug-testing for every employee of companies that take subsidies or tax breaks. Since a business is a person, every part of the "person" should be drug free.

I love how you blame the corporation, but not the government. That's funny and frankly confusing.

Yet, you still want bigger government. That's even funnier.

I think drug tests should be banned, but i like the psych testing because of the questions in it. Who was the first president of the U.S.A.?

Nah, drug testing is not protected medical information whereas testing for psychiatric disorders would be.

Really, this is a pisspoor analogy.

Maybe you should show your true colors and support one of these failed druggies on your own. Put up or shut up, honey.