HB 3288 - Drug testing for CHL

[Southpaw]

View attachment 20910

Damn!!! S.O.D.!! That takes me back a bit.

 

[Army 1911]

Meh ... most industry requires initial and random tests and like Joker said ...



CHL is a privilege and comes with baggage. I would prefer License holder to be above ANY suspicion.

I disagree, my reading of the constitution includes the word bear which in this case mean carry and there is no restriction on that right in my US Constitution. Now I do agree that an employer can require drug tests. Working at any company is not a right. They don't have to hire you.

 

[Prorkba]

If this isn't a bunch of crap. According to my sources, a basic drug screen runs $90. What if you have to pay for a do-over? That's another $90. And, once this kind of thing starts, when does it become random? Do y'all need a drug screen for a DL? Oh, I'm only getting started here this is wrong on so many levels.

 

[Armybrat]

Sure, let's agree to it as long as the feds require voters to pay the same fees CHL holders do, take a basic class (with a written test) on the Constitution and current political events knowledge, submit to a background check, show a state photo I.D., and get finger printed just like we do.

 

[OFFascist]

I'm opposed to this, it will just be used to raise the cost of of a CHL and limit poorer people from getting one.

Screw the war on drugs.

 

[mitchntx]

I disagree, my reading of the constitution includes the word bear which in this case mean carry and there is no restriction on that right in my US Constitution. Now I do agree that an employer can require drug tests. Working at any company is not a right. They don't have to hire you.

So you think requiring a CHL for daily carry is unconstitutional? Interesting ...

So you are willing to knuckle under for the test and fees, but draw the line at weeding out those under the radar?

 

[Greg_TX]

I would prefer License holder to be above ANY suspicion.

And what would all CHL holders be suspected of that they should be all tested for drug use?

 

[TrevX]

I don't agree with this, nor do I agree for drug testing people on food stamps.

 

[Greg_TX]

Next thing will be a law requiring CHL classes to be held only at lakes, and you'll have to walk across it to pass the course.

 

[Texas42]

I oppose nearly all drug testing outside attempts to diagnose illness.

Testing for jobs, testing at road checkpoints, testing for welfare recipients, testing for a chl, testing for anything, period. All drug testing is punishment (yes, being subjected to the process is a punishment) before guilt has been established. It may be justified in the course of an investigation once other factors create a reasonable suspicion but asking for public aid, asking to legally carry a concealed weapon, or asking for a job does not create a reasonable suspicion that the person asking has done anything wrong.

I believe society should default to assuming innocence. I can remember when we did, when no one got drug-tested unless they had almost indisputably done something wrong. Things seemed to work a bit better back then.

To be fair, no one is forcing you to get drug tested before applying for a job.

 

[kyletxria1911a1]

Heron?!
View attachment 20810

wrong heron!! heron a oldschool term!! ohhhhhhh snap you aint a cool ass old black dude!!!
so i willl let slide homeslice

 

[Bithabus]

Sounds like more Orc mischief to me.

 

[Charlie]

Meh ... most industry requires initial and random tests and like Joker said ...



CHL is a privilege and comes with baggage. I would prefer License holder to be above ANY suspicion.

Gotta' disagree, highlighted statement is bullshit! It's a constitutional right. Driving on a road built by the govt. may be a privilege ........ but me carrying my gun on my person is a right. Unless I'm unconscious and in dire need of medical services, no one has the right to take my blood, test my body fluids, etc. And of course, anything the government does usually cost us lots of money, and they screw it up, and they accomplish nothing.

 

[Younggun]

Yup, keep and bear arms=constitutional right

Sitting at home living of the hard earned dollars of everyone else=not a constitutional right.

 

[ROGER4314]

What a strange thing to dump on CHL applicants! Crime statistics in Texas show that CHL holders have an incredibly low incidence of criminal activity. As I recall, the statistics for CHL criminal violations is even lower that those of LEO's! Drug testing CHL applicants is the same as finding a cure for a problem that doesn't exist! I am clean and sober 31 years and have nothing to hide but the whole idea seems silly!

Flash

 

[TX69]

Oppose on the grounds of the record statistics of Texas CHL holders.

 

[Brains]

I hear that argument all the time. "Well if you have nothing to hide, then what's the big deal?" Because it's WRONG. Just because I can pass some silly qualification that accomplishes nothing beyond invading my privacy, does not mean someone has the right to intrude.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I think freedom of movement is a right as well. IMO, if there's a road paid for with tax dollars I have the constitutionally protected right (not privilege) to use it. See Bill of Rights Amendment #9 for verification. (I know most will disagree with me...and even though they're wrong they would probably prevail in court)

I think its a ridiculous mindset that requires certification in the first place. My rights are not contingent upon government certification or testing. My rights are just that - MINE - given to me by God. Throwing one more infringement upon them just highlights the failures in the current mindset of our society at large.

We've become a bunch of nosey, pansie ass, mommy types worried about what everyone else is doing. Must be all the female hormones in the water from all the birth control that made everyone's nuts shrivel up.

 

[Vaquero]

"Nothing to hide" argument will get you a random search of your domicile too.
How's that for a minor inconvenience so you can exercise a right?
Privilege? Hardly.
We're supposed to be taking baby steps forward, not backward!

 

[mitchntx]

Gotta' disagree, highlighted statement is bullshit!

I gots no issue with disagreements ... its what makes this country great.
But it can be done without being nasty about it.

but me carrying my gun on my person is a right.

For arguement's sake and not debate ...

If its a constitutional right, then why are classes, registration, fees and renewals required in order to do it lawfully?
Why aren't we all writing Mr. LaPierre, Mr Cruz and Mr. Perry to get them behind this travesty?