HB 3288 - Drug testing for CHL

[rgwalt]

83(R) HB 3288 - Introduced version - Bill Text

Not sure how I feel about this legislation. On the one hand, it ensures that people are complying with the requirements of the law relating to substance abuse. On the other hand, it provides the state with another avenue for depriving us of our rights. No test is 100% reliable. However, the bill provides for a confirming retest after the first positive test, and allows you to have a public hearing to explain the situation. For example, if you take a prescription drug that shows up as a metabolite on a test, you can bring a note from your doctor. If you end up failing the test, you can re-apply for a license one year later. My other concern is how this test information is used... Will it be reported to NICS so that a person will get turned down due to substance abuse?

Not a horrible idea in theory, but it will end up screwing some people. Maybe just a handful, but some people will have their rights deprived due to this legislation. I imagine that there are people out there on some sort of prescription medication who do not realize that they will fail a drug test. These people will be put through the wringer due to this legislation.

 

[TxDad]

More stupid shit if you ask me. I hope it fails. It is a way to calculate how many CHL holders are on prescription medication also. Another way for the government to build a statistic. My opinion.

 

[XinTX]

I'd say 'No' on this as well. Has there been an epidemic of droogies getting CHLs? Has there been an issue with doped up CHL holders getting into shootouts? A solution with no 'problem'. It will add cost to an already (IMO) overpriced process. Also, people in rural areas might find it difficult to find places to administer such tests. Besides, I think we're already forced to jump through far too many hoops to get 'permission' to exercise what is supposed to be an inalienable Constitutional right.

 

[rgwalt]

I tend to agree with you guys. Excellent point that it is a solution in search of a problem. I'm sure we would hear about drugged up CHL holders in the media if there was even one instance. Just another hurdle in the process.

 

[Glockster69]

Not sure how I feel about this legislation.

I am. Drug tests for welfare recipients is LONG over due. Now there's a problem the needs a solution.

 

[pewter99ta]

I am. Drug tests for welfare recipients is LONG over due. Now there's a problem the needs a solution.

This. I'm completely against this bill, especially as long as welfare recipients are using my tax dollars to buy drugs.

 

[txinvestigator]

I oppose.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I don't think carrying should require a permit, and this is way too far past that.

 

[Renegade]

Absolutely not.

If you did not read it, the are testing for all drugs, not jus illegal drugs. so when prescription meds turn up, the burden is on you to show you had a valid prescription, via a public hearing. So the public gets to hear what meds you are on.

And of course, guess who pays for the test.

 

[orbitup]

I don't think carrying should require a permit, and this is way too far past that.

Yep. And like Glockster said, welfare recipients should get them first.

 

[Das Jared]

Nope

sent from my dishwasher

 

[UncleSamsMisguidedChild]

<tinfoilhat on> What if this was a way to determine who was on prescription drugs like anti-depressants, which would give way to a cross searchable database on gun owners and those types of drugs? </tinfoilhat off>

BTW those drugs are used for more than depression, mostly for smoking cessation.

 

[jocat54]

Absolutely no.

Welfare absolutely yes.

 

[Glockster69]

I don't think carrying should require a permit, and this is way too far past that.

Agreed, but we must deal with current reality.

And of course, guess who pays for the test.

Understood, and I'm not really in favor of drug testing for welfare because that too would become a bloated government debacle. However drug testing for welfare long before CHL applicants.

 

[dustycorgill]

i'd say 'no' on this as well. Has there been an epidemic of droogies getting chls? Has there been an issue with doped up chl holders getting into shootouts? A solution with no 'problem'. It will add cost to an already (imo) overpriced process. Also, people in rural areas might find it difficult to find places to administer such tests. Besides, i think we're already forced to jump through far too many hoops to get 'permission' to exercise what is supposed to be an inalienable constitutional right.

"this !!!"

 

[Jakashh]

so what if i want to shoot some heron before i go carry? Leave me alone, drug test the welfare recipients first.

 

[kurt]

Introduced by a democrat out of Dallas. Who would of guessed? Its going nowhere fast I see.

 

[Hoji]

I oppose

 

[TxDad]

so what if i want to shoot some heron before i go carry? Leave me alone, drug test the welfare recipients first.

Oh goodness I hope youre not playing devils advocate. lol

 

[Younggun]

Wouldn't help in that situation anyways cause if you are about to go carry you already have your CHL