Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Intoxicated Tubists Declared Dangerous


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Joe Baker on March 26, 2002 at 13:44:14:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Intoxicated Tubists Declared Dangerous posted by abuse on March 25, 2002 at 17:48:20:

The 'drug abuse' semantic argument is a non-starter. It is a phrase that, in common use, includes the use of illegal substances or the use of legal substances in a manner other than intended or directed. Thus it includes smoking pot, which may not be as harmful as using some legal substances as directed, and huffing spray-paint, which is a legal substance but one that, when inhaled, is devastating. Let's not play semantic games. We're talking about illegal or improper substance use.

My question is this: do you have any basis for your asserting that teachers are much more likely than the public at large to use illegal substances? I flatly do not believe that this is true. Doubtless some do, and I would be happy to see them find employment elsewhere.

IMHO, teachers should set an example for their students by submitting to regular drug screenings. Law enforcement should not be compelling these tests without due cause, but employers can, and employees entrusted with important tasks (police, pilots, teachers, etc.) should be regularly tested.

Joe Baker, who been tested by employers quite a few times, without fear.


Follow Ups: