most of us know that the legal limit for alcohol is .08… but what gives them the right to test for other drugs and at what limit? we know that some drugs are illegal. we know that some folks do take marijuana for presciptional use. i think this portable drug test is going a bit far. you would have to give me proof 1) what are we testing for; 2) why are we testing — seeing this being a very legal issues and tried very soon in court; 3) costs associated. 4) what about those prescriptions we take that says not use heavy machinery, are we going to test for those and give them a ticket for that?
too many issues i can see popping up… sounds like they are stripping more of my right from search and seizure.
I am not sure how they can apply this since there are so many legal prescriptions that could affect driving. I would like to see some sort of testing become mandatory after an accident has occurred though. It does seem a little extreme and one more type of big government control. It also seems to give a little too much power to the authorities. Irritate the cop and have allergies and you could be in for a long night of testing.
It might pass… think about it, lawyers would love it because they’ll get more cases to challenge it. Law enforcement would love it because they get to harrass people, Government would love it because those who don’t challenge it are now subject to a fines and penalties.
I’m glad Michigan doesn’t have anything else to worry about… This has disaster written all over it. Determining probable cause of drug use is vague at best. Funny how republicans always preach about having our rights taken away, but are usually at the front of the line for causes like this.
The only place in Michigan that needs this kind of testing is Wayne County (D-Troit) That’s right. That’s were all the problems are, always have been, always will be. Why waste money on the whole state when a focused approached will more than meet the 80/20 rule?
I am pretty sure the ACLU already went after the use of drug testing for those on welfare and it was dropped…but I have no doubt that this would be ruled against even by our current SCOTUS; it is just too big a hammer for this gnat…current laws allow for tests after an accidentbut this is just expanding police power to make an arrest where someone would have been let go for lack of any evidence.
this makes no sense except when you consider the amount of fines that could be generated, in Ann Arbor, where the penalty for recreational use is a civil case and not criminal, at least for small amounts, so they would get two fines and double the money when someone gets stopped and they find a nickel bag on them?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
most of us know that the legal limit for alcohol is .08… but what gives them the right to test for other drugs and at what limit? we know that some drugs are illegal. we know that some folks do take marijuana for presciptional use. i think this portable drug test is going a bit far. you would have to give me proof 1) what are we testing for; 2) why are we testing — seeing this being a very legal issues and tried very soon in court; 3) costs associated. 4) what about those prescriptions we take that says not use heavy machinery, are we going to test for those and give them a ticket for that?
too many issues i can see popping up… sounds like they are stripping more of my right from search and seizure.
I am not sure how they can apply this since there are so many legal prescriptions that could affect driving. I would like to see some sort of testing become mandatory after an accident has occurred though. It does seem a little extreme and one more type of big government control. It also seems to give a little too much power to the authorities. Irritate the cop and have allergies and you could be in for a long night of testing.
How about proposing we give recipients of welfare and unemployment these drug tests prior to cutting their checks?!?
And what if someone is pulled over and sober, BUT smoked a joint 2 weeks prior and the THC is still showing in his/her system?
Glad I don’t live in Michigan. This will never pass, though.
It might pass… think about it, lawyers would love it because they’ll get more cases to challenge it. Law enforcement would love it because they get to harrass people, Government would love it because those who don’t challenge it are now subject to a fines and penalties.
I’m glad Michigan doesn’t have anything else to worry about… This has disaster written all over it. Determining probable cause of drug use is vague at best. Funny how republicans always preach about having our rights taken away, but are usually at the front of the line for causes like this.
The only place in Michigan that needs this kind of testing is Wayne County (D-Troit) That’s right. That’s were all the problems are, always have been, always will be. Why waste money on the whole state when a focused approached will more than meet the 80/20 rule?
I am pretty sure the ACLU already went after the use of drug testing for those on welfare and it was dropped…but I have no doubt that this would be ruled against even by our current SCOTUS; it is just too big a hammer for this gnat…current laws allow for tests after an accidentbut this is just expanding police power to make an arrest where someone would have been let go for lack of any evidence.
this makes no sense except when you consider the amount of fines that could be generated, in Ann Arbor, where the penalty for recreational use is a civil case and not criminal, at least for small amounts, so they would get two fines and double the money when someone gets stopped and they find a nickel bag on them?