OC in Florida?

It actually looks like Florida may get to OC. The leading candidate for Governor promises to sign an open carry bill. He also wants a bill to enable pee tests for all who recieve any form of public assistance. I thinkin' I need to save up for a dress up holster!

That would be something! Florida's no-OC stance has been an anchor to progress for quite some time.

ZO6Vettever said:

It actually looks like Florida may get to OC. The leading candidate for Governor promises to sign an open carry bill. He also wants a bill to enable pee tests for all who recieve any form of public assistance. I thinkin' I need to save up for a dress up holster!

Click to expand...

You're going to need to OC if people start jonesing because their welfare dried up. I'm not saying that everyone on welfare is on drugs, but the percentage that are won't be happy. I'm also not sure I support that particular violation of the 4th amendment for people who have no history of drug abuse... But that's another topic.

mcdonalk said:

You're going to need to OC if people start jonesing because their welfare dried up. I'm not saying that everyone on welfare is on drugs, but the percentage that are won't be happy

Click to expand...

I would argue that, whatever the percentage, those on welfare who are active drug users are probably already jonesing half the time as it is.

I'm also not sure I support that particular violation of the 4th amendment for people who have no history of drug abuse... But that's another topic.

Click to expand...

No, in this context it's a valid point, although it might be appropriate to start a new thread should enough interest be generated.

I would argue that the only justification for search and seizure is implied or explicit consent. Implied consent exists when someone is operating a motor vehicle on a public avenue of transportation, or when statute restricts an activity (such as carrying a firearm) which is prohibited under the influence. Explicit consent exists under some employment contracts as well as drug/rehab treatment programs. All members of the military, for example, are subject to drug testing at any time.

I would further argue that one condition of welfare should be either implied consent recognized in statute, or explicit consent in the form of documents signed as a requirement to receive public aid.

Thoughts?

I'm not sure

Well, I suppose you could say that if you take govenrment money you are giving implied consent for the government to make sure it is used for legal purposes, but I don't think you could make a very strong argument. If I drive drunk, they still have to have reason to stop me before they can get me to take the breath test. If someone has a history of drug abuse, there might be cause to have them tested regularly, but drug testing with no reason to believe they are drug users is an invasion of privacy and an illegal search, IMHO. Like you said, being in a rehab program or as a condition of employment is a separate issue.