1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fingerprint and Drug Test Public Housing Residents?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by YankeeFan, Aug 19, 2013.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Yeah, sure. Assuming they use similar standards as those used to issue a driver's license, passport, or firearms license, I would have no problem with that.
     
  2. amraeder

    amraeder Well-Known Member

    But do you think Chicago's getting a good cost/benefit for their buck? My guess is "no." That it's spending money on drug testing that isn't really making the city better. I'm highly skeptical that this actually saves the police any money, either. But, I admittedly don't have any figures at my fingertips to know if this is true.
     
  3. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Absolutely. And they should get them free of charge...
     
  4. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    The CHA building in question in the lawsuit is a "mixed income" building. (And, the testing is required of all residents.)

    As cities push to integrate buildings and neighborhoods, I think we're going to see more and more of this.

    In New York, you're seeing buildings with separate entrances, amenities, and maintenance companies for the full rate residents vs. the price regulated residents:

    For market rate residents, the "cost" is worth it. They want to know that their home will be safe, and free of drugs, and the problems they bring.
     
  5. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    I really don't have a problem with the fingerprinting thing, if it's being used as a method of building entry. I don't think that criminalizes people, and I do think it protects people

    I do have a problem with the drug testing, because I think that does criminalize and doesn't do that much to protect. And there IS a difference between employment and accessing a public service. You don't have a right to a job. You do, society has decided, have a right to have a roof over your head.

    And there is no question that policing is difficult. And I'm sure it's more difficult if you can't stop every black guy and check him for weapons. But that's what intelligent policing is about. Deal with the guys you know are committing crimes -- intensify probation supervision, etc. But using fine crafted tools is a lot harder than just blindly whacking people over the head with the mallet of drug testing or stop and frisk. But I think that's a price worth paying.
     
  6. JayFarrar

    JayFarrar Well-Known Member

    Last year I got a passport for a trip and it was the biggest pain in the ass.

    I'm a white, college-educated, middle class, 40 something with access to resources, technology and a working car. It was still a multi-day process that required me to take off from work for two days, a round trip drive of three hours plus at least a $100 in extra costs not related to the passport fees

    Seems like I detailed that glorious adventure here but I don't recall.

    Anyway, my experience is fairly typical, given some of the stories I've read.

    That is a bit much to vote.
     
  7. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Or, it's a bit much to get a passport.

    If the ID is going to be used to vote, it has to mean something. If a resident can't meet the standard, then maybe you have two types of ID cards, one that just signifies you live in the building, and one -- with an additional hologram, or something -- that indicates it is a SecureID, and can be used to vote, board an airplane, etc.
     
  8. Bradley Guire

    Bradley Guire Well-Known Member

    Guilty until proven innocent remains alive and well in America.

    If you drug test for a job, you are submitting to a private entity. You don't have to work there if you don't agree with the policy. Saying the government has the right to drug test any citizen for any reason is not a can of worms to be opened. I'd put it on par with highway checkpoints, which are unconstitutional in many states. So, we allow them to drug test. At what point do we allow them in our homes to take a look at our stuff, you know, just to be safe? They don't have to have a warrant or probable cause, just let 'em walk right in.

    Government should not operate on presumption that we're guilty.

    Fingerprinting is just another form of ID. I don't think it criminalizes anyone any more than if you're issued a card with a magnetic stripe for door entry. Plenty of places have those, like university dorms, private apartment buildings, business offices, etc. It doesn't assume guilt on anyone's part.
     
  9. Here me roar

    Here me roar Guest

    Wholesale drug testing is expensive. And finds out that many people don't do drugs.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/20/2758871/floridas-welfare-drug-tests-cost.html

     
  10. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    ObamaChips!

    (Not really)

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/microchip.asp
     
  11. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Is that a lot of money?
     
  12. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Getting a passport is a pain in the ass. Always has been... It takes awhile too, and if you pay to expedite the process, it can be expensive.

    It is not nearly as difficult to get an ID at the DMV. I even wouldn't have a problem with someone showing up with a water bill or electric bill sent to their address as proof to vote.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page