And a half million dollars fine?!?! WTF? The sad tale of the purveyors of the Whizzinator and their Synthetic Urine empire being brought down by the man.... (Quoted Below)
Making and Selling a Fake Penis to Pass Drug Tests Could Get You Sent to Prison?
- Thread starter Plummit
- Start date
i'm sure pot heads will think this is dumb, but these guys that are going to prison are the dumb ones. i wouldn't want some heroin addict, or a meth head working for me. all these guys are doing is helping you hire someone that will probably turn around and rob you blind just to get their fix, or get hurt on the job because they were high or worse get someone else hurt or killed on the job.
You wouldn't need a whizzinator for those drugs. Both are out of your system in less than 4 days.
yeah but usually those kinds of addicts need their fix every day and probably couldn't wait 4 days to pass a test, and besides there are other drugs out there besides those, prescription pills without prescriptions, coke, crack ect...either way i wouldn't want them working for me
Methinks if they marketed the device in a different manor, like for example NOT claiming that users can beat drug tests with it, they may have walked.
They sent Tommy Chong to jail for making water pipes.
Soon thinking about drugs will be against the law, because then you're thinking to support terrorists...
Soon thinking about drugs will be against the law, because then you're thinking to support terrorists...
There is a whole world of users between total sobriety and full-on crack head, including several classes of functional addicts, who you would never know.
Of course, who knows when they had that once-a-year rough night and are not ready for the next day's work.
If you're such a ****ing idiot that you can't spot a full blown meth-head or heroin junky without a piss-test, you deserve to be robbed blind.
Anyone who is that kind of state can't get through an interview or put together a resume. If they can get through an interview and put together a resume, and then do the work they're supposed to, who the **** cares if they smoke pot (or shoot up on the weekends for that matter)?
do you examine the veins -- and i don't just mean on the forearms
-- of all your applicants? while i agree that most meth-heads have "the look" of the meth teeth and behavior i've seen some pretty straight-up looking heroin users.I didn't say users. I said junkies. If they're functional enough to make it through an in-person interview and reference check, and impress you more than any other applicants, then they're functional enough to take a crack at the job until they prove themselves incompetent.do you examine the veins -- and i don't just mean on the forearms
so you would have no problem doing heavy equipment work with a person that's high on some drug.
Thank god there is no drug use in the construction industry.
Is it true that airline pilots bought in bulk?
i never said there wasn't....
you still haven't answered the question, if you were doing heaving equipment work, would you trust your life in the hands of a guy operating a machine while high on ANY drug...even if it's "just" weed
must spread
fyi if said construction worker smokes after work he will not be high the next day. However he will likely fail a drug test during the next 3-6 weeks.
but the whole point of a drug test is to ensure that the employee isn't using drugs while on the job
why can he get smashed at home but not smoke?
because alcohol is legal, weed isn't...i'm not going to get into the whole weed isn't as bad as alcohol, that's another thread for another day...the point i'm making is that if someone is using an illegal drug whether it be weed or meth, then that's their choice and they have to live with it
This is the most commonly repeated, bogus argument for drug testing since it's inception.
It is nothing more them a short cut method for employers to use less energy in the interview process.
It is very simple, if you cannot trust someone to be sober while on the job then don't hire them.
For argument's sake lets assume said construction worker lives and works in one of the several states where weed is available medically and he has a prescription.
Is it really that simple though? Its pretty easy for an alcoholic to scrub up for an interview which is often the first time an employer is going to meet someone. Not every employer has the luxury of knowing prospective employees before they hire them. I know you can make first impressions etc but its not always that easy to spot a functioning alcoholic straight up. Then there is the issue of workers who fall off the wagon after they are hired.
Considering that most employer-given drug tests only catch marijuana users, I think they are useless.
However, I know from working with cocaine and meth users that I don't want them around me, if there was a test that detected usage for lets say a month, I would administer it to my employees.
However, I know from working with cocaine and meth users that I don't want them around me, if there was a test that detected usage for lets say a month, I would administer it to my employees.
I put myself through college doing just that. The construction industry has drug use that would make Keith Richards stand up and say, "Hey guys, I think you may have a problem here..."
I refused to work with the excavator operator who was a cokehead though, he was just scary. The weed guys were fine to work with. Unlike the drunks, they usually showed up for work.
By the way, the same asshole prosecutor was the one behind putting Chong in jail...
You're going on the assumption that because someone uses drugs or alcohol that they are automatically going to do it on the job.
If this were the case, then every currently employed human that has ever had a few beers after work is going to drink on the job.
It just does not make sense.
I don't think people are going to do a toot in the port-a-john. But lets say you were up all night, cranked out of your skull.
You might be fine at work, or you might not.
Ever look at a known drug user on a Monday or a Friday? They don't look too good.
No I'm not. My current boss smokes quite a bit of pot and I had no problems putting my hands under his excavator this afternoon to put his track back on whilst he was still in the machine because I know that he only smokes at home and is fully compos mentis at work.
Ive worked construction and trusted a couple of functioning alcoholics over the years too. I realise there is a spectrum of users out there.
I was just saying its not always that easy for employers to pick that prospective employees might have a problem.
I wonder how the cycling community is taking this news?
To be fair it's also assuming that everyone who uses drugs is a hardcore addict. Most of the people I know to have done hard drugs at one point in time are not currently addicted to them.
Last edited:
Meth, heroin addicts, etc won't apply for the job, specially if it would include hard physical work. These guys will rob you straight away
And after that they'll fly off on their brooms all the way to Salem.
You should compare an after-work drinker with an after-work toker. The drug users you're talking about are party guys that use e's and meth during weekend/s, and thus may not sleep during friday and/or saturday night. Not apples to apples.
then he has a prescription, he tells the employer, takes the test, and gets the job because it's LEGAL to have a prescription...i'm not doing the mr. macky drugs are bad m'kay, i'm just saying illegal drugs are just that ILLEGAL. whether or not i think weed should be legalized isn't the point...the point is it's not legal and these people helped pot heads and OTHER drug users cheat the system and put other lives at danger
then why is it when you get injured on the job, the first thing that happens is you get a drug test
Interesting debate, but I'm wondering what conspiracy did they plead guilty to? Is evading a test given by a private party really punishable by law, or is it because of some form or document the person being tested signs saying they are providing an actual sample, telling the truth under penalty of perjury, blah blah blah? In that case the whizzes behind the whizzinator would be guilty of aiding people commit perjury?
BTW, it's clear the tests are designed to catch someone who is using, and are clearly not precise enough to detect whether someone is using on the job vs. wknds or at home, same thing with someone one who has a beer after work or on the wknds.
BTW, it's clear the tests are designed to catch someone who is using, and are clearly not precise enough to detect whether someone is using on the job vs. wknds or at home, same thing with someone one who has a beer after work or on the wknds.