[bamamule]

i think there should be a tighter montering of trucks/ why / i can rember a trip i did austin tx to dc could log to the fuel stop legal/the rest of story i realy won't say on open form but i didn't wreck and sat to wait on logs but if some idot had pulled in front of me the last 200 miles it would have been over iv'e even heard rumors of some companys that are expecting singles to run team miles it is very unsafe and for those of us who think we we are superpeople/keep it up and one day it will ketch up to you like a close friend of mine that i can only write to because he's behind bars for the rest of his life and a few more years and some of the storys he has told me there is no way i would want to be thar
just my thoughts
sorry for spelling and grammer
mule

[LDB]

I agree there should be strict compliance with HOS and verification of same. I find it interesting that you are strongly for this but strongly opposed to random drug tests which are for the same overall purpose of keeping things safe. Don't worry about your spelling and grammar. It certainly doesn't hurt any of us to work on it but it doesn't keep your message from getting through.

Leo Bricker, 73's K5LDB, OOIDA Life Member 677319
Owner, Panther trucks 5508, 5509, 5641
Highway Watch Participant, Truckerbuddy
EO Forum Moderator
----------
Support the entire Constitution, not just the parts you like.

[bamamule]

I am not against drug testing...but I feel that it is violations of my rights...without a court order....and it's illegal search and seizure of one's personal body....mule had Texasbelle ..2 type for him...lol...:+
mule

[riverrat2000]

try spell check it works wonders

[Jack_Berry]

so you want monitoring but you were illegal after the fuel. so you want tighter monitoring of you?

you don't want to be drug tested but you did sign the papers at orientation i presume and filled the container?

are you against your drug testing or testing in general? how about testing for dui? if it is wrong now maybe its time you stop.

Jack Berry

[Turtle]

A random drug test can only be considered an illegal search and seizure of your person if, and only if, the sample to be tested were collected without your consent. If you consent to it, and offer it up freely, it ain't illegal. No rights were violated, no court order needed.

Where certain rights come into play is when you have the right against self-incrimination, where if you have something illegal in your system, and you know it, you have the right not to offer up a sample for testing, to preserve your rights under the 5th Amendment. There are, of course, other ramifications that will play out in cases like this, chiefly the right to lose your driver's license, since the right to a license was predicated upon consent to a drug test. The penalty for failing to submit to a drug test can be severe. But there is no question that the penalty for failing to submit to a drug test is far, far less severe than the penalty (multiple penalties, actually) for them finding something illegal in your system.

Better to just not put anything illegal in your system in the first place. The ultimate in CYA strategy. :)

[x06col]

Yes, it's alway interesting when a party wants more scrutiny placed at their advantage and by their rules. That's i'm tinking why we have anti-monopoly rules in effect today ya know. Unfair advantage gets some really unfair advantage for a few.