PVal, PVal wherefore art thou, PVal? - Page 2

Danzig · #21 11-21-2011, 02:04 PM

i agree actually. i don't get why employers have the 'right' to test anyone. it's not exactly constitutional.

Indian Charlie · #22 11-21-2011, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Too much regulation. So what if he didn't make a phone call? S.hit happens. Let me ask this...are these people in power employing this guy and paying his taxes? If not, unless he kills another horse or jockey why should anyone care if he's on drugs?

I'll tell you why...because there's too many people on earth. The only jobs that can keep the masses employed are jobs where you're controlling, taxing, ruining the lives of others. We don't make anything these days...instead we create jobs that do nothing but keep a moron fed and the people they deal with absolutely miserable and domesticated.

Mind your own god-damned business. You can ride horses and be coked up. Not everyone responds the same to drugs. F.uck Nancy Reagan. If owners, trainers or whoever wants to hire this guy then it's their choice.

amen.

Cannon Shell · #23 11-21-2011, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

i agree actually. i don't get why employers have the 'right' to test anyone. it's not exactly constitutional.

His employers arent testing him, the state which grants his professional license is. In his case he has a conditional license so he is held to a different standard.

I have a hard time believing that you are going to get much support for letting someone who is impared ride a horse going 40 mph. This is different than testing a stockboy at Wal-Mart for weed.

Danzig · #24 11-22-2011, 06:32 AM

what he does in his leisure time is no one's business. i guess that's my biggest beef right there. you'd have to think it would be common sense not to get on a horse while one is impaired; but perhaps like they say, common sense isn't so common.
i've read where jockeys were riding who couldn't even stand because of dehydration. but they could pilot a half ton of horse?

Revidere · #25 11-22-2011, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Too much regulation. So what if he didn't make a phone call? S.hit happens. Let me ask this...are these people in power employing this guy and paying his taxes? If not, unless he kills another horse or jockey why should anyone care if he's on drugs?

I'll tell you why...because there's too many people on earth. The only jobs that can keep the masses employed are jobs where you're controlling, taxing, ruining the lives of others. We don't make anything these days...instead we create jobs that do nothing but keep a moron fed and the people they deal with absolutely miserable and domesticated.

Mind your own god-damned business. You can ride horses and be coked up. Not everyone responds the same to drugs. F.uck Nancy Reagan. If owners, trainers or whoever wants to hire this guy then it's their choice.

It's obvious that people can post while impaired....

iamthelurker · #26 11-23-2011, 12:50 AM

chilli dippin trippin... bro bro

dino · #27 11-23-2011, 06:06 AM

I know it goes against what young people believe these days but there are rules in life. If you want to be a jockey you need to take drug tests. If you don't want to take drug test then do something else. Seems simple to me.

#28 11-23-2011, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revidere

It's obvious that people can post while impaired....

I wasn't impaired. I was actually posting from church. Your mother was wearing an adorable hat.

Danzig · #29 11-23-2011, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

The United States Constitution is a document proscribing and limiting Federal government power.

so, you're suggesting our bill of rights doesn't apply if a state or local, or private entity tries to trample on our rights? free speech? freedom from illegal search and seizure, etc, etc? i don't think that's quite correct.

Dahoss · #30 11-23-2011, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dino

I know it goes against what young people believe these days but there are rules in life.

P Val is like 50 now right? This isn't a young person vs not so young person debate. Seems like at 50 P Val hasn't figured out there are rules in life.

I understand Coach's point about too much regulation and I agree with him that some people react to drugs differently. I don't think all jockeys should be tested, however considering the dozens of chances the guy has had, I think testing him is necessary and the fact he couldn't be bothered to pick up the phone when he KNOWS he should have means he probably doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Most people can't just fall off the face of the earth one day and not follow through with occupational obligations. They would be fired, and rightfully so.

Slewbopper · #31 11-23-2011, 11:38 AM

Disappears on the 17th
Says he will be back on the 26th. Needs some time off with fiance
Gets high from the 16th to the 23rd.
Has a big turkey dinner tomorrow and takes a drug flush.
Shaves himself head to toe Saturday morning and arrives at the track for his test if he doesn't get delayed in holiday traffic

Danzig · #32 11-23-2011, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

I didn't say state, county, or towns could "trample".

i'm not sure exactly what you're saying at this point....

Danzig · #33 11-23-2011, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dahoss

P Val is like 50 now right? This isn't a young person vs not so young person debate. Seems like at 50 P Val hasn't figured out there are rules in life.

I understand Coach's point about too much regulation and I agree with him that some people react to drugs differently. I don't think all jockeys should be tested, however considering the dozens of chances the guy has had, I think testing him is necessary and the fact he couldn't be bothered to pick up the phone when he KNOWS he should have means he probably doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Most people can't just fall off the face of the earth one day and not follow through with occupational obligations. They would be fired, and rightfully so.

really, this soap opera shouldn't have continued this long. it's what causes the drama to continue, they keep giving more chances-just like dutrow, biancone...

GenuineRisk · #34 11-23-2011, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, you're suggesting our bill of rights doesn't apply if a state or local, or private entity tries to trample on our rights? free speech? freedom from illegal search and seizure, etc, etc? i don't think that's quite correct.

If you work for a private employer and you are not a member of a union or under a contract, you are considered an "at-will" employee and can be fired for any reason the employer chooses that is not specifically prohibited by law. Refusal to submit to drug testing does not fall under things prohibited by law.

And if you don't like it? Find another job.

As someone else mentioned, the Bill of Rights does not apply to private sector employment.

#35 11-23-2011, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

If you work for a private employer and you are not a member of a union or under a contract, you are considered an "at-will" employee and can be fired for any reason the employer chooses that is not specifically prohibited by law. Refusal to submit to drug testing does not fall under things prohibited by law.

And if you don't like it? Find another job.

As someone else mentioned, the Bill of Rights does not apply to private sector employment.

It's not necessarily "private sector" when the state is involved. But taaaanks for trying.

Revidere · #36 11-23-2011, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I wasn't impaired. I was actually posting from church. Your mother was wearing an adorable hat.

The she made for one lively corpse.

At least she has an excuse. She's been declared dead. Others here are just under suspicion.

cmorioles · #37 11-23-2011, 06:27 PM

I'd love to see what would have happened if I was told to take a drug test in my Air Force days and told my Commander I'd be in next week after I spend some time with the fiance. This guy is nothing but a loser drug addict that needs to disappear from horse racing. I'm pretty sure the sport will go on just fine without him.

RockHardTen1985 · #38 11-23-2011, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I'd love to see what would have happened if I was told to take a drug test in my Air Force days and told my Commander I'd be in next week after I spend some time with the fiance. This guy is nothing but a loser drug addict that needs to disappear from horse racing. I'm pretty sure the sport will go on just fine without him.

The sports not really fine with him. I guess it will go on the same without him.

Danzig · #39 11-23-2011, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

Not when a private entity is concerned. That is not government intrusion.

i found this:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...ryId=123024596

i've learned something new today. i guess like many others, i had no idea. yikes. i figured laws on discrimination, age hiring/firing, etc, had come from rulings based on the constitution.

NTamm1215 · #40 11-23-2011, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, you're suggesting our bill of rights doesn't apply if a state or local, or private entity tries to trample on our rights? free speech? freedom from illegal search and seizure, etc, etc? i don't think that's quite correct.

You think the 4th Amendment protects people from taking drug tests at private entities? I don't.