Well, hereâ€™s an interesting case of irony if there ever was one. The city of Pittsburgh has had a civil right grievance filed against it by police officers claiming that mandatory drug testing violates their constitutional rights, not to mention violates their contracts.
There are three primary reasons an officer might usually be tested: 1) If he/she was suspected of being under the influence of something while on duty, 2) If that officer is involved in a traffic accident, and 3) If that officer fires his/her weapon.
The police claim that this unconstitutionality only applies to them, and not the public they serve and protect. Their argument becomes even more ironic when they claim that mandatory drug testing is an example of illegal search and seizure, and that police would be being forced to give up their constitutional rights to protect the city from civil liability.
This all came about after a car chase in which a crash occurred. It turned out that just being involved in a chase, whether a crash occurred or not, was reason enough to seek a drug test.
Man people of all walks of life already say â€œif you have nothing to hide, then why object to drug testing?â€ Well, according to the National Workrights Institute, it comes down to â€œa right to privacy and a right to be left alone.â€
The law enforcement community also adds that the analysis of a urine sample yields the possibility of revealing more than just drug use, but also personal medical information.
Drug tests, they argue, arenâ€™t a measure of job performance. The test canâ€™t definitively reveal how recently any drug was used, marijuana for example, and as a result, canâ€™t be considered reliable.
Urine and blood tests can only measure traces of the drugs in question, and some can stay in someoneâ€™s system for more than a month after they ingested it â€“ longer if they do it regularly.
Lastly, they argue that itâ€™s unnecessary and expensive to test employees for drugs and alcohol, especially for a car accident in which they may not have even been directly involved.