HoseHeads.com | HoseHeads Classifieds | Racer's Auction
Home | Register | Contact | Verify Email | FAQ |
Blogs | Photo Gallery | Press Release | Results | HoseheadsClassifieds.com


Welcome Guest. Already registered? Please Login

 

Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead


Records per page
 
Topic: Drug testing Part 1: Testing needs to start with major players Email this topic to a friend | Subscribe to this TopicReport this Topic to Moderator
Page 2 of 3   of  51 replies
StaggerLee
MyWebsite
February 16, 2015 at 03:44:29 PM
Joined: 05/14/2014
Posts: 645
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: Truth teller on February 16 2015 at 01:51:20 AM

It is a pretty monumental stretch to claim that someone who doesn't even go to races in the first place would be influenced by a driver failing a drug test. Using that logic, the NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. should be going out of business any day now.

Your argument is really that people who already don't go to races still won't go? It is amusing/pitiful to see the excuses for ducking a drug test.




What does anything i said have to do with ducking tests or making excuses? Bring on the testing, I hope your ready for what comes next.  I was simply replying to someone else saying how tarnished the image of our sport is, Tyler Walker and Ward Jr's drug use is soley responsible for alot of that tarnish, that is why i made the post about the headline reading " WoO driver John Doe fails a drug test and is thrown out of racing forever" not as an excuse for ducking a test, but to point out how that would serve to further tarnish sprint car racings image, learn how to read and comprehend for gods sake.



dirtybeer
February 16, 2015 at 03:48:05 PM
Joined: 11/25/2005
Posts: 558
Reply

It makes no difference that weed is legal in some states, an employer, and racing, can still mandate you not using it ig you want to work or race.Same as with some prescribed meds.



StaggerLee
MyWebsite
February 16, 2015 at 03:55:54 PM
Joined: 05/14/2014
Posts: 645
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: BigRightRear on February 16 2015 at 03:36:33 PM

yeah...stoners unite and tamp this down before it takes root...nobody will notice that fans that post on this website are more offended by this than the drivers interviewed in the article.

 

 




you know nothing about me, Im not a stoner and Im tired of you implying that anyone that thinks we dont need drug testing is automatically a stoner. What exactly does tamp this down mean, maybe you need to put down the weed. I dont understand the point of the rest of your run on sentence. None of the drivers seemed offended in the least, why would they be offended, if they claim they dont like drug tesing then close minded people like you will assume they are stoners.




revjimk
February 16, 2015 at 04:06:29 PM
Joined: 09/14/2010
Posts: 7634
Reply
This message was edited on February 16, 2015 at 04:08:49 PM by revjimk
Reply to:
Posted By: henry chinaski on February 12 2015 at 10:57:29 AM

I think you and I have a whole different perspective on what kind of exposure our sport needs. A multi part series on nothing but solving a problem that doesn't exist is niave at best in my firm opinion. Elliott means well I think but leave this lying dog alone and don't go stirring shit up. If our niche market sport opens up this Pandoras box of drug testing everyone, we better be ready for the ramifications of such a short sighted decision. Leave this fine sport alone to police itself without fan or pseudo journalist meddling into the internal policies. Until there is a definitive test that can show that a person is actually under the current influence of cannabis but not just show that they have it in their system as leftover compounds this will be a failed move. There are states where it's perfectly legal to use cannabis for either medical purposes or even for recreation. Thats not unlike alcohol. Nobody wants a driver who has been drinking racing and thats sensible. If they drink on their time after the races why should it be anyones business. The same is true for cannabis whether people want to accept that or not. 



100% agree. Not a problem, leave it be...

Does anyone think more people will come to sprint car races because they have drug tests? Hell, no, you like it or you don't



revjimk
February 16, 2015 at 04:07:08 PM
Joined: 09/14/2010
Posts: 7634
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: cubicdollars on February 15 2015 at 12:36:33 PM

You think these guys would have passed...lol?



BINGO!!!



StaggerLee
MyWebsite
February 16, 2015 at 04:27:50 PM
Joined: 05/14/2014
Posts: 645
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: dirtybeer on February 16 2015 at 03:48:05 PM

It makes no difference that weed is legal in some states, an employer, and racing, can still mandate you not using it ig you want to work or race.Same as with some prescribed meds.



yes but do they have the right to mandate you dont do it in your own home? but you still might be hot on race night even though you smoked 4 days ago. Imagine if Alcohol was detectable for 20 days after you drank it, you could get a dui for alcohol you drank 20 days ago, thats just one of the hundred or so issues with testing, simply put we do not have the technology to test and be fair and be correct 100% of the time, until then, testing is a crap shoot. And while it does have practicle aplications sprint car racing is not one of them.




kossuth
February 16, 2015 at 05:26:15 PM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: BigRightRear on February 16 2015 at 03:36:33 PM

yeah...stoners unite and tamp this down before it takes root...nobody will notice that fans that post on this website are more offended by this than the drivers interviewed in the article.

 

 



DING DING DING.  Winner winner chicken dinner.  Those that are so vocal apparently have something to hide. 



kossuth
February 16, 2015 at 05:30:33 PM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
This message was edited on February 16, 2015 at 05:36:52 PM by kossuth
Reply to:
Posted By: StaggerLee on February 16 2015 at 04:27:50 PM

yes but do they have the right to mandate you dont do it in your own home? but you still might be hot on race night even though you smoked 4 days ago. Imagine if Alcohol was detectable for 20 days after you drank it, you could get a dui for alcohol you drank 20 days ago, thats just one of the hundred or so issues with testing, simply put we do not have the technology to test and be fair and be correct 100% of the time, until then, testing is a crap shoot. And while it does have practicle aplications sprint car racing is not one of them.



 

Can they mandate that you don't use it in your own home?????  Yep, if the effects of you partaking with said drug will continue to influence you when you are actually at the track then yes, by all means they can dictate what you can and can't do.  This is no different than operating a piece of machinery under the influence of alcohol.  Just because you aren't drinking now doesn't mean you aren't drunk as a skunk. 

 

The fact that XYZ drug stays in your system for so many days after it's effects have worn off is not the concern of the testers.  The tests are not capable of discerning dates/times.  The tests conclude that you have XYZ amount in your system.  It's 100% irrelevent whether or not the person is under the influence at the time or not, the standard of measurement is XYZ.  The folks being tested should know this.  If they know this then they should know it takes in a worst case situation 21 days for your system to flush it.  Which should tell the individuals whom are subject to testing "Don't do it, unless you are willing to put possibly your career on the line".

 

Life is full of choices. 



hatesfenders
February 16, 2015 at 08:11:20 PM
Joined: 08/13/2012
Posts: 76
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on February 16 2015 at 05:30:33 PM

 

Can they mandate that you don't use it in your own home?????  Yep, if the effects of you partaking with said drug will continue to influence you when you are actually at the track then yes, by all means they can dictate what you can and can't do.  This is no different than operating a piece of machinery under the influence of alcohol.  Just because you aren't drinking now doesn't mean you aren't drunk as a skunk. 

 

The fact that XYZ drug stays in your system for so many days after it's effects have worn off is not the concern of the testers.  The tests are not capable of discerning dates/times.  The tests conclude that you have XYZ amount in your system.  It's 100% irrelevent whether or not the person is under the influence at the time or not, the standard of measurement is XYZ.  The folks being tested should know this.  If they know this then they should know it takes in a worst case situation 21 days for your system to flush it.  Which should tell the individuals whom are subject to testing "Don't do it, unless you are willing to put possibly your career on the line".

 

Life is full of choices. 



"this is no different than operating a piece of machninery under the influence of alcohol.  just because you arent drinking now doesn't mean you are drunk as a skunk"  your kidding right? "its 100% irrelevant weather or not the person is under the influence at the time or not, the standard measurment is xyz"  i thought the whole point of testing is to keep people from operating under the influence?  Just for reading those statements everyone is now dumber.... who are you to mandate what anyone uses or does in there home if it dont affect another human being?




kossuth
February 16, 2015 at 08:43:50 PM
Joined: 11/02/2013
Posts: 529
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: hatesfenders on February 16 2015 at 08:11:20 PM

"this is no different than operating a piece of machninery under the influence of alcohol.  just because you arent drinking now doesn't mean you are drunk as a skunk"  your kidding right? "its 100% irrelevant weather or not the person is under the influence at the time or not, the standard measurment is xyz"  i thought the whole point of testing is to keep people from operating under the influence?  Just for reading those statements everyone is now dumber.... who are you to mandate what anyone uses or does in there home if it dont affect another human being?



Sir, I would seriously recommend rereading my post.  Apparently you misread the content or my point completely missed you somehow.

I will also reiterate my prior statement.  Yes you can dictate what a person does in their home.  Yes, this is a free country.  Nobody said I had to tolerate your drug/alcohol abuse as a private company.....  People are fired all the time for popping hot on drugs or showing up drunk to work in the real world.  What would make you think a racetrack would be any different?  You are free to do as you wish, but an event organizer is free to enforce as they see fit.   



dirtybeer
February 16, 2015 at 08:50:18 PM
Joined: 11/25/2005
Posts: 558
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: StaggerLee on February 16 2015 at 04:27:50 PM

yes but do they have the right to mandate you dont do it in your own home? but you still might be hot on race night even though you smoked 4 days ago. Imagine if Alcohol was detectable for 20 days after you drank it, you could get a dui for alcohol you drank 20 days ago, thats just one of the hundred or so issues with testing, simply put we do not have the technology to test and be fair and be correct 100% of the time, until then, testing is a crap shoot. And while it does have practicle aplications sprint car racing is not one of them.



This is where a person has to decide their priorities in life.If getting high is more important to a person than racing so be it, but they have no reason to bitch when caught.Many of us have the same choice concerning our jobs.We can not partake, or we can light up and risk our job and means of income for ourselves and our families.It's not worth it to most of us, it all comes down to a persons priorities in life.



hatesfenders
February 16, 2015 at 09:29:57 PM
Joined: 08/13/2012
Posts: 76
Reply

i have a job and get randoms, but believe it or not there are jobs that don't require testing.  and believe it or not there are some very sucessfull people who partake in cannabis.  you are assuming someone cant use it and have a great life or make a lot of money. you are assuming people who use it cant function or have thrown their life and responsibilites away.  believe it or not there have been many families move to colorado because no other substance will help their child with seizures and other serious conditions.  Should saving your child or giving them a normal life be a revolutionary act in the united states of america?  Should someone be put in a cage because they are at the end of a losing health battle? The problem is we have so many closed minded people they don't even understand the significance of what is talking place.  States are telling the fed they can stick it, we don't need ur funding we dont need ur outdates laws. we don't need ur ATF and DEA strongarming people for victimless crime. guess what? colorado has had crime go down, less violent crime, and the economy is booming.  schools will be funded and a budget surplus is on the way.  The gov. just past legislation a couple months ago that they won't interfere with states passing such laws. Why? because they know any idea whose time has come can not be stopped by any laws or any army.   slowly but surely there is a revolution taking place across the country because people are waking up to what cannabis/hemp can do for health as well has the biodegradable industrial products it can be used for. thousands of uses.  its been used for over 8000 years for products and medicine.   And we are sitting here having a debate on sprint car racing so some company can get their hooks in local dirt track racing across the country for millions of dollars?  




hatesfenders
February 16, 2015 at 09:40:52 PM
Joined: 08/13/2012
Posts: 76
Reply

"yes you can dictate what a person does in their home.  yes this is a free country."  sir, with all due respect appearantly we disagree on what freedom/liberty is, what a constitutional republic is and what the founders had in mind when the constitution was adopted.



dirtybeer
February 16, 2015 at 11:49:40 PM
Joined: 11/25/2005
Posts: 558
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: hatesfenders on February 16 2015 at 09:29:57 PM

i have a job and get randoms, but believe it or not there are jobs that don't require testing.  and believe it or not there are some very sucessfull people who partake in cannabis.  you are assuming someone cant use it and have a great life or make a lot of money. you are assuming people who use it cant function or have thrown their life and responsibilites away.  believe it or not there have been many families move to colorado because no other substance will help their child with seizures and other serious conditions.  Should saving your child or giving them a normal life be a revolutionary act in the united states of america?  Should someone be put in a cage because they are at the end of a losing health battle? The problem is we have so many closed minded people they don't even understand the significance of what is talking place.  States are telling the fed they can stick it, we don't need ur funding we dont need ur outdates laws. we don't need ur ATF and DEA strongarming people for victimless crime. guess what? colorado has had crime go down, less violent crime, and the economy is booming.  schools will be funded and a budget surplus is on the way.  The gov. just past legislation a couple months ago that they won't interfere with states passing such laws. Why? because they know any idea whose time has come can not be stopped by any laws or any army.   slowly but surely there is a revolution taking place across the country because people are waking up to what cannabis/hemp can do for health as well has the biodegradable industrial products it can be used for. thousands of uses.  its been used for over 8000 years for products and medicine.   And we are sitting here having a debate on sprint car racing so some company can get their hooks in local dirt track racing across the country for millions of dollars?  



You are arguing with yourself on this, and reading into it something I never said.You made good points, but this is about up front rules.Just like you and I dont think the risk of getting high is worth losing our jobs over, racers will have to decide whether the risk is worth it also.Personally, I dont like not having the right to smoke if I chose to in my own free time, but I know the rules and abide by them.On the other hand, I see good reason for the rules from the emplyers standpoint.If I was a talented race car driver with a good ride the choice would be pretty easy for me to leave it alone, racing is a heck of alot more fun than working for a living.



revjimk
February 17, 2015 at 02:48:00 AM
Joined: 09/14/2010
Posts: 7634
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on February 16 2015 at 05:26:15 PM

DING DING DING.  Winner winner chicken dinner.  Those that are so vocal apparently have something to hide. 



No, if we were hiding something, we wouldn't be vocal




StaggerLee
MyWebsite
February 17, 2015 at 09:42:28 AM
Joined: 05/14/2014
Posts: 645
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: kossuth on February 16 2015 at 05:30:33 PM

 

Can they mandate that you don't use it in your own home?????  Yep, if the effects of you partaking with said drug will continue to influence you when you are actually at the track then yes, by all means they can dictate what you can and can't do.  This is no different than operating a piece of machinery under the influence of alcohol.  Just because you aren't drinking now doesn't mean you aren't drunk as a skunk. 

 

The fact that XYZ drug stays in your system for so many days after it's effects have worn off is not the concern of the testers.  The tests are not capable of discerning dates/times.  The tests conclude that you have XYZ amount in your system.  It's 100% irrelevent whether or not the person is under the influence at the time or not, the standard of measurement is XYZ.  The folks being tested should know this.  If they know this then they should know it takes in a worst case situation 21 days for your system to flush it.  Which should tell the individuals whom are subject to testing "Don't do it, unless you are willing to put possibly your career on the line".

 

Life is full of choices. 




Wow, how could you be drunk as a skunk and not be drinking? maybe you dont have the bottle in hand actually putting it to your lips, but you must have been drinking in the last couple of hours to be drunk as a skunk. using your 21 day example, some guy uses cannibis and 20 days later gets tested and is positive, so he deserves the same punishment as some guy who is smoking in his trailer before he straps into the car? thats BS. I understand what you guys are saying, "if you know the rules ahead of time then to bad for you", and its that closed minded attitude that fuels the fire of ignorance when it comes to peoples rights. You beleive that the minute chance that some driver or crew member might be under the influence is enough of a reason to open the door on testing, I dont agree. This country was built on freedom and civil rights, everytime we roll over and let some governing body tell us what to do we give up our freedom and our rights a little bit at a time, you will scoff and and laugh and use your job's random drug testing as justification for all drug testing, just because you sold your right to privacy for a pay check dosnt mean everyone else should.



chance2195
February 17, 2015 at 10:35:23 AM
Joined: 07/05/2013
Posts: 51
Reply

Hard to believe there isn't a single driver with an opposing view.  The pro testing people remind me of those who followed the Nuremberg laws.  It must be time to turn sprintcar drivers in for anti-American behavior in the name of safety and security.  It sounds like Joe McCarthy has been reborn as a sports writer.



gators0849
February 17, 2015 at 10:54:59 AM
Joined: 05/07/2013
Posts: 1991
Reply

It's an interesting debate, which again, is why I did the research and wrote the series. I also believe there is more research to do to address the concerns or opinions on here. 

A couple things: 

1) There are levels that must be exceeded by a test for it to come back positive. From what I'm told, the levels decrease so if you are smoking pot 20 days prior to the test, the levels will be less and therefor, it's a good chance you won't exceed the level for a true positive.

2) People are making this a pot issue only. There are other drugs out there, and I guarantee you they are being abused in this arena, somewhere. It happens. It's society. It's naive to think that Sprint Car racing is the only sport in the world where this doesn't go on.

3) The fact that some states have legalized marijuana is irrelevant. The truck drivers/machine operators in that state still can't do it. 

4) For the record, I'm all for the legalization of marijuana. The health benefits have been proven. However, there are some avenues where there needs to be standards. If you believe all the medical cards are for health reasons, you are being naive. I know of people that have it -- with no medical issues -- because they got a family doctor/friend to sign off on one. Again, it's naive to think it is all legit and that no one cheats or abuses the system.

Again, I appreciate all the comments. I do not have an agenda as some have suggested in other posts. Simply doing my job which is addressing an issue




StaggerLee
MyWebsite
February 17, 2015 at 03:20:46 PM
Joined: 05/14/2014
Posts: 645
Reply
Reply to:
Posted By: gators0849 on February 17 2015 at 10:54:59 AM

It's an interesting debate, which again, is why I did the research and wrote the series. I also believe there is more research to do to address the concerns or opinions on here. 

A couple things: 

1) There are levels that must be exceeded by a test for it to come back positive. From what I'm told, the levels decrease so if you are smoking pot 20 days prior to the test, the levels will be less and therefor, it's a good chance you won't exceed the level for a true positive.

2) People are making this a pot issue only. There are other drugs out there, and I guarantee you they are being abused in this arena, somewhere. It happens. It's society. It's naive to think that Sprint Car racing is the only sport in the world where this doesn't go on.

3) The fact that some states have legalized marijuana is irrelevant. The truck drivers/machine operators in that state still can't do it. 

4) For the record, I'm all for the legalization of marijuana. The health benefits have been proven. However, there are some avenues where there needs to be standards. If you believe all the medical cards are for health reasons, you are being naive. I know of people that have it -- with no medical issues -- because they got a family doctor/friend to sign off on one. Again, it's naive to think it is all legit and that no one cheats or abuses the system.

Again, I appreciate all the comments. I do not have an agenda as some have suggested in other posts. Simply doing my job which is addressing an issue



You say that you guarantee other drugs are being ABUSED in this arena, how can you make that guarantee? Truth is you have no idea, how could you unless you have seen it with your own eyes.  If drug abuse is so prevalent in dirt track racing why isnt anyone being arrested? How are these wasted drug abusing drivers and crew members able to fool everyone every weekend. I have been around drug abusers when I worked for a private agency that dealt with these type of folks, they cant take care of doing their own laundry or hygiene let alone work on a race car or worse yet drive one. You and everyone else who is pro testing are basing your decision on what might be happening, there is no concrete evidence that anyone, anywhere, at any track is a drug abuser. If you have proof that a drug abuser is racing or in the pits and you have not notified track management then shame on you. This looks more like a witch hunt than a way to make sure drivers are safe on the track, accuse everyone and assume they are all drug abusers until they prove they are not with a pee test. Please Jeremy or anyone else, produce some facts that drug abuse is an issue at race tracks other than speculation based on the rest of society.



hatesfenders
February 17, 2015 at 10:39:46 PM
Joined: 08/13/2012
Posts: 76
Reply

guys....guys....guys...... just think in 5-8 years we are going to look back on this debate and wonder why were we even fighting over this silly matter once its legal everywhere... well maybe not nebraska, utah or singapore, but you know what i mean.  prohibition is always on the wrong side of history.  it was with alcohol and it is with cannabis.  the young generation is going to look back on cannabis prohibition the same way alcohol prohibition is looked at.  to address point number 4 they dont need to get a medical card they arent fudging nothing.  people want to get high just like people want to get drunk, minus feeling like shit for 2 days.  they don't need medical issues! its called freedom. jump on weed maps and go get you some.  freedom can be a scary thing for some people.  its coming so be on the lookout





Post Reply
You must be logged in to Post a Message.
Not a member register Here.
Already registered? Please Login





If you have a website and would like to set up a forum here at HoseHeadForums.com
please contact us by using the contact link at the top of the page.

© 2024 HoseHeadForums.com Privacy Policy