Why is the "muh privacy" meme always employed to defend criminal activity?
It is never even once invoked to protect some legitimate enterprise, only illegal doings!
Why is the "muh privacy" meme always employed to defend criminal activity?
Jaxson Torres
Other urls found in this thread:
amnesty.ca
youtube.com
huffingtonpost.com
snopes.com
abcnews.go.com
theguardian.com
thinkprogress.org
commondreams.org
commondreams.org
commondreams.org
twitter.com
Austin Ward
Don't get it either. I just started at a new company and part of the hiring process was getting drug tested. On top of going through an extensive background check.
And looking at it from the perspective of the company it makes a lot of sense to test their employers.
Jayden Cruz
Because normies think that any time they give up privacy willingly they're not literally harming all privacy everywhere, so they do it. Leaves criminals out as the ones with a reason to protect their own rights.
Jace Rodriguez
> Trying this hard to troll Sup Forums.
Ryder Edwards
Jose Nelson
don't wanna get spied for free.
Adrian Cruz
There are lots of things that are criminal but not wrong. Try harder.
Ian Watson
Last I checked masturbation was not illegal and I don't want people I don't know watching me.
Elijah Nelson
Pretty please?
Jordan Baker
Why is the second amendment meme always trotted out after another mass shooting?
Why do second amendment constitutionalists enable the death and destruction of lives and property?
Benjamin Baker
Because the slippery slope when it comes to these sorts of things is very real and has happened countless times in history. There's a reason why first world countries are founded both legally and spiritually on the concept of bitching like a mother fucker whenever anyone even begins to tread a little too close. Hitler (ayy lmao) didn't suddenly blurt out "kill the jews!" and they were all with him. Not to say that drug testing will lead to genocide, but it's good practice to tell people to gtfo if they have no good reason to fuck with you.
>B-but drugs ARE a good reason
If you can do your job, nothing about what you do at home matters. Jobs are supposed to be about merit. Looking into one's personal life only encourages employers to act on their biases and possible bigotry, like those dumb stories you hear about someone getting fired because their boss saw a facebook post of them flashing their tits in cancun.
Connor Brown
Why not let your employer come to your home and snoop around if you are willing to give them blood?
If you are fucking up at work because you are high they should fire you, if you are smoking weed on the weekends it's none of their business any more than it is if you speed sometimes or got a traffic ticket
Evan Ward
Go the fuck back to with your cancerous faggotry.
Logan Long
Get out fag
Sebastian Diaz
sage
Zachary Nguyen
i don't want some coke fiend working at my bank or a pill-popper working at my clinic. degeneracy is degeneracy; doesn't matter if it's alcohol, weed, opiates, or amphetamines
Alexander Baker
Does it make sense that the consumption of a benign substance is strictly monitored for up to or more than 90 days; especially when it's a terminable offense, despite the fact that it may have been used exclusively on an employee's off-time? Sans marijuana, the adult public has the right to consume whatsoever they please as far as I'm concerned, and only when it becomes evident that they've committed to material crime that they should be prosecuted in any form.
What should take one further aback is the fact that many of the patented pharmaceuticals are far more profound in their potential impact. With a small handful of narcotic drugs being the exception in instances where those prescribed them work in safety sensitive environments you can go to work, piss hot for opiates, benzos, speed, and a whole other smorgasbord of easily abusable drugs while being protected from any sort of retaliation. Add that to the inherent difficulty of firing someone in the first place and you have a serious gap given the fact that these are all drugs that have illicit counterparts that behave very similarly, if not exactly the same, and yet are treated differently because of some arbitrary sanctions placed to promote pharmaceutical companies.
Another issue with the two contemporary methods is the stark contrast of detection for something like marijuana in urine and another much more deleterious drugs like methamphetamine, herion, cocaine, MDMA, PCP. Marijuana can be detected for up to 30 days in urine while most other drugs top out at a seven day cutoff. Hair follicle tests are supposed to go back only 90 days, but the science is based on averages and the reality is that they can go back as far as you've been growing your hair. Because hair grows at different rates you can be certain that you're getting a potential for error, which has the potential to be quite large.
Sebastian Walker
>degeneracy is degeneracy
Settle down there, conquistador
Zachary Foster
Perhaps you're the degenerate?
Wyatt Gutierrez
If they are truly degenerates and can't do their job, then they should be fired. He's arguing that what somebody does outside of work is not the company's business. If they can perform their job to the quality of their peers, why should anyone give a fuck?
Dylan Cooper
Drug testing only invades your privacy if you did not consent to it and there was no legal warrant for it.
We're against mass surveillance that has no legal warrant, which is rampant in computing.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's immoral for Pajeet to watch you fuck your girlfriend on the couch through your Smart TV.
Connor Scott
>i don't want some coke fiend working at my bank or a pill-popper working at my clinic. degeneracy is degeneracy; doesn't matter if it's alcohol, weed, opiates, or amphetamines
bait
all anyone has to do to pass a test for coke is not do it for 3 days before the test
Being an alcoholic is perfectly legal, if you are not drunk at work you wont get caught
god forbid you judge an employee by his/her performance and not your biases against drinking
Julian Bennett
Your way of thinking is dangerous and why the separation of church and state is a thing. People have different moral ideals, different modalities for living. We've had tyrannies for millennia, forcing one and only one morality down people's throats. Has that ever worked out well? Obviously the answer is fucking no. So we've come to a point in history where we legally enforce a "live and let live" attitude. Everyone can follow their own moral code, their own modality, as long as it doesn't interfere with someone else's. So firing someone solely on the basis of taking drugs is moving away from this policy and into forcing a way of life onto someone else. The grey areas, such as how much of one's personal life we allow to be fucked before we can use it as justification to fire them, call the cops, put them into a mental institution, etc, is why politicians have a job. They are constantly rewriting the grey areas. Before the grey area was "no homos, no blacks". Do you want to go back to something like that? No?
Then shut the fuck up and take a long look in the mirror you whiny little bitch
Oliver Gonzalez
From years of imageboard shitposting I have concluded that some people are just born with "we need a king" mentality, where they want everything to be regulated and hate freedom, regardless of actual political inclination.
Jackson Watson
The CIA spied on, and then killed, Martin Luther King Jr.
Tyler Richardson
The CIA spied on him but a rogue assassin killed him.
Andrew Brown
Wait pajeet can do what? Wtf how to protect myself
Bentley Richardson
>look mom I posted it again
S A G E
A
G
E
Isaac Lee
Don't buy a Smart TV?
Go to wikileaks. The most recent CIA leak was the biggest ever and covered a lot of weaponized malware the CIA developed but chose not to use because it could be reverse engineered and used by civvies and other governments to devastating effect.
Ian Campbell
I object to drug testing because I don't do drugs. My urine is clean, and thus has monetary value amongst druggies. I should be paid to piss in a cup for a drug test, since I'm literally pissing away money.
Christian Green
Already have one. Fuck it now i need to find a way to secure it against pajeets
Jeremiah Ramirez
Get razor cutter, cut out the microphone and black tape over the camera.
If enough people do it, they'll start putting firmware that refuses to turn the screen on unless the microphone is connected.
Then we'll need open-source TVs.
Evan Rivera
I smoke weed like a chimney and work my ass off. I deal directly with customers and offer technical expertise and computer repair at a national chain store. I live in a hippie town and nobody gives a fuck, everyone smokes weed from the college students to the retirees. I don't bring my shit onto the property or smoke anywhere near work. Several of my coworkers have or currently do smoke as well.
People who can't do their job while high are probably just as incompetent sober and shouldn't have been hired in the first place.
I have on occasion dealt with meth heads who genuinely try to social-engineer their way into free shit -- I had a toothless black-gummed fucker who wanted a hard drive, then he changed his mind and wanted a tablet, then tried to pay $60 in singles but only had $45. The entire time he was waiting for me to place the box on the counter so he could grab it and run. No luck, fucko.
Jordan Green
Also have a mic in the remote need to cut that out too
Kevin Perez
i'm surprised you got this ass-blasted about this
Xavier Young
>degenerate is casually doing drugs in a bank/hospital/wharever
>doesn't effect his performance
>suddenly hits a rougher patch financially
>can't afford to buy his drug of choice anymore
>his dealer happens to know where they work and what type of access they have to sensitive information
>blackmails shit out of him for drugs
>degenerate agrees to it because he wants his drugs
>company gets into massive problems later on due to the degenerate doing illegal shit to get drugs
Having drug users is massive liability to any company because they're illegal. That's why comparing them to alcohol isn't the same. That's why it still matters even if it doesn't happen to effect his work right now. If drugs weren't illegal then insisting that your employees don't use any wouldn't make nearly as much sense because the degeneracy wouldn't be nearly as big of a liability.
And for drug testing to work it needs to happen often and unannounced because of how fast most of the drugs clear the system.
Nolan Jenkins
this is Sup Forums not Sup Forums
Owen Thomas
Well, I don't know desu~
Here is EU I've never heard of drug testing, especially no the forced one.
You must be living in a 3rd world shithole if someone treats you like some kind of wild animal.
Carter Cruz
In America, we regularly take drug-urine tests if arrested.
Drug-charges amplify other charges, so the police like to get as many drug-use charges as possible to feed the Private Prison system more moneys.
Aiden Gray
Enjoy living in a police state then.
Here I poland I see the police on streets maybe once two months and yet that's the safest country in region.
Daniel Cook
HARAM
Carson Thompson
>It is never even once invoked to protect some legitimate enterprise, only illegal doings!
That's a bold claim, and you have no evidence to back it up. But, just so we are clear about a few things...
1. Just because something is legal now, does not mean it will be legal later. Just because something is illegal now does not mean it is morally or ethically wrong, and that it will remain illegal. Even if you can somehow make the argument that protecting privacy rights only helps criminals, I would still argue that this is a valid enough reason to allow for universal privacy laws.
2. The government is not a universal morally good entity, free of corruption. It is composed of human beings, who are flawed, and may abuse the information they obtain under the guise of solving crimes. Moreover, even innocents may be found guilty of crimes that they haven't committed, if the right evidence is portrayed in the right way. There is a reason people have a fifth amendment right against self-incrimination, and that is to protect the innocent. Don't believe me? Watch this:
youtube.com
3. Any means by which the government can use to get around modern encryption schemes can also be used by criminals. There is no such thing, and can never be a such thing, as a method of encryption that can be unlocked using a master key by law enforcement, that cannot be unlocked by criminals. If you think the government can keep secrets, you need only look to Wikileaks. There is much more being leaked to private individuals and institutions than there is to the public.
Anthony Gomez
> amnesty
> not an ultra-far left globalist organization built around supporting Islamization
of course they'll slam mass surveillance, but for all the wrong reasons
Grayson Hall
The second amendment is brought out after every mass shooting because liberals keep making the same tired arguments after every mass shooting. Do you want to know why we accept a few mass shootings to keep our guns? Because when you run the numbers, mass shootings kill maybe a hundred or so people a year at most. The vast majority of firearm murders occur between criminals, who are not legally allowed to obtain firearms anyways. Meanwhile, if we remove guns, we remove the ability to resist potential government tyranny. One competent dictator and millions can die.
>But muh tanks, fighter jets, nukes
You cannot rule over a smoldering crater. To run a police state, you need police. Police don't do well against an armed populace that isn't going to put up with their shit. We need to maintain an armed militia (that is, a people's armed forces, separate from the military, capable of rising to the occasion when necessary), to maintain the security of our free state (for a land under a dictator is no longer a free state), and therefore, the second amendment recognizes that the right of the people of this country to keep arms, and bear them where necessary, shall not be infringed.
Robert Robinson
Self-rape is a sin and haram, though
Anthony Smith
if a company wants to screen it's employees, fine
but I don't think every single person in my country should be drug screened, without choice
Logan Perez
If I consent to my own fap, how is it self-rape, Mohammed?
Jaxson Thompson
do you use https to access your bank? email? Sup Forums?
why? are you doing something illegal?
Christopher Reed
>implying underage people can consent to any sexual activity
Luis Perez
>implying 16 year olds are old enough to drive cars and work for a living but not old enough to consent to have sex with anyone older than 17.9 years
Christian Barnes
Okay. Give me your username and passwords to your email, your Reddit, your computer, and your bank account too. And download one of those remote desktop apps and give me access to that too.
I'll wait.
Nicholas King
>Before the grey area was "no homos, no blacks". Do you want to go back to something like that? No?
Yes please, actually.
Evan Cox
But what if they do "no unemployed" though?
Julian Cook
Does "actively searching for a job" count as unemployed? Also do you need to claim welfare, or do you just need to not currently be working?
Because if you have to always ensure you're under an employment contract literally 100% of the time that's rather arbitrary and counterproductive. On the other hand, cutting down on social leeches who take advantage of the welfare state? Yes, absolutely!
Wyatt Ortiz
>Because if you have to always ensure you're under an employment contract literally 100% of the time that's rather arbitrary and counterproductive
>arbitrary and counterproductive
Why?
Nathaniel Green
you can test positive for opiods if you ate certain bagels.
Dominic Martinez
this
Jose Bennett
>get tested for opioids
>test shows positive
>I have the choice between telling my employer that I have a back injury that I get painkillers for (something the company isn't legally allowed to ask of me) or get fired and charged with a drug crime
Drug tests are only okay in certain circumstances and for certain jobs.
Levi Reed
Someone can be fully non-degenerate, highly productive, and generally a perfect person even from an ultra-conservative point of view, but maybe his company suddenly folds and boom, he has no job. Because he is such an exemplary human being, one-two weeks later he's already signed his next contract and is dutifully employed.
During those one-two weeks, would he get gestapo'd under your scenario?
Nolan Brooks
You would have to eat a bunch of them though.
Carter Martinez
>but maybe his company suddenly folds and boom
That's his fault for not working hard enough and/or not doing his homework properly when he tried to find work.
>cause he is such an exemplary human being, one-two weeks later he's already signed his next contract and is dutifully employed.
Two-three weeks is way too long. I've never between jobs more than literally three days.
>During those one-two weeks, would he get gestapo'd under your scenario?
Jokes aside, no. But a balance must be struck between those that are legitimately trying to find a new job and those that are special snowflakes and trying to find their dream job and playing around. I'd say that during those weeks, you have to prove that you're sending out job applications and showing up to interviews, and if you pass down a job offer you shorten the time-period you're allowed to spend searching for a job.
Josiah Williams
>That's his fault for not working hard enough and/or not doing his homework properly when he tried to find work.
To expand on this, before you accuse me of memes, I honestly think that if we made a system that punished bankruptcy, this would actually stimulate the economy and force people to make more sane and well-considered investments.
Parker Jenkins
>implying 16 year olds are old enough to drive cars
John Flores
It is in the US
At age 16 you are old enough to have the responsibilities of working full time and owning+driving a car, but you're not old enough to
>drink alcohol
>vote
>have your own bank account
>consent to having sex
It literally is the capitalists' wet dream. You can work and drive to work, but you're not allowed to save your earned money.
Landon Collins
or have fun spending your money on booze and sex, or even vote to change the system.
Gabriel Mitchell
Your testing agency isn't doing a proper job if that's a possibility. In all the ones I've gone through all the results say is wether or not they detected substances in other than medicational use. So even if you did have an opioid prescription your employer wouldn't be any wiser even after the test.
Zachary Perry
What it would actually do is make people do more desperate things to avoid bankruptcy, and therefore be less concerned about dealing legally and honestly.
Christian Hughes
>Your testing agency isn't doing a proper job if that's a possibility.
It's not even a possibility, it's a reality. There are literally lobbyists right now that want to change Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) so that companies are allowed to test even for prescription drugs.
In 2007 a car factory banned their workers from taking several prescription drugs and won the subsequent lawsuit by arguing that they suspected misuse and abuse, even though most of the workers that tested positive in this case all had valid prescriptions.
Connor Evans
Not happening any time soon. As long as it's a 'limited' liability company, then as the name implies. The liability of the owners is limited to how fucked they can get. Which is why white collar infractions of even horrible levels is recieves better punishment than someone using weed for recreational use.
Nolan White
>less concerned with dealing legally and honestly
Solution: punish illegal businesses harder
You wouldn't be so tempted to be fraudulent if you knew you risked capital punishment now, would you?
Lucas Moore
Well, they should change this obviously. Make owners and employees responsible. Make it harder for companies to fire people without valid reasons.
Ian Moore
Then wrongdoers go to even greater lengths to cover up their wrongdoings.
Jonathan Ortiz
>That's his fault for not working hard enough and/or not doing his homework properly when he tried to find work.
Ok, maybe the company suddenly does layoffs. Maybe the company is relatively small and a merger deal got hashed out really fast and now half the employees are being given the boot.
Or maybe some really important business deal fell through.
Or maybe it was a startup and he took a risk. Before the startup has a minimum viable product/prototype, while it's still not generating any income whatsoever, is he employed? Then if the startup fails (which most of them do), does he deserve to be punished for trying to be entrepreneurial?
>Two-three weeks is way too long
I'd just like to point out that I said "one-two weeks" twice, and never "two-three", kek.
>other points
Honestly I think welfare is the main problem; everything you say can apply to people on government support who work close to minimum wage jobs and are too poor to survive out of employment; if they don't get their shit together and fuck about because "free money" then that free money should cut off.
But I don't really see the problem if someone has savings, and want to spend some extra time looking for a good job. Forcing them to pick a suboptimal offer under threat of punishment or something will not benefit society, and will in fact lower the person's productivity since they won't like their new job, thus actually harming society. Or what if they are a highly skilled worker, but with a niche skillset? They should have enough savings to wait, and then in several months an opportunity will turn up where they will fully utilise their skillset and make a ton of money. Or your proposed scheme will make them jump on the first job they're capable of doing, they'll make far less money (and thus pay less taxes etc.), they won't utilise their skillset properly, and when the opening gets created several months later, that company will now need to spend a lot more effort searching for someone.
Levi Ortiz
>Then wrongdoers go to even greater lengths to cover up their wrongdoings.
They already do this, so it's not really a good argument.
>Or maybe it was a startup and he took a risk.
See
Colton Cooper
Look, Shlomo, Sup Forums is redpilled, this won't work.
Levi Price
>land of the fucking free
>make it harder to fire people
How to make sure companies don't want to actually hire anyone
Christopher Bailey
I used to think that Sup Forums and the rest of the internet was just trolling when they said nothing to hide and mass survillance was a great thing. But now it's clear as crystal that it's no longer trolling and people who actually think that way post here now.
Nicholas Bell
>How to make sure companies don't want to actually hire anyone
Well, explain Scandinavia's low unemployment rates then.
Companies are more thorough when employing
Asher Ward
I live in fucking Scandinavia. I've worked at my current job for 2.5 years now. Before the 1st of last month I wasn't actually employed by the company but working as a contractor through another company. People will still work because companies need employers. However the companies start hiring new workers through 3rd party companies as contractors to make sure they can get rid of them fast if they don't end up working. And this is even when we still have test periods when you can fire people without reason. Because if they at some point need to scale down they can just stop the contractor contracts without a massive legal battle and negative pr. Only the ones that they really want to keep are hired as internal employees.
I'd much rather have a system where it's easy to hire and fire employees as needed.
Cooper Morgan
Only worthless trash would use any non-medicinal drugs, and that includes alcohol. Someone weak enough to use drugs is weak enough to destroy lives by performing retarded actions that come with being a drug using retard.
Ayden Smith
Do you drink coffee user? Because coffee is a fucking drug. Also I know you said non-medicinally, but I suffered from debilitating chronic gastritis for 5 years, would have to leave work and lay in bed for 5 hours, sometimes would puke a lot. I started using canabis to control the symptoms, but it fucking cured me. I know it's the canabis because when I stopped using the gastritis came back and then went away when I started using again.
Nicholas Brown
>he uses caffeine
100% pleb
William Ortiz
the problem with drug testing is that it gives employers access to more than just information about drug usage.
discrimination based on drugs is legal, but giving a urine sample gives a lot more info. a company could hire based on pregnancy, because maternity benefits are expensive. they could check for pre-existing medical conditions, and refuse to hire people who might be sick. that's illegal, but it's impossible to make sure it's not happening.
basically it's not what they say it's for that matters, it's everything they can do with the information once they have it, and this applies to every form of privacy and security.
Juan Brown
Jokes on all you days, acid is very expensive to test for and only takes a few days to be totally gone.
William Kelly
Didn't know there was this many muslim pedophiles on Sup Forums
Grayson Garcia
Proper societies like the age of vikings used to drink to celebrate their manly raids. Sorry you're so weak and effeminine you can't even handle a bit of beer.
Juan Parker
>weak enough to use drugs
Lmao this is hilarious.
Luis Mitchell
But what if aliens find out you work at a bank and promise you could live in a world without degenerates if you give them details?
Should moralfags be fired from their jobs as well, just in case?
Brandon Foster
You say "islamization" as if it was a bad thing.
I have to admit islamization used to be a fear. Now, with how degenerate our culture and society has become, islamization is a hope.
Nathaniel Brown
Dumb ignorant tripfag.
huffingtonpost.com
Daniel Cruz
Nobody says that dumbass. Huge Fucking liability if someone is getting high and fucks up and hurts someone else while on the job. Now if you work Fastfood than you're straight. Most of us have real jobs where we get random drug tests.
James Flores
Like what? Doing drugs?
Brayden Smith
>Any means by which the government can use to get around modern encryption schemes can also be used by criminals. There is no such thing, and can never be a such thing, as a method of encryption that can be unlocked using a master key by law enforcement, that cannot be unlocked by criminals.
>WHAT ARE ASYMMETRIC BACKDOORS???
Filtered.
Ethan Bailey
>We have no way to prove that you did something wrong
>We will just unreasonably assume you are a druggy
Gee, I wonder why people are offended by drug tests.
Logan Evans
>Make owners responsible
>harder for companies to fire
contradictory
Camden Anderson
Here's that (you) that you wanted
Adam Williams
>tfw I'll never know if you're being this retarded on purpose or by accident
Oliver Martin
You see, user, that's because
>illegal doings!
>!
nevermind
Oliver Davis
Benjamin Fisher
>durr drugs are bad, mmmmkay?
Anyone who unironically defends drug testing for any reason is either illiterate and uninformed or a shill. Those screenings are massive privacy violations, they're pointless because they fight a problem that doesn't exist and because drugs are not that bad, they're a huge waste of our tax dollars, they're unconstitutional, they're useless and wrong on all levels.
theguardian.com