Should law enforcement officers be subject to random drug testing? Several state legislators seem to think so, and a set of bills are working through the House and Senate which could require police officers to submit to drug tests following traffic accidents, shootings or at random intervals.
The bill would require departments to test about a third of its employees every year. Testing would also have to be approved by voters.
Naturally, the SPD union leaders—who represent officers in the largest police department in the state—aren’t too stoked about the idea. “This probably comes up every time we have contract [negotiations],” says Seattle Police Officers Guild president Rich O’Neil. “My response is always the same: why stop at police officers? Why not drug test everybody in city government randomly?”
Currently, cadets are tested as part of a medical exam when entering training, but after joining the department, officers are only tested if their supervisors have reason to believe they may be using drugs. With a few exceptions, O’Neil says, drug use has not been a problem in the Seattle Police Department. “There’s no problem, there’s nothing to dictate that we need this legislation,” he says. “As soon as they want to randomly dug test all the legislators, the mayor, we don’t have a problem with it.”
Not all officers are against the idea, however. When asked for their thoughts on the proposed legislation, one officer in the Seattle Police Department told me that (and I believe this was totally genuine) “drug testing is cool.”
“My response is always the same: why stop at police officers? Why not drug test everybody in city government randomly?”
Because file clerks don’t carry firearms or drive at high speeds as part of their job description?
If they are busting someone for possession or smoking, then there should be no double standard.
@1 – You beat me to it. Rich O’Neil is a dim bulb.
I’m with @1 here. If the legislature and city officials were required to carry guns and tasers and had the assorted abilities that police officers have, sure! But they don’t.
Maybe if officers have to get drug tested they’ll think a bit harder about all the people they are busting for drugs. My guess is that drug use among police officers is a lot more prevalent than they’d like to admit.
Drug testing is pretty standard in any case where safety is an issue. At my work all the forklift drivers have to be drug tested. Guns can be just as dangerous as forklifts.
Man, if anybody ever needed the bong, it’s the police. Kinda aggro, those guys.
Can we make it so we just test the officers for coke, heroin, meth and steroids? Because I don’t care if they’re smoking weed, but the others are probably going to affect their job performance.
That BART cop who shot the guy in the back because…he thought he was Tasering him?
I’d definitely suggest a pee test.
As long as the government supports drug prohibition they should have to submit to drug tests. Until every gets the memo that its all useless bullshit thats none of the governments business change will continue at a glacial pace.
How much will all this testing cost? Should we be considering this at all, since our state is in such fiscal trouble?
this could just create a more anti-drug police force over time as all the casual pot-smokers are removed from the ranks and replaced with cops who are intolerant.
funny how they have to right to privacy issues with this, the concern is that…
the police union apparently think it’s unfair that only police officers have to stop using drugs while other city officials get to keep using them.
Rich O’Neil and the Guild have consistently demonstrated that they don’t care at all about the people they are supposed to protect and serve. Just the latest installment.
I’m ok with the whole city government being drug tested. They may not carry guns, but they have the ability to affect a whole lot of peoples’ lives. Somehow I feel McIver might have a tough time passing.
If Metro bus drivers have to, then so should the Seattle police.
@14: wrong and offensive.
By “working through the House and Senate,” do you mean “introduced by Republicans and won’t receive a hearing”? I think maybe you do.
I know a Sheriff that’s a coke head, takes E all the time, does meth, ect. But he’s very functional. I’m sure there are more like him out there, that hate the idea.
If we’re going to test them, we should test them for impairment, not for what is or has been in their bodies.
All legislators should be asked what illegal drugs they have used, and how they feel about other people sitting in jail or losing their jobs for having done the same.
@18 — they might hate the idea, but as long as they are enforcing those laws, there shouldn’t be a double-standard.
This is similar to drug testing in high schools. As soon as all teachers, faculty & staff are tested, then they can start testing the kids. A coked up VP or meth-head janitor is a much greater threat to your 15yo daughter than her valium-popping friend.
A coked up detective with a race grudge & a gun is a menace to all society.
They test transit drivers and ferry captains after incidents, why not cops?
The Police guild is against it because these tests could play hell with convictions. They don’t want to be tested because cases would
crumble if defense attorneys could supoena test results and find a cop was using something around the time of almost any arrest.
If a cop came up positive for an antidepressive in a random test and was later accused of beating down a suspect, what would a jury make of that? It could give rise to doubts about the officer’s mental state. A lot of cops are on them and more should be, it is a stressful job.
As a secretary I did some of my best work on weed, but I agree that anyone who’s job description involves driving or operating machinery, or are a cop, fireman, or in the medical profession, should be drug and alcohol free, at least when they are on the job.
I’m with @1. As long as they have the means to shoot people, I want them sober. And if they’re supposed to be coming to my house to get a burglar, I don’t want them stopping for munchies on the way.
And there’s a simple solution to the antidepressants could mess with convictions argument: don’t test for drugs that aren’t commonly abused. Just look for opiates and street drugs. Then you’ll bust the guys on Oxy and the ones on meth, but leave the ones on Prozac alone.
As bad as it is that they don’t get tested, I’d rather not chip away union rights. I think they need better psychiatric tests and evaluations before they’re allowed to wear a badge.
Drug testing is stupid. You would all agree. A drug test does not test whether or when someone is impaired. It only tests if someone has a trace of a chemical in their system.
Random drug testing is an warrant less invasion of privacy.
These statements are true for cops, teachers, computer nerds, reporters, student athletes and everyone else.
The police department trains, hires, and supports command staff responsible for monitoring its officers. Test when these professionals suspect a problem.
By the way, the SPOG and Rich O’Niel are not in business to look out for Seattle’s interests. They are in business to protect the police officers’ interests.
You don’t ask longshoremen to negotiate lower safety standards for their workers simply because “the public” needs cheaper shipping. You don’t ask service workers to agree to work more hours simply because the population is aging.
Don’t ask the SPOG to submit to offensive procedures simply because, on a whim, you think it would serve your needs. Don’t act hurt when they first think of their union members rights. That’s their job.
This used to be a union town. I imagine there are plenty of laid-off workers thinking twice about Labor.
So I have to take a pee test to work in an office all day while someone working with weapons and responsible for enforcing drug laws doesn’t have to?
yes, I hate stupid drug laws but monitoring the potential behaviour of someone who uses weapons or has access to machinery and equipment that can affect people’s lives isn’t too much to ask.
I could care less if the guy making my coffee or selling me a dvd are a bit high, but I do care when the cop who pulls me over for speeding or the guy monitoring the control panel at the power plant are bombed out of their mind…
@28 — If only there were some way to tell if someone is bombed out of their mind at any given time…
A piss test doesn’t do that.
A good boss does.
You only have to take a piss test at your office because you don’t belong to a union that fights for your rights (and common sense).
@22 this has absolutely nothing to do with anti-depressants.