Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
nvxplorer said:No, it would be painfully obvious if marijuana users were causing havoc in society. It would be plastered all over our local news reports.
Oh yes it is.I've got a friend that's been trying to quit for at least 10 years. No can do.He doesn't want his kids to find out. He thinks they don't know.Abongil said:Marijuana is not addictive, sorry sir
This means that your friend has an addictive personality, not that marijuana is addictive.Harlan Norris said:Oh yes it is.I've got a friend that's been trying to quit for at least 10 years. No can do.He doesn't want his kids to find out. He thinks they don't know.
Denial is the cornerstone of addiction.Do you use pot?nvxplorer said:This means that your friend has an addictive personality, not that marijuana is addictive.
And your point would be? (In other words, how is this factoid related to what I wrote?)Harlan Norris said:Denial is the cornerstone of addiction.
No.Do you use pot?
Harlan Norris said:Denial is the cornerstone of addiction.
Do you use pot?
I think you need to lookup the word addiction in the dictionary. Seriously. People get addicted to being online all the time. Is the Internet a drug? No. Pot is a drug, just not an addictive one.Harlan Norris said:Oh yes it is.I've got a friend that's been trying to quit for at least 10 years. No can do.He doesn't want his kids to find out. He thinks they don't know.
Well, then I guess you don't really know anything about the weed, other than what you've read or heard on TV.A man has to make a few dope deals before he's got the true flavor of the drug culture.Back in my 20s,after my divorce,which was due largely to my drug use,I made some new friends.We all met at a certain bar.Sort of an Algonquin round table type thing. We all drank and many,myself included, were strong advocates of drug use.We were all about the same age give or take a few years.We had a great time,and were for the most part harmless.None of us thought that what we were doing would lead to any serious problems.However, now it's about 30 years later.Here's how it shakes out.One I'll call JB,drunken wife beater, and he comitted suicide.Another,RC,suicide,cocaine.Another GB, 8 years in canyon,vehicular homicide,booze&coke.RW, my brother in law,comitted suicide shortly there after,pot coke,booze.JA,died of liver failier,he just couldn't resist one last high on pain pills.His brother DA,also has a fragile liver,as do I.SE & DK,were married.SE,dead at 42,liver failier.DK,dead at 44,liver failier.The rest of us escaped with our lives more or less in tact. Now, I am not about to say that I believe that if pot had been legal that none of this would have happened.And clearly the law against it didn't prevent anything.However,everyone knows that when pot becomes legal it will all become legal.Frankly,it was the law that separated me from my use.Random testing made it difficult for me to continue to use and keep my job.I quit for the most part,only occasionally smoking dope on vacation. Random testing did not include alchohol though, and I continued to drink,as did virtually everyone else in my trade.My point is that the law can be and is a deterrant for some,and can prevent some from ever starting.This is why I say the law is good,and say dope is bad.nvxplorer said:And your point would be? (In other words, how is this factoid related to what I wrote?)
No.
You asked whether I currently use pot, not whether I had ever used it in the past. I have plenty of experience with marijuana.Harlan Norris said:Well, then I guess you don't really know anything about the weed...
My personal experience is entirely different than yours. No one I know has had your experience. This is why the law is bad.This is why I say the law is good,and say dope is bad.
Harlan Norris said:Now, I am not about to say that I believe that if pot had been legal that none of this would have happened.And clearly the law against it didn't prevent anything.
Frankly,it was the law that separated me from my use.
Random testing made it difficult for me to continue to use and keep my job.I quit for the most part,only occasionally smoking dope on vacation. Random testing did not include alchohol though, and I continued to drink,as did virtually everyone else in my trade.
Well, I figured this was the case. Simple deductive reasoning pointed to your having been at least a pot smoker.Now, if I were to ask why you quit,what will you say? I think it's likely that you will say you quit because you just got tired of it,that you no longer had any interest in smoking. To which I will reply that simple deductive reasoning points to a different truth. You see we tend to remember only the good things about our addictions. That's the essence of addiction. I quit, just to keep my job. I suspect you did something similar. So, there is still a place in your heart for the drug, that causes you to defend the idea of legalisation.nvxplorer said:You asked whether I currently use pot, not whether I had ever used it in the past. I have plenty of experience with marijuana.
My personal experience is entirely different than yours. No one I know has had your experience. This is why the law is bad.
Of course you know that if pot were legal then random testing would most likely never have been allowed to become policy. Construction work is dangerous in the best of circumstances. A drunk,stoned workforce makes it extremely so.So, if random testing was responsible for me quitting then so much the better for my crew.susanann said:Go back and read your own post.
It was not the law that kept you from anything, it was random testing - by a private company.
What would have been of more help to you, would have been your company doing random testing for alcohol as well as drugs.
Making pot legal, would not stop private companies from continuing to do testing for drugs, alcohol, or tobacco - as some companies already do today.
You are making no case at all for keeping drugs illegal - rather, you are making a case for private companies to do more testing of its employees.
Harlan Norris said:Of course you know that if pot were legal then random testing would most likely never have been allowed to become policy. Construction work is dangerous in the best of circumstances. A drunk,stoned workforce makes it extremely so.So, if random testing was responsible for me quitting then so much the better for my crew.
Drug testing is not government policy. It is not tied to marijuana law in any way. Drug testing is the policy of insurance companies. Drug testing is done to minimize civil liability prior to hiring, and to determine liability after an accident. It's about money, not criminal activity. It's because of the effects of drug use that testing is required, not because a drug may be illegal.Harlan Norris said:Of course you know that if pot were legal then random testing would most likely never have been allowed to become policy.
Can't say about freight trucks or airlines but construction,sadly yes. Now I'm not saying that one can be falling down drunk,but a hung over crewman is not unusual. Iv'e seen quite a few accidents that were a direct result of this. When an accident occours a drug test is administered. If the individual involved has not been smoking dope or doing some other illegal substance,insurance pays.Alchohol levels are not checked unless the person is obviously drunk. In other words just having booze breath that floats through all day after a night of drinking,will not generally be cause for a blood alchohol test.If the person is found to have drugs in their system,they have the choice to go to rehab,which is paid by inshurance Or be terminated. They are not allowed back on the job till they have sucessfully completed their rehab.Quite a few in these circumstances chose to leave rather than go to rehab.xMinionX said:Are people currently allowed to work construction drunk? Are they allowed to drive large freight trucks while drunk? Or fly airliners while drunk?
Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's going to be allowed everywhere.
Well, now you are saying that drug testing is required because of the effect of drugs. Clearly this indicates that drug use is detremental to the health and welfare of the tested employees.You see legalising drugs will not get rid of the effect of drugs.The law changes but the drugs effect stays the same.nvxplorer said:Drug testing is not government policy. It is not tied to marijuana law in any way. Drug testing is the policy of insurance companies. Drug testing is done to minimize civil liability prior to hiring, and to determine liability after an accident. It's about money, not criminal activity. It's because of the effects of drug use that testing is required, not because a drug may be illegal.
Uh...yes?Harlan Norris said:Well, now you are saying that drug testing is required because of the effect of drugs.
While performing job functions, yes. Employers bear responsibility for employees.Clearly this indicates that drug use is detremental to the health and welfare of the tested employees.
Of course this is true. Legal status, including criminalization, has no bearing on the effects of drugs. What is your point?You see legalising drugs will not get rid of the effect of drugs. The law changes but the drugs effect stays the same.
Harlan Norris said:Can't say about freight trucks or airlines but construction,sadly yes. Now I'm not saying that one can be falling down drunk,but a hung over crewman is not unusual. Iv'e seen quite a few accidents that were a direct result of this. When an accident occours a drug test is administered. If the individual involved has not been smoking dope or doing some other illegal substance,insurance pays.Alchohol levels are not checked unless the person is obviously drunk. In other words just having booze breath that floats through all day after a night of drinking,will not generally be cause for a blood alchohol test.If the person is found to have drugs in their system,they have the choice to go to rehab,which is paid by inshurance Or be terminated. They are not allowed back on the job till they have sucessfully completed their rehab.Quite a few in these circumstances chose to leave rather than go to rehab.
One I'll call JB,drunken wife beater, and he comitted suicide.
Another,RC,suicide,cocaine.
Another GB, 8 years in canyon,vehicular homicide,booze&coke.
RW, my brother in law,comitted suicide shortly there after,pot coke,booze.
JA,died of liver failier,he just couldn't resist one last high on pain pills.
His brother DA,also has a fragile liver,as do I
.SE & DK,were married.SE,dead at 42,liver failier.DK,dead at 44,liver failier.
Random testing did not include alchohol though, and I continued to drink,as did virtually everyone else in my trade.My point is that the law can be and is a deterrant for some,and can prevent some from ever starting.This is why I say the law is good,and say dope is bad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?