Marijuana

susanann · May 21, 2006

xMinionX said:
Maybe there should be more BAC tests then? Making marijuana legal shouldn't stop jobs from keeping their employees and jobsites safe.

There are now companies that test its employees for nicoine. Anyone found wih nicotine in their system is fired. Ross Perot fired any employee in all of his companies who had been drinking alcohol prior to coming to work.

We really should have more testing for substances that affect performance, not less.

Nurses and doctors are NOT tested at the current time.

Neither are company executives.

Neither are our congressmen and our state legislators.

I dont see any reason why we should not be testing doctors and nurses for any substance that might affect their performance.

Likewise, executives and company officers, esp in a company that has drug testing, should be tested even more frequently than common workers - executives should not be exempt from substance abuse testing.

Gracchus · May 21, 2006

Testing for performance is justified. But back in the seventies studies were done. The profile of a driver who had been smoking marijuana was someone driving under the speed limit and obeying all the traffic laws.

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]"The first casualty when war comes is truth." -- Hiram Johnson

The war on drugs gives ample evidence of that.

[/FONT]

Nightson · May 21, 2006

I can certainly see why companies should test for alcohol, and they should face reprimands for having to high a blood-alcohol content, but I can see no reason to test employees for nicotine, it doesn't impair job performance, and there are a number of jobs in which marijuana would not impair job performance.

susanann · May 21, 2006

Nightson said:
I can certainly see why companies should test for alcohol, and they should face reprimands for having to high a blood-alcohol content, but I can see no reason to test employees for nicotine, it doesn't impair job performance, and there are a number of jobs in which marijuana would not impair job performance.

The point is, that a private company can test for whatever it wants, for whatever reason, regardless if the substance is legal or illegal. If a company states that it will not hire any tobacco smoker, no marijuanna smoker, and no milk drinker , then they are not eligable to be employed by that company.

For example, if you are an alcoholic, then you cannot work for Ross Perot, get a job with someone else.

Making marijuanna legal would not stop any company from testing for it if it wanted to.

nvxplorer · May 21, 2006

Nightson said:
I can certainly see why companies should test for alcohol, and they should face reprimands for having to high a blood-alcohol content, but I can see no reason to test employees for nicotine, it doesn't impair job performance, and there are a number of jobs in which marijuana would not impair job performance.

Not hiring smokers reduces an employer's health insurance costs.

susanann · May 21, 2006

nvxplorer said:
Not hiring smokers reduces an employer's health insurance costs.

Obese people have more health problems than smokers, have higher health risks, and cannot be physically able to do all jobs as quickly or efficiently. All things being equal, I would hire a smoker over a fat person for most jobs.

Harlan Norris · May 21, 2006

xMinionX said:
Maybe there should be more BAC tests then? I definitley think that jobs like that should have random testing for all substances, marijuana included (although not testing for THC metabolites, as that is meaningless). Making marijuana legal shouldn't stop jobs from keeping their employees and jobsites safe.

I'd hate to have to go to rehab just because I had a minor accident and they found the THC metabolites in me from a joint smoked two weeks ago.

Then don't smoke. That's how one avoids that. We choose to smoke. When were caught we blame the rules. It's never our fault. It's the law, it's our upbringing, it's society. No when we do something. That's what WE did.

Harlan Norris · May 21, 2006

nvxplorer said:
Uh...yes?

While performing job functions, yes. Employers bear responsibility for employees.

Of course this is true. Legal status, including criminalization, has no bearing on the effects of drugs. What is your point?

My point is, drugs cause problems. Problems that are bad enough to cause a need for laws against drugs. Therefore, the law should remain. If people aren't willing to stop,they should at least be willing to accept what comes of that. Dopers are notorious for not taking resposibility, any responsibility for what they do while high.

Harlan Norris · May 21, 2006

JustJack! said:
Sounds like he should have stuck with the pot. Not as many potheads beat their wives in a psychedelic rage.

Again, should have stuck with the pot. Coke makes your head too big.

Drunk driving. Fortunately for me, I'm too busy getting high to drink and drive.

Pot doesn't make you commit suicide.

Now the coke and booze, that's another story.

Good ol' FDA approved prescription meds, bet he wouldn't have ODed if he'ld been tokin up instead of popping pills.

And guess what, that wasn't the pot. I too probably wouldn't have a healthy liver if I hadn't found a suitable alternative to alcohol.

Half your friends die from alcohol alone, and you're on here bashing pot, spreading misinformation, and slandering anyone who sees the truth about drug laws as an abuser, and turn around and call them ignorant about the subject when they deny it.

Well guess what, I am a user, and your friends were just stupid, no disrepect. And you don't sound much smarter than them either, just a bit luckier. I'ld never poison myself to the degree that you have, and I do experiment. I wouldn't end up like you, or your friends, because I don't drink, I don't do coke, I don't get addicted to hard things, and I know my limits. I don't mess with things that I don't think I'm ready to handle, or want to handle.

There's a lot to learn in your stories, but if your think that any of your tales apply to us, then that just goes to show what all the poison you ingested can really do to the brain.

So, you've got liver problems, and you still drink alcohol, the very substance that you claim drove many of your friends to their graves, but "dope is bad".

Nope I neither drink or drug. I've had a change of heart. Put it behind me. So, you experiment. You are a whole nother animal are't you. Not possible these things can happen to you. Your to wise for that. Well, smoke a bowl and consider this. Update on the earlier post about the child abuse with the kids hidein out in the yard. Turns out that the guy involved I'll call him RH didn't pass his UA. The one he was compelled to take.Easily 2 months since we visited him in the hospital. So, he smoked since then. It looks like the kids will be going back to their mother. He's waffeling. What do you think he did. Did he go to the social worker and say that he was willing to do whatever it takes to keep his kids safe. Nay he did not. He's saying he thinks they will be better off back in her house. So, does this mean he's a terrible person. If he was straight, I'd have to say yes. The obvious fact is. He's an addict. He's addicted to pot to the point that he places it above even his childrens wellfare.As I said earlier,he doesn't drink but a little,and does no other drugs. Just pot.But he'd rather see them in her house, knowing the danger,than quit.

nvxplorer · May 21, 2006

Harlan Norris said:
My point is, drugs cause problems.

Life is filled with problems. If we locked up everyone who experienced problems, we'd have no one left to guard the prisons.

Problems that are bad enough to cause a need for laws against drugs.

Is premature death a problem? How many families have suffered because of a death from a skiing accident? Do you suggest criminalizing skiing?

If people aren't willing to stop,they should at least be willing to accept what comes of that.

Incarceration should not be the result of possessing a weed that grows in the ground. Since you are Christian, you must feel that God created marijuana. Do you think He created it with the purpose of jailing people?

Dopers are notorious for not taking resposibility, any responsibility for what they do while high.

PEOPLE are notorious for being irresponsible. Do you support criminalizing irresponsibility? If someone gets fired from his job for being habitually late, should we lock him up?

Selznak · May 21, 2006

Definitely legalize it. The prohibition of marijuana has resulted in more problems than the drug itself poses.

Harlan Norris · May 22, 2006

nvxplorer said:
Life is filled with problems. If we locked up everyone who experienced problems, we'd have no one left to guard the prisons.

Is premature death a problem? How many families have suffered because of a death from a skiing accident? Do you suggest criminalizing skiing?

Incarceration should not be the result of possessing a weed that grows in the ground. Since you are Christian, you must feel that God created marijuana. Do you think He created it with the purpose of jailing people?

PEOPLE are notorious for being irresponsible. Do you support criminalizing irresponsibility? If someone gets fired from his job for being habitually late, should we lock him up?

Look, you,ve said that you are for even more testing for substance abuse. That all should be tested. Does this not resemble the law? Ok, it's legal to smoke pot but it's not allowed in the workplace.All this will do is shut down the country.There will be cases in court against the testing requirement. The arguement will be that since pot is legal, companies shouldn't be able to say whether or not one can have it in their system. It will be like alchohol,which by the way is a terrible burdon on the workplace.You are saying that the law is responsible for the ills of society. I'm saying that laws against addictive drugs should remain. It's not the law but the addiction that causes the problems in society. A persons behavior is not enhanced that is made better by drug use.It looks to me like there is a dark day comming in this nation. I believe drug law will become harsher. I can visualise a time when being caught with a bag of dope can send an otherwise decent citizen to some place like Gitmo. They are listening to our phone calls as I write. I'm definately not for this,but it's obvious to me that the people no longer rule govt. Quite the opposite. There's nothin stoppin em. Dopers, beware.

xMinionX · May 22, 2006

Harlan Norris said:
Look, you,ve said that you are for even more testing for substance abuse. That all should be tested. Does this not resemble the law? Ok, it's legal to smoke pot but it's not allowed in the workplace.All this will do is shut down the country.There will be cases in court against the testing requirement. The arguement will be that since pot is legal, companies shouldn't be able to say whether or not one can have it in their system. It will be like alchohol,which by the way is a terrible burdon on the workplace.You are saying that the law is responsible for the ills of society. I'm saying that laws against addictive drugs should remain. It's not the law but the addiction that causes the problems in society. A persons behavior is not enhanced that is made better by drug use.It looks to me like there is a dark day comming in this nation. I believe drug law will become harsher. I can visualise a time when being caught with a bag of dope can send an otherwise decent citizen to some place like Gitmo. They are listening to our phone calls as I write. I'm definately not for this,but it's obvious to me that the people no longer rule govt. Quite the opposite. There's nothin stoppin em. Dopers, beware.

Oh, c'mon. Pot is a joke as a hard drug. Heck, they make entire movies around its use. Celebrities have risen openly stating that they use it. People just don't see it as a dangerous drug anymore. The world is getting more tolerant of it. If anything, the exact opposite of what you describe will happen. I suspect that pot will be legalized within this country in under 25 years.

nvxplorer · May 22, 2006

Harlan Norris said:
Look, you,ve said that you are for even more testing for substance abuse. That all should be tested. Does this not resemble the law? Ok, it's legal to smoke pot but it's not allowed in the workplace.All this will do is shut down the country.There will be cases in court against the testing requirement. The arguement will be that since pot is legal, companies shouldn't be able to say whether or not one can have it in their system. It will be like alchohol,which by the way is a terrible burdon on the workplace.You are saying that the law is responsible for the ills of society. I'm saying that laws against addictive drugs should remain. It's not the law but the addiction that causes the problems in society. A persons behavior is not enhanced that is made better by drug use.It looks to me like there is a dark day comming in this nation. I believe drug law will become harsher. I can visualise a time when being caught with a bag of dope can send an otherwise decent citizen to some place like Gitmo. They are listening to our phone calls as I write. I'm definately not for this,but it's obvious to me that the people no longer rule govt. Quite the opposite. There's nothin stoppin em. Dopers, beware.

This response is completely irrelevant to to the post you quoted. Care to address my points?

Mistia · May 22, 2006

I have argued for years to have it legalized, it is in the same category as alcohol and cigarettes anyway, and I personally think those two drugs are more harmful than marijuana.

Legalize it, tax it, watch drunken violent crime go down and the sale of mars bars go up!

meebs · May 22, 2006

Mistia said:
I have argued for years to have it legalized, it is in the same category as alcohol and cigarettes anyway, and I personally think those two drugs are more harmful than marijuana.

Legalize it, tax, watch drunken violent crime go down and the sale of mars bars go up!

we're trying to fight obesity too..

WalksWithChrist · May 22, 2006

Harlan Norris said:
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.

Well, I read your latest posts just now, and I must say they don't make a whole lot of sense. No offense! I can actually make a solid case for legalization using your own words, but I think that would be a waste of my time. I really see you have your opinion set, so I'll end my contribution here now. Unless of course you want to process some of the facts presented here instead of just generalizing and repeating yourself.

Let's take all that money we're spending on *not* keeping drugs off the streets and locking people up and put it to a better use. Let's wage a "War Against Irresponsible Drug Use" campaign. Just for the record, if pot becomes legal I'm not crazy about the idea of legalizing other harder drugs. But that's another topic...

susanann · May 22, 2006

xMinionX said:
Celebrities have risen openly stating that they use it. .

Even the president of the United States admitted using it.

WalksWithChrist · May 22, 2006

susanann said:
Even the president of the United States admitted using it.

Which one?

Harlan Norris · May 23, 2006

xMinionX said:
Oh, c'mon. Pot is a joke as a hard drug. Heck, they make entire movies around its use. Celebrities have risen openly stating that they use it. People just don't see it as a dangerous drug anymore. The world is getting more tolerant of it. If anything, the exact opposite of what you describe will happen. I suspect that pot will be legalized within this country in under 25 years.

Well, what I'm saying is the govenment arguement will be, that drug money is going to support terrorism. It will be presented as a national security issue,just like phone tapps.It won't matter if it's true or not.They've found a way to do whatever they want. If no one is standing up against phone tapps. Who will stand up for drug deals? Remember Tommie Chong? He had a line of bongs he sold online.He was arrested and jailed for contributing to the delinquency of minors. He no longer has this business. Here recently, there was a guy that was selling pot seed worldwide. He lived in Canada. Federal agents went up to Canada and arrested him for selling pot seed in the US. No one stood in the way.

Marijuana

What is your disposition on marijuana?

Legalize it.

Medical uses only.

Keep illegal.

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Take two snuggles and call me in the morning

Senior Veteran

Senior Contributor

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Contributor

No King But Jesus

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Senior Contributor

MistyPaws

The dev!l loves rock and roll

Seeking God's Will

Senior Veteran

Seeking God's Will

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency