The sky is not falling in Wash or Col Like the anti drug crusaders said.

[Texmex]

I know people that have left Florida to move to CO to get on unemployment there and get dope. Sounds like a wonderful plan.

There are always some who scam the system.

 

[James D Hill]

Ok. And what does that have to do with worker protection in the work place as it relates to drug testing to insure co-workers are safe?

I have said this to you before and I will say it again. As long as an employee shows up to work sober and does a good job who cares? Being stupid is a far bigger risk on the job that having THC in your pee. If you can't handle the job for whatever reason fire them. Who cares what the reason is. For far too long the drug testing companies and the anti drug crusaders have spread lies so employers will drug test. This helps make up for the fact the police lost the drug war long ago by getting employers involved. That did not work either but it did create a underclass of pot smokers who where capable of holding down those very jobs.

 

[James D Hill]

I'm not talking about blood alcohol. I'm talking about chronic alcohol use that can now be detected just like pot use days, or even weeks after imbibing.
Certainly if you don't want someone who smoked a little pot last month driving the fork-lift you don't want someone who got drunk last weekend to be endangering your life either ...Right?

Who cares as long as they drive that forklift just fine? If they don't fire them or put them on another job. It is just that simple. You don't believe all that work place safety propaganda spread by the anti drug crusaders or the drug testing companies do you? They have been lying about pot for 100 years my friend so what makes these lies any different?

 

[Buck Ewer]

There are always some who scam the system.

How do you get unemployment insurance in a state you never worked in?
We have here an amusing tsk tsk story with absolutely no basis in fact.

You have been had Tex.:2wave:

 

[Buck Ewer]

Who cares as long as they drive that forklift just fine? If they don't fire them or put them on another job. It is just that simple. You don't believe all that work place safety propaganda spread by the anti drug crusaders or the drug testing companies do you? They have been lying about pot for 100 years my friend so what makes these lies any different?

You miss my point. I am illustrating that all this panic over someone testing positive for traces of pot use is foolish when no one is testing for traces of alcohol use.
Neither the guy who recreationally uses weed after work nor the guy who tosses down a shot and a beer at home pose any hazard while they are on the job sober.
Detectable traces do not indicate intoxication at work... but the pot smoker faces being fired for recreational use at home because traces may show up in a sample.
If employees do that they ought to also test for alcohol use off the job as well and fire users of alcohol. (They really should do neither.)
There are tests that can detect alcohol usage weeks after a worker was actually drunk.
Judgement and discipline of either for their off the job use is retarded.
Pot use is becoming so common in Colorado that employers are beginning to realize that because weed is now legal, testing for traces in the body is foolish and like alcohol the only "on the job test" that really means anything is an "under the influence test" Just like alcohol.

 

[Slartibartfast]

So legalized pot is going well in both states. People are not smoking more pot and the attitude of our teens has not changed because of it. They love the drug as much now as they did before. The fact is these common sense laws ( Col's new law is better that Wash's) should be adopted everywhere and the cash will flow into the state and not the dealers. Damn isn't that what we where saying all along. We always knew you anti drug warriors where full of **** and now we all know it. We need to shut these moralist up on other issues too.

Asking for revision of laws allowing employers to discharge those who test positive for weed is not something I see as realistic at this time. Instead I would prefer more research be dedicated to finding a method to determine if the employee is currently under the influence or if its in their blood stream from previous use.

An employee who us currently under the influence can easily be a danger in the work place, especially if they have access to heavy machinery or are in an unsafe environment. As such employers have an obligation towards workplace health and safety.

My view is if such a test is developed than the employers no longer have a leg to stand on to discipline workers any more than they would alcohol in those states.

Right now the best developed are what they use in Australia and frankly those devices are ill designed and hardly work.

 

[CRUE CAB]

How do you get unemployment insurance in a state you never worked in?
We have here an amusing tsk tsk story with absolutely no basis in fact.

You have been had Tex.:2wave:

Easy, just move there and tell them you can find work.

 

[americanwoman]

I know people that have left Florida to move to CO to get on unemployment there and get dope. Sounds like a wonderful plan.

I know a family who left Nebraska to move to CO to be able to get cannabis oil, which helps to stabilize their 5 year olds seizures. Sounds like a wonderful plan.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I know a family who left Nebraska to move to CO to be able to get cannabis oil, which helps to stabilize their 5 year olds seizures. Sounds like a wonderful plan.

Plenty of seizure meds out there without having to up root family.

 

[What if...?]

Asking for revision of laws allowing employers to discharge those who test positive for weed is not something I see as realistic at this time. Instead I would prefer more research be dedicated to finding a method to determine if the employee is currently under the influence or if its in their blood stream from previous use.

An employee who us currently under the influence can easily be a danger in the work place, especially if they have access to heavy machinery or are in an unsafe environment. As such employers have an obligation towards workplace health and safety.

My view is if such a test is developed than the employers no longer have a leg to stand on to discipline workers any more than they would alcohol in those states.

Right now the best developed are what they use in Australia and frankly those devices are ill designed and hardly work.

They have a metabolic marker that indicates actually being under the influence. They are hammering out a "level" like blood alcohol levels.

The tricks gonna be getting the various states, and businesses to establish "realistic" levels so they only bust those actually impaired.

 

[What if...?]

Plenty of seizure meds out there without having to up root family.

Never met a person on seizure meds that wasn't impaired by them, even after stopping. No one wants their child whacked out on phenobarbital, and some of the worst seizure conditions don't respond to conventional meds.

That said, CBD, the anti-seizure component in pot, isn't psychoactive. Strains/processes have been developed with little to no thc. And the effectiveness is almost miraculous. Children dying from seizures have almost complete remission from the first dose.

 

[americanwoman]

Plenty of seizure meds out there without having to up root family.

This family had tried dozens of seizure medication, some with narcotics and none worked. The child was still having 10 - 100 seizures per day. With the natural cannabis oil, which contains very little thc and does not get the child high at all it reduced the seizures to a couple a month. Yet it's illegal where they lived so I could totally imagine that's a big incentive to root up the family and move for the family. Some people put their children's well being over their own personal life or views.

 

[CRUE CAB]

This family had tried dozens of seizure medication, some with narcotics and none worked. The child was still having 10 - 100 seizures per day. With the natural cannabis oil, which contains very little thc and does not get the child high at all it reduced the seizures to a couple a month. Yet it's illegal where they lived so I could totally imagine that's a big incentive to root up the family and move for the family. Some people put their children's well being over their own personal life or views.

So ever epileptic should move to Colorado?
I actually have no issue with "medical" pot. But I know it will be abused. If there could be measures to make abuse kept at a minimum, I have no problem with it.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Never met a person on seizure meds that wasn't impaired by them, even after stopping. No one wants their child whacked out on phenobarbital, and some of the worst seizure conditions don't respond to conventional meds.

That said, CBD, the anti-seizure component in pot, isn't psychoactive. Strains/processes have been developed with little to no thc. And the effectiveness is almost miraculous. Children dying from seizures have almost complete remission from the first dose.

Define impaired, and you are wrong.

 

[Slartibartfast]

They have a metabolic marker that indicates actually being under the influence. They are hammering out a "level" like blood alcohol levels.

The tricks gonna be getting the various states, and businesses to establish "realistic" levels so they only bust those actually impaired.

Good. We are on our way to sensible legislation then

 

[americanwoman]

So ever epileptic should move to Colorado?
I actually have no issue with "medical" pot. But I know it will be abused. If there could be measures to make abuse kept at a minimum, I have no problem with it.

That's each persons personal decision but if I had a child with a serious medical issue that could be solved legally by moving to another state, it's a no-brainer that I would move in a heartbeat. I don't see how medicinal cannabis oil can be abused, it barely has any thc. I know it's not impossible but the good benefits outweigh the bad in this case.

 

[CRUE CAB]

That's each persons personal decision but if I had a child with a serious medical issue that could be solved legally by moving to another state, it's a no-brainer that I would move in a heartbeat. I don't see how medicinal cannabis oil can be abused, it barely has any thc. I know it's not impossible but the good benefits outweigh the bad in this case.

I don't disagree, but that is not the spirit of the law. That is a medical issue that doctors should be allowed to try in any state.

 

[americanwoman]

I don't disagree, but that is not the spirit of the law. That is a medical issue that doctors should be allowed to try in any state.

That's why it needs to be voted on to legalize, so the doctors can try it.

 

[Linc]

And this is because former anti-drug crusaders with huge money ties to the GOP have now become CEOs in their own marihuana-related companies. It's just how these Elite hypocritical GOPs roll. Even the "independent" POTUS candidate Gary Johnson is a CEO in medicinal dope industry .

 

[CRUE CAB]

That's why it needs to be voted on to legalize, so the doctors can try it.

Legalize medical or recreational? Or both? I am not down with both.

 

[americanwoman]

Legalize medical or recreational? Or both? I am not down with both.

I'm down with both. I don't think it's any worse smoking a little recreational pot at the end of the day than to drink a glass of wine. Just like people abuse alcohol, they are going to abuse pot but that's not a reason to outlaw it for all of us who don't abuse it.

 

[Ockham]

Legalize medical or recreational? Or both? I am not down with both.

Eventually it will all be legalized. By keeping it illegal (billions are spent on illegal drugs every year in the US) only increases it's mystique. Like alcohol, it needs to be regulated and controlled as well as taxed. Legalization will force parents who actually care about their kids to educate them on it - for schools to educate them on it and for people to take responsibility for their own recreational use. Prior to the 1930's the US had no drug war. Yes keep all recreational drugs illegal for anyone under 21 years of age - no brainer. Make laws that not only punish but severely educate kids who break these laws. After 21 however, as long as a person is not operating a vehicle or causing danger to themselves or others - let people do what they want to do. It's freedom of choice. Those who are addicts who cannot break themselves of such dependency I'm sorry to say will most likely end their lives prematurely. Those who can get and stay clean or those who refuse to imbibe, such legalization will make little difference.

Tax money used for the sale of these recreational drugs should only be used to open decontamination facilities - ownership should be privately run but publicly funded. It's the cost that goes with legalization.

 

[What if...?]

Define impaired, and you are wrong.

I will defer to your doctorate, Dr. Cruel Cab.

Not.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I will defer to your doctorate, Dr. Cruel Cab.

Not.

Do you have family with epilepsy?

 

[CRUE CAB]

Eventually it will all be legalized. By keeping it illegal (billions are spent on illegal drugs every year in the US) only increases it's mystique. Like alcohol, it needs to be regulated and controlled as well as taxed. Legalization will force parents who actually care about their kids to educate them on it - for schools to educate them on it and for people to take responsibility for their own recreational use. Prior to the 1930's the US had no drug war. Yes keep all recreational drugs illegal for anyone under 21 years of age - no brainer. Make laws that not only punish but severely educate kids who break these laws. After 21 however, as long as a person is not operating a vehicle or causing danger to themselves or others - let people do what they want to do. It's freedom of choice. Those who are addicts who cannot break themselves of such dependency I'm sorry to say will most likely end their lives prematurely. Those who can get and stay clean or those who refuse to imbibe, such legalization will make little difference.

Tax money used for the sale of these recreational drugs should only be used to open decontamination facilities - ownership should be privately run but publicly funded. It's the cost that goes with legalization.

Tax money like all tax money will be squandered on something else.