• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Welfare drug testing, maybe I was wrong

The Man said:
What if you buy drugs on your own time and get busted for possession and sent to jail? Since you won't be showing up for work because you're in jail, that does effect your employer, no? Just one more reason it is completely reasonable that they weed out (no pun intended) drug users upon hiring.
Click to expand...

So I assume getting a DUI would justify banning the use of alcohol by employees?
 
What if...? said:
So I assume getting a DUI would justify banning the use of alcohol by employees?
Click to expand...

You can get a DUI on weed too. I said POSSESSION. Alcohol is a legal substance, marijuana is not. You cannot get thrown in jail for possession of alcohol if you are 21 and over and not on some sort of probation for criminal offenses. Marijuana, you get caught simply possessing it and you're going to jail and missing work.
 
The Man said:
You can get a DUI on weed too. I said POSSESSION. Alcohol is a legal substance, marijuana is not. You cannot get thrown in jail for possession of alcohol if you are 21 and over and not on some sort of probation for criminal offenses. Marijuana, you get caught simply possessing it and you're going to jail and missing work.
Click to expand...

That's a dodge.

You go to jail for a DUI and miss work too.

So if missing work for going to jail for possession justifies drug testing, going to jail for a DUI should justify banning the use of alcohol by employees.

Internal possession of too much alcohol while driving is against the law.
 
What if...? said:
That's a dodge.

You go to jail for a DUI and miss work too.

So if missing work for going to jail for possession justifies drug testing, going to jail for a DUI should justify banning the use of alcohol by employees.

Internal possession of too much alcohol while driving is against the law.
Click to expand...

It's not a dodge. A business can easily ban employee use of an illegal substance, like MJ or other drugs. Alcohol is not illegal, so it's not as easily justifiable for a company to ban its employees from using. Is it a perfect system? Absolutely not. But companies need to protect themselves the best they can by weeding out illegal drug users before they even get a chance to present a problem for them.
 
Companies have a right to drug test you and you have a right not to work there as simple as that .
 
The Man said:
It's not a dodge. A business can easily ban employee use of an illegal substance, like MJ or other drugs. Alcohol is not illegal, so it's not as easily justifiable for a company to ban its employees from using. Is it a perfect system? Absolutely not. But companies need to protect themselves the best they can by weeding out illegal drug users before they even get a chance to present a problem for them.
Click to expand...

So as an aside, can an employer in CO or WA now continue to ban pot use by employees using the same logic? Now that its legal there? Like alcohol?
 
What if...? said:
So as an aside, can an employer in CO or WA now continue to ban pot use by employees using the same logic? Now that its legal there? Like alcohol?
Click to expand...

I don't know if they can or not? They probably can, since it is still a federally banned substance. They shouldn't be able to though, IMO.
 
Last edited:
The Man said:
If it means that you can lose your job or not get hired for a job, then yes. You have to be a responsible adult. It's not 'wrong place at the wrong time'. Sorry, no adult is forced to be around marijuana smoke. That's a choice.

(Rabbit, for some reason I'm unable to quote your posts now, so I just copied and pasted).
Click to expand...

Well, this summer I saw Paul McCarthy when I was in San Francisco visiting my sister. You could smell pot in the crowd so that means it may be detected in my system. Let's say I have a job that makes me drug test and I fail because of it, not only could that ruin my employment, it could ruin my reputation in the company if I get fired for drug detection. It's not always going to work fairly and can have quite negative consequences. It doesn't mean you were irresponsible like some would like to believe.
 
code1211 said:
If someone is using and gets hurt as a result they should suffer the consequences. However regardless of their condition, their immediate care and the property damage is the financial responsibility of their employer.

The trouble is that they will probably also hurt others or destroy property. The lost time for the others or the exposure this gives their employer are both avoidable expenses.

The losers doing the damage are not operating in a vacuum. There are others around them hoping they will be capable of doing their job. The doper has more than just his own skin to take care of until he gets home to mommy's basement.
Click to expand...

Does this also apply to alcoholics and prescription drug abusers? Like I already mentioned in another post, I give employers credit to determine if a person is competent or not at their job by seeing how they work day to day. I believe a "stoner" would be pretty easy to detect.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Well, this summer I saw Paul McCarthy when I was in San Francisco visiting my sister. You could smell pot in the crowd so that means it may be detected in my system. Let's say I have a job that makes me drug test and I fail because of it, not only could that ruin my employment, it could ruin my reputation in the company if I get fired for drug detection. It's not always going to work fairly and can have quite negative consequences. It doesn't mean you were irresponsible like some would like to believe.
Click to expand...

You're not going to fail a drug test because you smelled pot at a concert. Come on rabbit, don't be ridiculous. The only way you could turn a positive drug test from second hand marijuana smoke would be if it were in close quarters, like in a car. And maybe not even then.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
Well, this summer I saw Paul McCarthy when I was in San Francisco visiting my sister. You could smell pot in the crowd so that means it may be detected in my system. Let's say I have a job that makes me drug test and I fail because of it, not only could that ruin my employment, it could ruin my reputation in the company if I get fired for drug detection. It's not always going to work fairly and can have quite negative consequences. It doesn't mean you were irresponsible like some would like to believe.
Click to expand...

So were you responsible and left . If you were only their for a few minutes after you smelt the pot it should only be in our system for a very short amount of time not days or even one day if you can even get second hand high in the first place
 
Un biased said:
So were you responsible and left . If you were only their for a few minutes after you smelt the pot it should only be in our system for a very short amount of time not days or even one day if you can even get second hand high in the first place
Click to expand...

No, I didn't leave because I went to see Paul McCarthy. One of my favorite musicians of all time. Someone smoking pot in the crowd isn't going to make me run and hole myself up in my sister's apartment until I leave San Fransico. Talk about having zero freedom to enjoy your life!
 
The Man said:
You're not going to fail a drug test because you smelled pot at a concert. Come on rabbit, don't be ridiculous. The only way you could turn a positive drug test from second hand marijuana smoke would be if it were in close quarters, like in a car. And maybe not even then.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can be detected.
 
What if...? said:
I notice no breakdown.

Traffic accident studies do the same thing.

Testing positive for pot puts a mark in the "under the influence" box even if the use was weeks before.

Useful for pro-testing/anti-drug propaganda, not so much for determining whether anyone was actually impaired in any way.
Click to expand...




You're probably right, Dude. Drugs have no adverse affect on anything in your life
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
"After an hour of breathing second hand smoke, I used the oral swab to test my THC level. It registered positive for THC in my system. If I was subject to a random drug test after my exposure to Edwin's smoke, I most likely would have been fired" Woman claims she was fired for inhaling second-hand pot smoke | Local & Regional | Seattle News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOMO News
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I'm calling bull on that article. I guarantee you that woman smoked the pot herself, and then tried to make an excuse because she failed a drug test.
 
code1211 said:
You're probably right, Dude. Drugs have no adverse affect on anything in your life
Click to expand...

This would be "failing to draw the line".

Including people who simply test positive for pot or whatever tells us NOTHING about impairment. Yet is commonly put in the "impaired" column in anti-drug propaganda. Which is what MAKES it propaganda.

My point has always been an employer has a right to an unimpaired workforce. They're paying for ones time and it isnt unreasonable to expect sobriety.They just shouldn't get to dictate behavior during unpaid hours. Employment shouldn't be a form of indenture.
 
Mason66 said:
You are comparing coffee to narcotics?
Click to expand...

You said drugs. Caffeine is a drug.

One that many believe improves their performance at work.

Legality and illegality are pretty arbitrary distinctions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom