|10-06-2007 10:21 AM|
Not government brain washing...you asked stoner or drunk? We answered and it turned that way cuz you didn't give us any other choices.
The replies were heading towards asnwering your original question...but you as the OP asked a different question...that's how it got turned....unless you work for the government!
|10-06-2007 07:33 AM|
|10-06-2007 07:10 AM|
That's why I just smoke crack.
|10-06-2007 07:01 AM|
The general pot smoker that smokes it in their own home is only hurting themselves and as long as it doesn't involve me I really do not care, but if someone brings weed into our house or is impared by it at my work then it involves me and I am not afraid to send them on their way or turn them in. My reasoning is that even if it is less harmfull then some legal drugs it is still illegal. This puts me and my family at risk for the loss of a job or a stint in the county jail. In my teens I saw some really idiotic things done by Pot heads (usually followed by "Dude!!!that was so cool...Dude!!! are you OK...HEHEHE WOW MAN") but I have never seen any that were a danger to others unless their stunts were done in a car. I work, and have worked in some really dangerous jobs. I would not want an alcoholic or a stoner watching my back when it comes to my livelyhood or safety. I will agree with what was said. In some jobs it doesn't matter if a person is a stoner. I agree the government has no right to make drug testing a law, but if you are hireing in as a govt. employee they have every right to test just like a company that is attempting to protect their own interests.
Found several sites to read up on become better informed on the drug. This one seemed to be the most authentic to me.
Quoted from site as "Marijana dangers"
|10-06-2007 05:28 AM|
|mmasuperman12||all you have to do is have a fit for duty screening it takes your BAC and tests you for drugs then no one can bitch that they are singling out druggies if you blow a .04 you are asked to go home and not to return for 5 years. and i havent smoked weed but i do drink and smoke cigarettes but it is my responsibility not to have a beer 5 hours before work. some poeple dont abide by that rule but the money i am making right now to post this is just stupid to lose it for a beer or poppin a pill|
|10-06-2007 02:58 AM|
Government Brain washing mahn
|10-05-2007 09:48 PM|
|Gary1129||Ive never been tested.........g|
|10-05-2007 09:07 PM|
i say, whats it matter either way? i use to be 100% against pot, but anymore, even tho i dont smoke the stuff, im more understanding of it and how little it truley does to you. but, at the same time, its just simply the law to not smoke it. so, if you're getting ready to go into a job that wants to screen you, and you are smart enough to not smoke anything before the screening by how ever many days it can be traced back to, then you have nothing to worry about anyways. so why complain about the screening process. i dont think its an invasion of our privacy so much as the company trying to protect their own asses.
its like where i work, i drive a forklift 12 hrs a night, and if you wreck one, you have to go and get a drug test. but its purely just to save their asses. plus, you dont want a guy driving a 9000 pound or 18000 pound fork lift if hes high or drunk..lol...that could make for a bad day
|10-05-2007 07:56 PM|
|10-05-2007 07:50 PM|
well i've missed most of the convo and its too much to read. so sorry if what i say has been discussed. but heres my thoughts.....
i think its sad that the world has gotten to the pointing of needing to do random and pre-hire drug test.
i am also aware of people that do smoke and people i went to school with that smoked. and for some odd reason, some of them are very smart actually. not just dummies melted to the couch like many people would leave you to believe.
i had another point but forgot it. sorry, its been a long week. i'll come back to this thread later
|10-05-2007 07:43 PM|
|10-05-2007 07:34 PM|
|deverhart||Im pissed that I get picked for a random every time we are due for randoms... doesnt seem so random :-( Regardless I am drug free personally and fully support testing especially in my field where I have to make safety sensitive decisions as part of my daily job|
|10-05-2007 07:24 PM|
To answer the OP's question. I am for drug screening. Not for just certian jobs but any job the boss wants. Random of everyone not just individuals who the boss thinks is lacking in performance and is looking for a way to fire a person. And yes I think Peace Officers should be included. (myself a peace officer).
The problem with stoners or the legalization of marijuana is that many stoners don't stop at just marijuana. Other illegal drugs are taken as well that are much more dangerous. Now alcoholics on the other hand very seldom partake in any other drugs.
The next question I will guess one would be asking is where do I get my information....6+ years of dealing with addicts in the drug Court in San Bernardino County.
|10-05-2007 05:10 PM|
|10-05-2007 04:23 PM|
A weekend every now and then, thats a different story, I see no problem at all.
Now from a business perspective, they have every right in the world to test and re-test if desired. If the employee doesn't like it, or like stated above can't pass the test, there are a lot of other employment opportunities out there for ya, go elsewhere.
|10-05-2007 04:22 PM|
It's funny how tobacco & alcohol are legal, & taxed. And really no one goes out of their way to grow tobacco in their own back yard or closet, and no one really brews their own moonshine to get out of the expense of buying it from a store & paying the taxes. Wouldn't you think it would work the same with marijuana ?
As far as testing, I work in a machine shop and initial & random tests are necessary. Not for personal safety so much (although someone impaired might be more prone to hurting themself) but for the sake of the owners expense of getting a $100,000 machine repaired because some guy was woozy & daydreaming (trippin').
If there was a law, or a way to have a person who is a drug or alcohol user to be held responsible if an accident or damage was caused by his/her impairment........that would be one thing. But right now a guy can come to work drunk and do $20,000 in damage to a machine, then walk away from it.
Owners/bosses need something to protect them, and random testing is what they have.
But the government shouldn't be the one deciding who should be tested in the non-government workplace. Leave it up to the private sector owner/boss to decide what they need for their particular situation.
|10-05-2007 03:54 PM|
|1BLKJP||If people aren't bright enough to pass a drug test when they start then they don't rightly deserve the job.|
|10-05-2007 03:42 PM|
What I was going to say has been said a couple of times above. If you don't like the policy, work elsewhere. Companies are just evaluating the risk they are taking on an employee... If a company hires someone, spends 10's of thousands of dollars in training, and then they get picked up for cocaine possesion, they are possibly out an employee and have to spend that same 10's of thousands of dollars to train someone new.
I am really indifferent to the whole pot thing, I don't personally smoke it, but don't care if you do. But until the law is changed (if ever) it is still an illegal substance, and you can/will go to jail if you get caught with enough of it, so companies have to cover themselves.
|10-05-2007 03:06 PM|
I think they should legalize weed (I don't smoke it) and tax the shit out of it like they to alcohol and tobacco. As far as drug testing goes I feel that it should most definately be left up to the business. Like it was said previously, "if you don't like it go work elsewhere". However, under no circumstances do I believe the government should have a hand in regulating this for others.
|10-05-2007 02:59 PM|
My opinion is It's a iffy subject but I agree with skeeter for the most part.
|10-05-2007 02:39 PM|
If the employee doesn't like the rules he or she is free to work elsewhere.
Freedom is great as long as it's freedom for everyone.
Drug tests look for more than just weed, many mind altering substances can have lingering or even recurring effects that could pose a danger in certain jobs.
Personally, I all for legalizing weed, it's been proven over and over again that it's less dangerous than alcohol.
I have no interest in using it but I can't understand why we waste billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting something less harmful than Budweiser.
|10-05-2007 02:29 PM|
|10-05-2007 02:24 PM|
|OdhinnsChick||Don't make me search the house next time I come over Bro. :/|
|10-05-2007 02:02 PM|
Just because someone smokes say weed on the weekend, does that mean they will come on the job and light up?
|10-05-2007 01:50 PM|
|10-05-2007 01:49 PM|
Security, machinery operators, medical workers, drivers and so on need testing, basically anyone with a job that can put someone elses safety at risk I don't have a problem testing.
The checker at Wally world? not so much. There are jobs where it just doesn't matter.
Now don't get me wrong. I think it's the owners right to decide if he wants to test his employees and if they don't like it they're free to work somewhere else. I just don't want the government deciding that everybody needs testing.
|10-05-2007 10:38 AM|
In my line of work a 2578 gross ton vessel would require drug testing. You would be suprised just how many ships are out there in the open ocean. the problem lies in that crews rotate with 3 months on and 3 months off so technically they are on vacation. I am sure some smoke while off but clean up 30 days prior to going back to work. Drug testing I feel is mostly to find the frequent abuser a weekend toker may pop positive but the daily smoker would for sure. that being said I woould rather have a stoner drive me home than a drunk.
|10-05-2007 10:33 AM|
|10-05-2007 10:03 AM|
|Odhinn||In my chosen field I am glad they have many randoms and new hire screening. Enough death happens when a 10 thousand ton train and a non-attentive general public are involved without the help of people being impaired by drugs or alcohol.|
|10-05-2007 09:22 AM|
I think most jobs should require it, along with randoms, not just the new hire test, or after you are injured or have a near miss. If you come to work drunk or high, its a choice you make, and take the chances of getting caught, and whatever happens with that.
I understand people use it, and its about the same drinking, but its still not legal. If it was legal, hold it to the same standards as drinking on the job.
|This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|