2 U.S. States Legalize Adult Consumption of Cannabis

[jl2035]

You lucky americanz... I wonder when the shit will be legal in Europe... 

[1715546767]

1715546767

[1715546767]

1715546767

[myrkul]

Fixed that for you. But I 100% agree. I was speaking of pre-employment pee tests. You know, the ones where they check to see if you've smoked in the past 3 months. (They don't check for past history of alcohol use...)

Yeah but there is a difference, where alcohol only stays in blood for a couple hours.
So are you saying that those who smokes have to wait 3 months before getting a job?

Any job that requires a pre-employment drug screening, yes. (alcohol metabolites can be detected in urine for a day or two, IIRC...)

[AndrewBUD]

You lucky americanz... I wonder when the shit will be legal in Europe... 

Lucky american's ? Dude 2 states legalized personal use.....  



and the same thing is happening in Europe, you can find a few places that have legal personal use....

[Badonkadonk]

You lucky americanz... I wonder when the shit will be legal in Europe... 

like with 99% of what the usa does, the western world will follow in due time...
dont ask me why tho, cause theres allot of crazy shit going on lol

[bitcoinbear]

What I don't understand it that since it became legal, does that mean that companies cannot refuse to hire you anymore if they find out that you smoked weed?

Pot smokers aren't going to suddenly be made a protected class under civil rights and other anti-discrimination laws.  

But it should reduce the number of pee tests.

Companies can require alcohol tests, but alcohol is legal. It is not about the legality of the substance, it is about the impairment to performing the job functions. If you come to work high impaired and put other people in danger, then you should be fired.

Fixed that for you. But I 100% agree. I was speaking of pre-employment pee tests. You know, the ones where they check to see if you've smoked in the past 3 months. (They don't check for past history of alcohol use...)

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

[myrkul]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

[BitcoinCoffee.com]

I'm nervous to see how the federal perspective unfolds.

It will be unfortunate if they take it to supreme court.

[SgtSpike]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

And how, exactly, would a company objectively test for impairment?

[myrkul]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

And how, exactly, would a company objectively test for impairment?

Google is your friend. First result: http://workrights.us/?products=impairment-testing-does-it-work
There are several methods.

[SgtSpike]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

And how, exactly, would a company objectively test for impairment?

Google is your friend. First result: http://workrights.us/?products=impairment-testing-does-it-work
There are several methods.

I don't care to read a 200 page paper on the subject.  Just give a quick summary - what are ways that a company can objectively test for impairment?

[SaintDevil]

In Colorado, voters approved Amendment 64  that supports the legalization of marijuana on a recreational basis and will amend the state constitution to legalize and regulate the production, possession, and distribution of marijuana for persons age 21 and older. Article XVIII of the constitution of the state of Colorado would be amended by the addition of a new section: ‘Personal Use and Regulation of Marijuana.’ Regarding the workplace, Section 16(6)(a) states:
“Nothing in this section is intended to require an employer to permit or accommodate the use, consumption, possession, transfer, display, transportation, sale or growing or marijuana in the workplace or to affect the ability of employers to have policies restricting the use of marijuana by employees.”

In Washington, voters supported Initiative 502  that will legalize and regulate the production, possession, and distribution of marijuana for persons age 21 and older. The Washington referendum called for a 25% tax rate imposed when the grower sells marijuana to the processor, when the processor sells marijuana to the retailer, and when the retailer sells marijuana to the customer. Estimates for how much tax revenue the Washington measure would create run as high as $500 million.
Concerning the workplace, State Drug Testing Laws Monthly reports Initiative 502 does not address if the decriminalization of recreational marijuana use requires workplace accommodation but does say the Washington State Institute for Public Policy must create reports on the effects of marijuana that must specifically include the effects on the workplace.

Source:
http://www.esrcheck.com/wordpress/2012/11/08/marijuana-legalization-legislation-passed-in-colorado-and-washington-could-affect-workplace-drug-testing/

[myrkul]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

And how, exactly, would a company objectively test for impairment?

Google is your friend. First result: http://workrights.us/?products=impairment-testing-does-it-work
There are several methods.

I don't care to read a 200 page paper on the subject.  Just give a quick summary - what are ways that a company can objectively test for impairment?

One of the methods used: http://www.eyedynamics.com/products.htm
Another: http://www.bowles-langley.com/job-safety/
And one more: http://www.pmifit.com/

All three of these have proven results.

[SgtSpike]

That is only because alcohol is harder to measure than cannabis. Where I work, we sometimes have to take a random trip to the clinic for a pee test and alcohol breathilizer. So they are measuring alcohol use. And before I started this job I took the pee test and breathed into the machine. While few people would be drunk going into a job interview, I suppose doing the test screens out the real screwballs.

All a UA proves is that you used a chemical. It tests for metabolites. It proves that your system has processed a chemical. Testing for impairment instead of the presence of a chemical or its metabolites will catch not only the stoners and drunks, but also the ones who don't get enough sleep, or otherwise are a danger to their co-workers, and more importantly, not catch the people who had a beer or a joint last night after work and aren't impaired now.

And how, exactly, would a company objectively test for impairment?

Google is your friend. First result: http://workrights.us/?products=impairment-testing-does-it-work
There are several methods.

I don't care to read a 200 page paper on the subject.  Just give a quick summary - what are ways that a company can objectively test for impairment?

One of the methods used: http://www.eyedynamics.com/products.htm
Another: http://www.bowles-langley.com/job-safety/
And one more: http://www.pmifit.com/

All three of these have proven results.

Those are pretty cool TBH!  I agree with impairment testing.

[AndrewBUD]

A large percentage of construction workers in Canada smoke pot all day long while working..... IMO it doesn't impair you enough to affect your job. It should not make a difference if someone wants to smoke on their own free time.

It boggles the mind how it can be okay for someone to drink but not smoke weed...


If I drank 10 beers. I wouldn't be functioning normal for 2 days afterwards... If I smoked 10 joints I would be fine after my nap......

[myrkul]

Those are pretty cool TBH!  I agree with impairment testing.

Much smarter than checking for evidence that you've sobered up, huh?

If I drank 10 beers. I wouldn't be functioning normal for 2 days afterwards... If I smoked 10 joints I would be fine after my nap......

Assuming you made it to 10 before the nap...

[SgtSpike]

Those are pretty cool TBH!  I agree with impairment testing.

Much smarter than checking for evidence that you've sobered up, huh?

Yes.  I mean, I don't agree with illegal drug usage or anything (nor do I agree with marijuana usage, but w/e), but it does make sense to test on the capability for a person to do their job vs what they've done to themselves last night.

[AndrewBUD]

Those are pretty cool TBH!  I agree with impairment testing.

Much smarter than checking for evidence that you've sobered up, huh?

If I drank 10 beers. I wouldn't be functioning normal for 2 days afterwards... If I smoked 10 joints I would be fine after my nap......

Assuming you made it to 10 before the nap...

LoL yeah..... 10 joints would probably make me puke.. same with 10 beers....

[dank]

Lightweight.

[BitcoinCoffee.com]

The fed's might put up a weak fight, but they understand the inevitability. They knew this was coming. Now that Obama is re-elected for his last term, and the states are firming their ground, while medicalization keeps rapidly growing, I see more states to follow the legalization trend in the future.

[myrkul]

The fed's might put up a weak fight, but they understand the inevitability. They knew this was coming. Now that Obama is re-elected for his last term, and the states are firming their ground, while medicalization keeps rapidly growing, I see more states to follow the legalization trend in the future.

NORML is simultaneously throwing the hugest party ever, and shitting their shorts. "Woooo! We're winning!.... Oh, shit, this means we'll have to get real jobs."