U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-14-2012, 01:35 PM
 
14 posts, read 25,184 times
Reputation: 29

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
I don't think they can say what you can do on your own time. If someone wants to have a drink but shows up to work sober that should be all they care about. If someone smokes pot but shows up to work sober again that is all they should care about. There needs to be better tests that can show the difference.
thats exactly what I think... find a breathalyzer or some other test that can tell how much is acting on your system, not if you have smoked in last 30+ days. Its just a crappy standard. I gladly would give up any habit such as pot if it meant employment but I think weed is at more of a disadvantage due to testing.
I am also a believer in its medicinal benefits.
you can have narcotics in your system and not lose a job (so long as you are prescribed) but pot you cant? hmm let me think which is more likely to impair you, yeah... the narcotics. I'm just fristrated with the rationale of it all ....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2012, 01:42 PM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,034,478 times
Reputation: 3566
If I as a employer do not like what you do on your own time , I can fire you because of it.
Most states are "at will" employment states, you are free to quit at any time and I can fire you at any time for any reason. (yes unions make it harder to fire a bad employee)
well, just as long as it is not related to your sex, age or religion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo View Post
.
I don't believe an employer has a right to interfere in your personal business, except when it has something to do with your work performance.

Last edited by snofarmer; 11-14-2012 at 01:56 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,034,478 times
Reputation: 3566
Not true, if you are under the influence it does not matter if the substance that caused it was prescribed or not, or if the substance ingested was legal or not.
You could loose your job.
Did you tell your employer you were taking a narcotic?
You didn't and you caused a injury or are injured and or damage property?
You will be fired , denied workmans comp and be held liable for the damages.


So the state will still be a safe place to work and to move to.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinesfamily5 View Post
you can have narcotics in your system and not lose a job (so long as you are prescribed)....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Le Grand, Ca
858 posts, read 1,335,624 times
Reputation: 233
There is a simple fix to all of this. Be your own employer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Northern MN
3,869 posts, read 13,034,478 times
Reputation: 3566
To a point, you still have to be insurable.
Responsibility still creeps in even if your a sol proprietor or if you have employes.
Your liability Ins will only go so far and they are a stickler about not covering illegal acts.

But a business could see a up tick in liability Ins and workmans comp Ins rates, if injury rates associated to mj use go up compared to the past rates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xplorer View Post
There is a simple fix to all of this. Be your own employer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,764 posts, read 16,828,014 times
Reputation: 9316
Airborneguy wrote: Still nothing on what 'potheads' refuse to take responsibility for? I'm starting to think those who made the statement have nothing of substance to explain it.

That's because they don't!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 06:03 PM
 
3,147 posts, read 2,928,585 times
Reputation: 1858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
I think your both wrong. Don't expect it to be clear cut and absolute in either direction. Although much MJ testing "could" go away, IMO there will always be testing for narcotics and in jobs where public /worker safety is an issue.
I see Cannabis legalization as a one way street, I believe we have made world changes here in Colorado, we just have to wait to see them. A state standing up to the federal government and the U.N. on this issue is unprecedented since the U.N. treaty was signed in 1961.

I believe that one day in the not to distant future, we will see it right along bourbon on shelves. The laws will become more relaxed gradually. Happened with alcohol prohibition.

At that point testing for Cannabis would be akin to testing for alcohol would be now. I think it will be rare, like reserved for astronauts rare.

This is just what I think will happen, not necessarily disagreeing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
DON'T talk about macro-economics, Friedman, Keynes, trickle down, trickle up, etc.

OKAY to talk the politics of the MJ amendment.
Is it ok to make generalizations like the ones earlier in the thread about the "left" and "right" and the such? That is my only other question, otherwise your list is pretty specific.

Again, wasn't trying to rub you the wrong way, just wanted clarification. My mind likes to have the facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 06:57 PM
 
3,104 posts, read 2,827,735 times
Reputation: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airborneguy View Post
Still nothing on what 'potheads' refuse to take responsibility for? I'm starting to think those who made the statement have nothing of substance to explain it.
Or no actual definition of 'pothead' either (as I asked for earlier).

Seems to me it's just an insult they like to throw around in an attempt to discredit all cannabis users - typical tactic of the 'morally superior' abstainers.

Even a complete idiot knows that not everyone who uses alcohol an alcoholic, but that is exactly what some posters here would have you believe when it comes to cannabis. Poor form indeed.

A small percentage of gun owners are criminals. But we do not ban guns because of this.
A small percentage of drinkers are alcoholics. But we do not ban Alcohol because of this.
A small percentage of cannabis users are potheads. But we (no longer) ban cannabis because of this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 07:05 PM
 
3,104 posts, read 2,827,735 times
Reputation: 4029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xplorer View Post
There is a simple fix to all of this. Be your own employer.
Yeah baby

Frank Sinatra - My Way (1969) - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2012, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Wherabouts Unknown!
7,764 posts, read 16,828,014 times
Reputation: 9316
waneroo wrote: Sorry I don't buy into that "no one is better than the other person". People get judged on their work performance, ethics, character, trustworthiness, etc. as they should.

Intrinsically, "no one is better than the other person". At the 'judgement level', there are differences indeed because each and every one of us judges according to our biases and prejudices. And of course, the judgements that any individual levels are always the ones that everyone SHOULD be accountable to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top