New Pot Law making people wanting to move to Colorado? (taxi driver, cost)
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.
I should think that those who consider themselves libertarian would find the legalized pot thing in line with libertarian thought.
If someone moved to a state for such a small reason, I'd suspect they have very little going on in their lives that might keep them anywhere, namely, a job, a house, a family, a sense of community... Same with the "free state" movement that never happened for New Hampshire. A young self-proclaimed libertarian friend of mine asked me if I thought it could work- that enough people would deliberately move to New Hampshire to make a libertarian state. I said the same thing- few people have so little going on that they can move for such a reason. (Friend ended up in Massachusetts because that's where companion bought a condo and he got a great job and has put down such adolescent ideas).
I have read that the routes and hubs and all of Mexican/Columbian cartels were set up in the marijuana trade and easily transferred to the meth, cocaine and heroin trade. MJ is hardest to transport, being smelly and bulky, and there's a whole lot more money in the other stuff.
I'd be happy if law enforcement energy and resources didn't go to put the social pot smoker into jail. Yes, many people move from social drinking/social smoking to abuse and addiction (or in the case of pot, compulsion). There is no medical treatment/detox for MJ compulsion and insurance won't cover it as they do for alcohol, benzos, and heroin. In my state, they won't cover detox from coke/crack because there is no physical withdrawal or treatment- person has to say they're suicidal to be admitted (easy enough- most people abusing such aren't in the best of moods). In my state, there is virtually no meth issue because of the easy availability of pharmaceuticals and coke.
I wish there were a program/system for people not to abuse substances, not to get into trouble with any of them, not to drive on them. Drunken drivers have been getting away with murder and mayhem for years. I hope anyone driving under any influence gets nailed, and hard. It would have saved me 35 stitches in my face.
I am actually looking to relocate to CO but my decision wasn't based on pot. Thats just an added perk....
even if its 'legal' its not going to matter to those of us who work jobs that drug test. especially since it stays in your system for 30-45 days....
which kinda sucks cause someone could go on a brinking binder on day off, go to work still buzzed with no worry but if I smoke on my off time it will haunt me for a whole month. bum deal.....
I am pro cannabis 100% for all uses , one plant can improve the american quality of life ...
I am actually looking to relocate to CO but my decision wasn't based on pot. Thats just an added perk....
even if its 'legal' its not going to matter to those of us who work jobs that drug test. especially since it stays in your system for 30-45 days....
which kinda sucks cause someone could go on a brinking binder on day off, go to work still buzzed with no worry but if I smoke on my off time it will haunt me for a whole month. bum deal.....
I am pro cannabis 100% for all uses , one plant can improve the american quality of life ...
Drug testing will go away. They don't test for alcohol because it is legal. Like you said, it stays in your system for ~30 days, drug testing gives absolutely no indication on whether you are getting high before work.
Avon, Colorado's Home Depot had to change their policies and drop the drug tests even before this amendment passed because they couldn't hire anyone. As you can guess their store has an abnormally high rate of accidents when compared to other Colorado stores, not. It is around average.
It is my gut feeling that this amendment is going to lead to cannabis being on pretty equal ground as alcohol, and that applies to drug testing as well.
Leave big politics out of this thread, it's about the pot law. There are other forums for discussing all sorts of economic models, with some very good discussions, and some very stupid ones too. But let's forego all of that in this thread.
Like don't say party names?
How are we not suppose to talk big politics when we are talking about a political issue on a state and federal issue?
Again, don't say party names, or only in direct reference to Cannabis? (Even though state law, taxation, and constitutionality are all political issues not directly about cannabis that affect this issue.)
Not trying to be confrontational or anything, I just don't see how you can talk about an amendment to a state constitution and not talk politics.
Drug testing will go away. They don't test for alcohol because it is legal. Like you said, it stays in your system for ~30 days, drug testing gives absolutely no indication on whether you are getting high before work.
Avon, Colorado's Home Depot had to change their policies and drop the drug tests even before this amendment passed because they couldn't hire anyone. As you can guess their store has an abnormally high rate of accidents when compared to other Colorado stores, not. It is around average.
It is my gut feeling that this amendment is going to lead to cannabis being on pretty equal ground as alcohol, and that applies to drug testing as well.
Excuse me, but plenty of employers regularly drug test prior to hiring, and a positive test for alcohol or drugs (including pot) while a person is on the job certainly can be grounds for termination, especially in where workers operate hazardous equipment.
Here's an example:
A young fellow I know had always wanted to go to work for the railroad to be a locomotive engineer. He thought that he would like the job and, where he lived, it was one of the best-paying jobs one could get. A few years ago, he was thrilled when the railroad company had a "hiring fair" in his community. His enthusiasm was somewhat crushed when he showed up and there were well over 250 applicants for what were to be about 6 jobs available in the local area. Two railroad officials, one the local manager and the other a home-office HR person conducted the session, which started at 8:00 AM. The first hour or so was spent listening to the officials talk about the difficulty of the work, days away from home, weird work shifts, etc. Right before the first break, the HR person told the applicants that when they signed the application that they had agreed to a full criminal and driving background check and that anyone who had a felony conviction or had ever had their driver's license suspended or revoked for a driving infraction or DUI would not be considered for hire. After the break only about 150 applicants came back to the room. The rest of the morning was spent by the officials talking more about aspects of the job. Right before the lunch break, the officials told the applicants that they would be required to submit a urine sample to the company nurse before they left for lunch, and that if they tested positive for any illicit drug, that they would ineligible for hire by the railroad, not only then, but never eligible for hire in the future. This particular young fellow, who never used drugs, submitted his sample and then went to lunch. When he returned for the afternoon session, there were less than 20 applicants left in the room.
The bottom line to all of this? He got his dream job, where he continues to work today. In a community where a college graduate can often not make much more than $30K a year, this fellow makes over $100K a year, with great health insurance and retirement benefits. The other folks who didn't take the drug test because they knew they couldn't pass it? Most of them are probably working the minimum-wage jobs at some employer who doesn't care if they have stoners working for them. I spent a lot of years hiring and firing people. If I had two applicants of equal qualifications and I knew one used marijuana and the other didn't, who do you suppose that I hired?
Drug testing will go away. They don't test for alcohol because it is legal. Like you said, it stays in your system for ~30 days, drug testing gives absolutely no indication on whether you are getting high before work.
Avon, Colorado's Home Depot had to change their policies and drop the drug tests even before this amendment passed because they couldn't hire anyone. As you can guess their store has an abnormally high rate of accidents when compared to other Colorado stores, not. It is around average.
It is my gut feeling that this amendment is going to lead to cannabis being on pretty equal ground as alcohol, and that applies to drug testing as well.
I don't think it's going away at all. People in jobs that could cause danger or harm will always have it due to the legal implications.
The bottom line to all of this? He got his dream job, where he continues to work today. In a community where a college graduate can often not make much more than $30K a year, this fellow makes over $100K a year, with great health insurance and retirement benefits. The other folks who didn't take the drug test because they knew they couldn't pass it? Most of them are probably working the minimum-wage jobs at some employer who doesn't care if they have stoners working for them. I spent a lot of years hiring and firing people. If I had two applicants of equal qualifications and I knew one used marijuana and the other didn't, who do you suppose that I hired?
I see this a lot in one business I work around that requires clearances and involves handling weapons and vehicles. Guys get bounced from consideration for jobs that pay over 6 figures because they've got drink or drug issues from the past, not to mention other legal, financial or health issues.
In the past when standards were relaxed, you ended up with some of these users in a warzone, who ended up stealing morphine from medics or abusing prescription drugs or smoking weed acquired locally. No one wants to work around others with automatic weapons who is stoned or high or drunk.
As I said before, potheads have this self image of themselves that they are these enlightened, intellectual beings with the reflexes of a tiger. The way the rest of us view them is as the foggy, hazy, irrational people they are. No one wants to work around a pothead with weapons, vehicles, heavy machinery or other equipment.
As I said before, potheads have this self image of themselves that they are these enlightened, intellectual beings with the reflexes of a tiger. The way the rest of us view them is as the foggy, hazy, irrational people they are. No one wants to work around a pothead with weapons, vehicles, heavy machinery or other equipment.
And some people see themselves as better because they do not smoke pot.
The bottom line is we are all human and no one is better then the next person. Some people choose to drink wine, beer, hard liquor, smoke pot etc and some choose not to. Now in Colorado its legal to smoke pot like it is to drink alcohol.
Yeah, I'm agreeing with Jazz and Wanneroo on this one.
Thing is, employment is a voluntary business on both sides. An employer is not obligated to hire any particular person or continue to employ them, and no matter what happens on state or federal levels anywhere with regards to decriminalization, I don't see the government taking the further step of saying that you have the RIGHT to smoke and can't be discriminated against by employers for it. Nope, I'm not thinking that's gonna happen.
And I don't think it should.
Just like a government that gives the OK to gay marriage shouldn't be allowed to force any church to perform or recognize them. If an employer has a no tolerance policy for drugs, for whatever reason or no reason, a prospective employee needs to decide to abide by that and agree to it if they want to work there. Ya just need to decide which is more important, smoking up or having a job. Because if you can't abide by workplace policy, your employer can find ten more than look just like you in less than ten minutes, especially with the unemployment rates we've got these days...
Yeah, I'm agreeing with Jazz and Wanneroo on this one.
Thing is, employment is a voluntary business on both sides. An employer is not obligated to hire any particular person or continue to employ them, and no matter what happens on state or federal levels anywhere with regards to decriminalization, I don't see the government taking the further step of saying that you have the RIGHT to smoke and can't be discriminated against by employers for it. Nope, I'm not thinking that's gonna happen.
And I don't think it should.
Just like a government that gives the OK to gay marriage shouldn't be allowed to force any church to perform or recognize them. If an employer has a no tolerance policy for drugs, for whatever reason or no reason, a prospective employee needs to decide to abide by that and agree to it if they want to work there. Ya just need to decide which is more important, smoking up or having a job. Because if you can't abide by workplace policy, your employer can find ten more than look just like you in less than ten minutes, especially with the unemployment rates we've got these days...
I agree with this and I voted yes with the pot law and off topic but I also agree that if a church does not want to perform or recognize gay marriage then that is their will as well. Then I can decide if I want to work there or if I want to attend that church.
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.
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.
