Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2012, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Michigan
792 posts, read 2,323,445 times
Reputation: 934

Advertisements

^That's an understandable reaction, but one does not own one's employer either, nor the possibly dangerous equipment one uses on the job. You can get drunk in your off-hours and be sober in time for work, but pot builds up in your system if used regularly. Your employer has a right to demand that you not be stoned on the job. Same thing with students -- if you want public $$ to fund your education, then the public has a right to demand that you actually learn something and not come to class mentally impaired. If you want to work stoned, start your own business. If you want to study stoned, go to a private college and pay your own way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2012, 11:31 PM
 
Location: west mich
5,739 posts, read 6,931,116 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuebor View Post
I grew up in Ann Arbor back when "decriminalization" was the watchword. That was when Ann Arbor passed the $5 fine for possessing small amounts. That seemed to work well enough.

I think it should be legal for those over 21, but employers should still be able to require employees not to use it as a condition of employment, and students should have to abstain in order to qualify for aid. Habitual use does impair certain mental functions.
That's vague and a very broad umbrella imo. "Certain" functions?
I believe that a worker should only be fired or rejected over job performance PERIOD. The ability to do a task at a level set by the employer is the only thing he should be concerned about.
I'm saying that if I were an employer I would only care about the bottom line, and that would be the measure of the employee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 07:06 AM
 
Location: State of Superior
8,733 posts, read 15,933,713 times
Reputation: 2869
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuebor View Post
^That's an understandable reaction, but one does not own one's employer either, nor the possibly dangerous equipment one uses on the job. You can get drunk in your off-hours and be sober in time for work, but pot builds up in your system if used regularly. Your employer has a right to demand that you not be stoned on the job. Same thing with students -- if you want public $$ to fund your education, then the public has a right to demand that you actually learn something and not come to class mentally impaired. If you want to work stoned, start your own business. If you want to study stoned, go to a private college and pay your own way.
All that said, there IS a difference between always coming to work with a hangover, and or stoned a little the next day,...or both. As a business, as a society, and for the quest for a stronger, more productive, efficient work force in a competing World economy we need all the help we can get, and its not impaired workers or managers.Forget about all the hype about tax dollars and free hand-outs, food stamps, and all the talking points in politics. Whats really important is safety, be it ship captain, airplane pilot, truck driver, or machine controller in the work place. having a drink after work to unwind is fine, and smoking a joint now and then, is OK too. The problem is we as a culture demand over compassion, compulsion , and consumption, its the American Way. We do need regulation, the proof HAS shown its ugly head, time and time again. We DO need protection from ourselves and for all the others we come into contact with on a daily basis...... I for one would not want to have an impaired Banker or stock broker ether !.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2012, 10:33 AM
 
1,149 posts, read 1,590,261 times
Reputation: 1403
I'm torn on the issue. Quite frankly, I find pot smokers (at least the stereotypical ones, which are many) to be annoying, self-righteous and really of low worth to society. But on the other hand, I also find drunks to be shallow and obnoxious and useless.

I don't like the idea of so many kids getting into pot because it does clearly affect their already poor judgement and seems to make them lack any ambition. But then I look around and see that most people I know already smoke pot. It seems to be increasing each year and pot is getting easier and easier to get. It has spread into the "respectable" parts of society and they no longer really hide it.

So it seems to me that the inevitable tide is toward legalization, for better or worse. And things being as they are, it probably would make sense to tax it and police it and regulate it. We could still have some rather draconian laws regulating pot smoking, but at least it'd free up some space in prisons and some legal bills.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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 > Michigan

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top