Posted on 08/13/2010 12:06:56 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Can you cite any examples?
Scotts - the fertilizer people...
require their employees to be “tobacco free”
slow day?
Allowing states to make their own rules means that some states will do smart things, and others will do stupid things.
That’s why all the states changed the language to “driving while impaired”. They’ve got all kinds of great stuff to figure out how drunk you are, but you can still be busted for driving stoned, medicated, and tired. The penalties don’t tend to be quite as severe but it’s still illegal and will continue to be illegal even if pot becomes legal.
• “Different people have different reactions to substances. I had to take pain pills, and I had no reaction, except for the reduced pain. Fortunately, I only had to take them a few times, so I didn’t have any trouble.”
•
There are different pills. I’m fairly certain I was prescribed a strong dose of codeine or vicodin due to my large size at the time. I remember the “D” sound but didn’t know much about drugs or chemistry then. They are both commonly abused, very addictive and give a “high”.
As you said, people are different. Drugs that can turn one person insane or kill them may save another person’s life. Meth (the most addictive, mind-altering drug known) can actually correct the brain chemistry of certain people and is legally prescribed if it helps them with low side effects.
It boggles my mind why the 400+ compounds in a natural, non-addictive plant cannot be researched, prescribed and doctor monitored the same way as amphetamines or opiates. Before the “stamp” act of 1937, drug companies like Bayer and Merck had dozens of patents on effective cannabis-based medicines. An old researcher colleague of mine said that researchers in the 30s
It also boggles the mind why all forms of cannabis are illegal but blindly pumping patients full of body-rotting addictive narcotics is not. People are given narcotic death sentences in hospitals and doctor’s offices every day. Yes, some people get obsessed with cannabis as a recreation, but you cannot imagine how addictive and toxic those narcotics are.
“Just because you say you didn’t have any impairment on pot, doesn’t mean others don’t, because I have seen them. Also, why do call it hemp? Hemp is a fibre made from the plant, and I doubt anyone smokes that.”
A great deal depends on the social circle and the environment that a drug is used in. People tend to act how they think they’re “supposed to” act in a group. I’ve known groups of smokers that stumble and run around town like drunks. Some lift weights. Some watch WWII documentaries. Heck, I knew one group of mathematicians that would smoke constantly and do recognized research. I’ve never met a smoker from a non-stumbling group that couldn’t walk a straight line.
Yes, you are correct. Some people refer to any plant of that species as hemp but the exact word should be cannabis. MJ is not a scientific word and it was introduced into our language during the corrupt senate hearings that outlawed hemp. At the time, the hemp industry was very important and opposing special interests used the word “marihuana” to conceal that the entire hemp industry was being outlawed. For entertainment, get transcripts of these senate hearings to see how laughable and corrupt they were. Nothing new under the sun…
That's just plain silly. Silly.
A free man should defend the rights of another free man to pursue his happiness;
unless it has an impact on his own ability to pursue his own happiness.
The problem is...
some people derive their happiness from dictating the ‘proper’ behavior of other people.
That is not the proper interaction of free men; that is the interaction of a master and a slave.
Cripes! I guess I'm in the wrong line of work.
Yes, so men whose pursuit of happiness is subsidized by my paycheck shouldn’t be claiming their actions have no impact. Or is they get less punishment for harming me, or destroying my property, because of how they were pursuing their happiness.
You’re missing a lot. Especially a life skill called “reading comprehension.”
Alcohol is so evil that I can brew gallons of beer in my basement, and pot is so good that it’s a class 4 felony in my state to grow it.
What kind of quack would tell someone to get drunk medically? Oh, I see.
From 134-feet away these last two days, the wind has carried a cloud of marijuana smoke that could make one dizzy. (He lives alone). Upon his uncle's death, his uncle unwittingly enabled this behavior with a Will that gave my neighbor $1-million. But yesterday's winds then followed that pot smoke with the smell of a burning candle!
==8-O
Elaborate smart ass.
Nobody is seriously considering making smoking pot on the job legal. The crux of the article is that if it is legal, people may show up to the job high more often than it was illegal, and that employers may not be able to fire employees who test positive for it in their system.
I know exactly what the article was talking about. I was referring to crap like this....
They now want to make it legal to smoke pot at home but you can’t smoke a cigarette at home because the second hand smoke might drift out your window or vent into your neighbors apartment.
As far as I know, there is nothing in that Santa Monica law (which is dumb IMO) that differs between tobacco, marijuana, or any other sort of legal or illegal substance. It just states that smoking won’t be allowed. I have no idea why it wouldn’t include marijuana if it were to become legal.
Second of all, if this is what you were talking about, why did you say this? “Smokers can’t smoke on the job but the commies want to make legal to smoke pot on the job”
You’ve got me there because that wasn’t what I was thinking about when I typed it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.