Started By
Message

re: Give me one good reason why marijuana should be illegal while alcohol shouldn't

Posted on 12/18/14 at 11:20 pm to
Posted by reverendotis
the jawbone of an arse
Member since Nov 2007
4867 posts
Posted on 12/18/14 at 11:20 pm to
quote:

What about a coworker with a prescription for pain pills who abuses them on the job?


It is a hazard that exists and is difficult to mitigate.

quote:

Also, what you're saying is that this scenario can't possibly happen now? 


It can happen now.

Post legalization, the person can explain away a positive drug test (urinalysis) after an accident by saying they smoked recently but they were not under the influence when it happened. Pot is legal and with no way of knowing if they were stoned when they killed or injured somebody, they get off free and clear. That's not OK.

I will drop my objection to legalization once this one single hurdle is cleared.

As I stated earlier, I read about devices and tests that are currently being developed. Once they are commonly available for sale, I will change my tune.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 12/18/14 at 11:28 pm to
quote:

I will drop my objection to legalization once this one single hurdle is cleared.

As I stated earlier, I read about devices and tests that are currently being developed. Once they are commonly available for sale, I will change my tune.
LINK

Something tells me you're going to find a reason not to change your tune. Call it a hunch.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 12/18/14 at 11:41 pm to
I would also point out that it's actually perfectly possible to distinguish recent use and residual excretion with a urine test, most places just don't bother. You test them twice in 24 hours and look at the creatine-normalized ratios.

LINK
This post was edited on 12/18/14 at 11:42 pm
Posted by efrad
Member since Nov 2007
18651 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 12:24 am to
quote:

Post legalization, the person can explain away a positive drug test (urinalysis) after an accident by saying they smoked recently but they were not under the influence when it happened. Pot is legal and with no way of knowing if they were stoned when they killed or injured somebody, they get off free and clear. That's not OK.



1. Making weed legal does not mean employers don't have to require their employees to stay drug free. Colorado employers, for example, can still deny people employment based on marijuana usage, despite it being legal there. So your argument doesn't hold up.

2. I knew you were going to make that argument, which is why my post began with this:
quote:

What about a coworker with a prescription for pain pills who abuses them on the job? Where's your oxycodone breathalyzer, so you can test them in real time? Out of all of the legal substances that exist that can be abused with or without a prescription, alcohol is the only one I'm aware of that has a real-time breathalyzer type test (i.e. no blood work).


3. If you're concerned about holding someone accountable for injuring or killing someone, then, as other posters have pointed out, there are tests that can be taken and used to determine if someone is high, but they just don't have instant results. Employees who operate machinery are already subject to drug tests in most workplaces, especially after an accident, so administering a test will be nothing new anyway.

Besides, how do you expect new tests to come out if marijuana is never legalized? What company is going to invest in a product that has no use? It's silly to think that this type of test won't be developed very soon after legalization

quote:

The 24 hour urinalysis creatine test you mentioned earlier is fine but how do you administer it on the side of the road to someone suspected of DUI?


1. Field sobriety tests still exist
2. They don't drug test for marijuana now for a DUI, so what makes this any different? We're back to the "you don't think people smoke and drive now?" argument.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 12:26 am
Posted by Porky
Member since Aug 2008
19103 posts
Posted on 12/19/14 at 1:33 am to
quote:

Post legalization, the person can explain away a positive drug test (urinalysis) after an accident by saying they smoked recently but they were not under the influence when it happened. Pot is legal and with no way of knowing if they were stoned when they killed or injured somebody, they get off free and clear. That's not OK.

I would be more concerned about someone using a cell phone and being inattentive while driving than I would be with someone having recently smoked marijuana. If or when someone is killed by a driver under the influence of marijuana, I'm going to suspect something else besides the marijuana causing the accident, unless of course the individual is guilty of something like trying to roll a joint while driving, which should be listed on a "dangerous and stupid things one should not do while driving" list.
This post was edited on 12/19/14 at 1:43 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram