- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are there still people here who think marijuana should be illegal?
Posted on 12/29/17 at 10:31 am to Breesus
Posted on 12/29/17 at 10:31 am to Breesus
quote:
Legalize weed and the device is invented within a year.
Exactly. Why? There will be a huge market for this product. Capitalism people. Understand it.
0
Posted on 12/29/17 at 11:32 am to HotKoolaid
quote:
quote:Until they can develop a "real time" way to measure impairment for MJ use for DWI purposes, I am against it.
This is stupid. Alcohol is the only drug on the list with an instant concentration test. Do you really believe people pop a hydrocodone and drop their keys in the fishbowl? Not a chance.
Hydrocodone can be reliably tested for (blood) and will only have certain concentrations (depending on dosage) within a set period of time of ingestion. Significantly measurable TSH stays in the body for an extended period of time in the body, with no easy way of indicating when ingested.
Sorry, but a stoner that busts up a family of 4 should not have an out that they smoked a week ago, with no reliable way to disprove that.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 11:34 am to udtiger
quote:
Hydrocodone can be reliably tested for (blood) and will only have certain concentrations (depending on dosage) within a set period of time of ingestion.
Ok. Cool. So what level of hydrocodone is considered impaired?
Posted on 12/29/17 at 11:41 am to keepitsimple
quote:
I don't have a strong opinion about legalizing it or not, but if it is legalized I suspect more employees will get fired from testing positive.
I don't want any impaired employees working where I work at an industrial construction company. I don't even want redstick13 falling out of his office chair . Then I'd have to open a workers comp claim and the BS that goes along with it.
I don’t understand this logic.
Do people come to work drunk? Do people take a drag or two of vodka before showing up in the mornings? Are people just all of the sudden going to show up enibriated once weed was made legal just because it’s legal?
Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean people are just going to start showing up to work fricked up. Showing up to work under the influence of ANYTHING has and will always be ground for termination. No matter the substance.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 11:56 am to Prominentwon
Has Jdoc tried to claim that hundreds of people a year die from marijuana overdoses yet?
Posted on 12/29/17 at 12:15 pm to mouton
quote:
Has Jdoc tried to claim that hundreds of people a year die from marijuana overdoses yet?
Not yet
Posted on 12/29/17 at 12:24 pm to mindbreaker
quote:
there is a dangerous period in my industry that could cause major concerns until that device is created.
Oh OK then. Guess we'll just continue the insane federal regime because it naught cause a small headache in your industry.
P.S.
They made the same argument when slavery was ending.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:03 pm to BR Tiger
quote:I bet you use the term "sheeple" a lot and think it sounds intelligent
Ahh- I see you prefer to have everything illegal unless it is specifically made legal. What a drab life that must be.
I much prefer the US perspective on laws. Everything is permitted unless it is specifically restricted. Life is much more colorful and interesting that way. Innovation prospers, too
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:13 pm to tigerbacon
quote:
1. 1 joint puts the same amount of tar in your lungs as 20 cigarettes
Serious question... how much of this has to do with filtered cigarettes vs an unfiltered joint? I honestly don’t know what the actual difference in tar content for tobacco vs marijuana is but I would imagine that filters, water pipes, etc make a big difference. Not to mention edibles which to my knowledge have no known cancer risk.
As for the people saying that it shouldn’t be legal until we can test for active THC...
This argument doesn’t hold water. As long as marijuana is illegal there’s no economic incentive for anyone to develop such a test. Employers don’t need to test for inebriation because they can say that any usage is illegal.
In fact, all you have to do is take a look at all of the money being spent on evaluating new methods for THC testing right now and ask yourself “why now?”. The answer is simple: legalization in certain states has created a market for those tools. Whoever develops the test method that becomes the new gold standard will be rich. But without legalization in those states, this never would have happened.
We haven’t had breathalyzers forever; they were developed based on a market need.
This post was edited on 12/29/17 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:16 pm to Pecker
heck tobacco has more business being illegal than weed, especially when considering the health damage and costs...
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:19 pm to udtiger
quote:
ignificantly measurable TSH stays in the body for an extended period of time in the body
No it doesn't. The THC is broken down within the first few hours after ingesting. All of the drug tests are actually selecting for metabolites that are not psychoactive and remain in the body for long after use.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 2:39 pm to udtiger
quote:
Significantly measurable THC stays in the body for an extended period of time in the body, with no easy way of indicating when ingested.
The completely fabricated and incorrect information surrounding marijuana that people like you repeat as fact is alarming.
Stop being a sheep. Go learn the facts. Stop believing whatever bullshite the media and government jam into your head.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 2:47 pm to Breesus
Jeez Breesus we are on the same side I'm not against it like I said numerous times I am 100% for legalization. I'm not allowed to have concerns?
Here is another concern of mine. Marijuana is legalized. Employee tokes up on a Friday after work. Comes in Monday and gets popped with a random for a legal substance. I don't think that guy should loose his job, but how can you be sure he wasn't impaired when there isn't a legitimate way to test for impairment.
Now we have a guy that did nothing wrong in the eyes of the law. Was completely safe doing what he did at home on the weekend and is out of work because the technology doesn't exist to prove otherwise.
All that said there is absolutely no reason it should be illegal anymore. But I don't think legalization will come with no hurdles.
Here is another concern of mine. Marijuana is legalized. Employee tokes up on a Friday after work. Comes in Monday and gets popped with a random for a legal substance. I don't think that guy should loose his job, but how can you be sure he wasn't impaired when there isn't a legitimate way to test for impairment.
Now we have a guy that did nothing wrong in the eyes of the law. Was completely safe doing what he did at home on the weekend and is out of work because the technology doesn't exist to prove otherwise.
All that said there is absolutely no reason it should be illegal anymore. But I don't think legalization will come with no hurdles.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 2:53 pm to mindbreaker
quote:
Here is another concern of mine. Marijuana is legalized. Employee tokes up on a Friday after work. Comes in Monday and gets popped with a random for a legal substance. I don't think that guy should loose his job, but how can you be sure he wasn't impaired when there isn't a legitimate way to test for impairment.
Why does it concern you? Said employee knows he can still lose his job.
Legalization shouldn't be held up because of simple concerns like this.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 3:05 pm to udtiger
quote:
Sorry, but a stoner that busts up a family of 4 should not have an out that they smoked a week ago, with no reliable way to disprove that.
Sorry, this makes no sense. Same scenario applies now. Does no one drive stoned because it’s illegal? No. Will making It egal increase stoned driving? Probably not. Legal or illegal, having smoked a week before an event is not evidence that you were high at the time.
This argument is always brought up and it’s bullshite. Why are people only concerned with driving while high if its legal to otherwise have pot but not with the current “driving while high” potential make no sense?
This post was edited on 12/29/17 at 3:06 pm
Posted on 12/29/17 at 3:11 pm to Capital Cajun
quote:
It prevents it in the workplace.
No it doesn’t. Employer policies prevent it in the workplace. Same as alcohol, Vicodin, and any other substance.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 3:36 pm to BrotherEsau
Honest question:
Can I fail a work drug test from second hand marijuana smoke?
If yes, illegal. If no, legal.
Can I fail a work drug test from second hand marijuana smoke?
If yes, illegal. If no, legal.
Posted on 12/29/17 at 3:37 pm to SaintEB
I'm high af right now 
Posted on 12/29/17 at 4:01 pm to beerJeep
quote:
I'm high af right now
Wanna match?
Posted on 12/29/17 at 4:48 pm to Pecker
quote:
I still would like to know how we benefit as a society from its illegality.
I don't smoke pot (did in HS and college a lot) so I have no skin the the game either way. But I would argue that legalizing it would put an end to the black market and illegals bringing rag weed over the border. Now you might argue "Well why not legalize all drugs, then?" and I would respond "because not all drugs have the same risk profile. Weed is not addictive."
Page 10 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News