- 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: Pitt researchers develop weed breathalyzer.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 11:46 am to ShoeBang
Posted on 9/6/19 at 11:46 am to ShoeBang
quote:
as I find you insightful and smart 99%),
quote:
private company has the right to ask you to agree to do things, or not do things in this case, in exchange for currency. If said employee does not want to do (or not do) these things, he is under no obligation and can find more agreeable employment elsewhere.
I 100% agree. I actually talked about this with my wife today because she's firing someone for the first time today.
quote:
business owner should be allowed to not employ people that do not live up to his expectations.
Does that put a finer point on this for you? It is about individual rights, not the morality of drugs.
Absolutely, but I think once legalization is widespread or federally legal, it would be hypocritical to prohibit pot use and not alcohol use, again provided they are using at work or showing up under the influence.
I'm not advocating for businesses to be forced to do anything. I'm more explaining my desire for the opinions on weed to change, which will happen as gen x and millennials come more into power. I feel it shouldn't be treated any differently that alcohol. If it's abused, it's an issue, if used in moderation, it's fine. If used on the job, there's the door.
2
Posted on 9/6/19 at 11:56 am to Jim Rockford
Not once, but twice when I was in college, stoned out of my mind, a friend that was driving got pulled over for DWI. They were drunk, I was high.
They both went to jail, and I got to drive the car back to the apartment or to the jail house bc I passed the field sobriety check.
No, I am not advocating driving while high, but I can tell you there is a difference.
I'll stop now.
They both went to jail, and I got to drive the car back to the apartment or to the jail house bc I passed the field sobriety check.
No, I am not advocating driving while high, but I can tell you there is a difference.
I'll stop now.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 12:00 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
FSTs are not "tests" in the traditional sense. They're basically just evidence collection checklists. A cop doesn't give you a FST because he's wondering if you're drunk. He's already begun putting together a DWI arrest at that point.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 12:04 pm to bamabkj
quote:
Is there gonna be a legal limit or if it shows up you're under the influence?
Every legal state already has a limit.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 12:08 pm to TGFN57
It's stays in your system as far as drug tests are concerned for a month or more. Yes it's metabolites, but that's what the test detects.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 12:10 pm to Jim Rockford
Theres no shroom breathalyzer. Im good to go then.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 12:20 pm to Nutriaitch
quote:
with other employees? yeah.
That wasn't the question
Posted on 9/6/19 at 1:37 pm to Napoleon
Which CANNOT get you high. They only linger in fat cells and show up in tests. This is what is used to term people that, other than testing positive, are good employees.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:08 pm to SG_Geaux
quote:
So what you are saying is that it does impair driving.
Many times a drink or two doesn't impair drivers either.
Yes. If one eats a 50mg edible, no way they can drive unless they're just very tolerant. If one takes a puff off a vape, I have no doubt they are perfectly in control.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:12 pm to NikolaiJakov
quote:jesus fricking christ you are stupid.
Totally unrelated. Companies have the right to know if they're employees are potheads whether it's illegal or not. If they don't want stoners working for them they shouldn't have to keep paying them.
Similarly, if you don't want to work for a company that doesn't want stoners, you are free to find one that doesn't drug test. Freedom works both ways.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:24 pm to TH03
quote:
If used on the job, there's the door
that’s about how i feel as well.
hopefully one day there is a viable accurate test to determine if you used like right now vs a couple days ago.
i don’t care if the guy next to me smoked it up Saturday night.
i just don’t want someone who is blitzed working on our job sites.
Alcohol is simple. Breath test.
Weed, well not so much. The shite that pops you may have been long enough ago that it’s no longer having any physical or mental effects.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:35 pm to Motorboat
I don't want anyone driving if they've taken enough of anything, legal or illegal, that impairs their operation of a vehicle.
This weed test has a ways to go it looks like. Cops can't tell bird poop from coke with their $12 field kits now, I'm sure this test will be abused as well.
This weed test has a ways to go it looks like. Cops can't tell bird poop from coke with their $12 field kits now, I'm sure this test will be abused as well.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:40 pm to Nutriaitch
quote:
know enough people that willing ruin anything else in their lives to keep smoking that i’ll never believe it’s not addictive.
People ruin their live to keep doing a lot of things: cheating on their spouse, spending too much money, eating too much food. None of these things are physically addictive and neither is pot. I've been physically addicted to substances. I've also smoked my fair share of pot.
You can believe what you want but there is no physical withdrawals from stopping marijuana other than the feeling that, Well this sucks, I wish I could get high right now and maybe a little sleeplessness if you are used to smoking in the evenings.
This post was edited on 9/6/19 at 3:01 pm
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:44 pm to TH03
quote:
I'm more explaining my desire for the opinions on weed to change,
I think you're arguing a point that is already won, for the most part. There will always be holdouts by backwards-arse states, but most people really don't have an issue with it being legal.
There will be a societal cost as it is legalized, look at marijuana-related automobile fatalities in Colorado, for example.
People that paint too rosy of a picture of legalization sometimes sound as unconvincing as anti-vaxxers.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 2:53 pm to VetteGuy
quote:
I think you're arguing a point that is already won, for the most part
Not really. It's only completely recreationally legal in what, like 4 or 5 states? It's not legal federally.
Public perception has changed on it, but the "battle" is very far from over.
quote:
There will be a societal cost as it is legalized, look at marijuana-related automobile fatalities in Colorado, for example.
That's not really a valid reason why we should keep it illegal.
quote:
People that paint too rosy of a picture of legalization sometimes sound as unconvincing as anti-vaxxers.
This is a bit ridiculous.
This post was edited on 9/6/19 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 9/6/19 at 3:02 pm to TH03
OK, nvm.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 3:04 pm to TH03
quote:
It's only completely recreationally legal in what, like 4 or 5 states?
11 states and D.C..
Posted on 9/6/19 at 3:06 pm to LSUintheNW
And obviously, the trend is towards legalization, as it should be.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 3:10 pm to LSUintheNW
Well I mean legal like CO or CA where you can just walk in a dispensary and buy. DC for example is super weird with it.
Posted on 9/6/19 at 3:18 pm to Ryan3232
quote:
esus fricking christ you are stupid.
He’s not stupid. He’s probably a pretty smart guy. He’s just incredibly ignorant.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News