Lots of interesting news today

Futbalfantic said:
Wonder how that will work for us with federal government finger in the pot requiring drug testing (healthcare, fed employees, fed contractors, etc)
Click to expand...
I just want my workers comp insurer to let me quit pre employment drug screening for weed.
 
awheelterd said:
I just want my workers comp insurer to let me quit pre employment drug screening for weed.
Click to expand...
thats unlikely to change, its not about weed being illegal, but about people doing dumb shit when they are high causing unfavorable statistics for actuaries.
 
RatLabGuy said:
thats unlikely to change, its not about weed being illegal, but about people doing dumb shit when they are high causing unfavorable statistics for actuaries.
Click to expand...

So we should be testing for alcohol consumption.
 
RatLabGuy said:
thats unlikely to change, its not about weed being illegal, but about people doing dumb shit when they are high causing unfavorable statistics for actuaries.
Click to expand...

JSJJ388 said:
So we should be testing for alcohol consumption.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You can get blazed out of your mind on Sunday night and be perfectly straight the next morning. Get slobber drunk on Sunday night and you are going to still have some drunk hanging around come Monday morning.
 
awheelterd said:
Exactly. You can get blazed out of your mind on Sunday night and be perfectly straight the next morning. Get slobber drunk on Sunday night and you are going to still have some drunk hanging around come Monday morning.
Click to expand...

Which is why I despise the negative connotation that comes with weed in particular. As someone who wants equal freedoms for everyone, I think drugs should be decriminalized and considered more like any other commodity. Im not saying anyone should go use them, but im saying you have the right to be stupid.
 
JSJJ388 said:
Which is why I despise the negative connotation that comes with weed in particular. As someone who wants equal freedoms for everyone, I think drugs should be decriminalized and considered more like any other commodity. Im not saying anyone should go use them, but im saying you have the right to be stupid.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree. But where do you draw the line. Do you allow anybody to obtain oxy then? What about fentanyl?
if you make cocaine, herion, etc all decriminalized, should you also decriminalize all of those even though you can't obtain them most times by legal means?
 
DSM Turbos said:
Not that I disagree. But where do you draw the line. Do you allow anybody to obtain oxy then? What about fentanyl?
if you make cocaine, herion, etc all decriminalized, should you also decriminalize all of those even though you can't obtain them most times by legal means?
Click to expand...

I do believe we should decriminalize drugs. Anyone of the age considered an adult should be able to buy whatever they want. But as Ive said previously you are free to be stupid, but the moment you hurt someone there should be stiff consequences.
 
JSJJ388 said:
I do believe we should decriminalize drugs. Anyone of the age considered an adult should be able to buy whatever they want. But as Ive said previously you are free to be stupid, but the moment you hurt someone there should be stiff consequences.
Click to expand...
This works well for smart and responsible people. Laws are written for the lowest common denominator. The job of government is to balance this equation and protect people from themselves and each other while maximizing freedom.
 
jeepinmatt said:
This works well for smart and responsible people. Laws are written for the lowest common denominator. The job of government is to balance this equation and protect people from themselves and each other while maximizing freedom.
Click to expand...

That is not the job of the government at any level, and certainly not at the federal level. If the lowest common denominator want to raise the bar of the lowest common denominator, well..........
 
JSJJ388 said:
That is not the job of the government at any level, and certainly not at the federal level. If the lowest common denominator want to raise the bar of the lowest common denominator, well..........
Click to expand...
Incorrect. One of the roles of government is to provide security for the citizens. That means needing rules that keep people, on average, safer, by preventing stupid behavior that endangers other people.
 
Last edited:
JSJJ388 said:
That is not the job of the government at any level, and certainly not at the federal level. If the lowest common denominator want to raise the bar of the lowest common denominator, well..........
Click to expand...
False, that is the absolute, high-perspective job of government at any level. But ok, I'll engage...what is the job of government then?
 
What is government?
 
RatLabGuy said:
Incorrect. One of the roles of government is to provide security for the citizens. That means needing rules that keep people, on average, safer, by preventing stupid behavior that endangers other people.
Click to expand...

jeepinmatt said:
False, that is the absolute, high-perspective job of government at any level. But ok, I'll engage...what is the job of government then?
Click to expand...

I guess we can disagree, but I dont see protecting idiots from themselves anywhere in the constitution. The job of the federal government is to ensure that the states within the union are in, well, union. At least for the most part. The federal government was never meant to have 98% of the people or authority that it currently has. After the war of northern aggression, this country went downhill in a big hurry. That was due in part to federal overreach, and also lead to more federal overreach.

It really boils down to do you want big tyrants whom you cant control and and typically dont even elect in one central place/organization (federal), or do you want smaller maybe tyrants that are local who you vote about directly and can to with concerns ect (state/local).
 
getstucksome said:
My company stopped the pre-employment drug screen for marijuana, which I found interesting. I believe it would still be part of any post-accident test.
Click to expand...
Post accident makes sense, pre employment does not. I don't care if you smoke at home, just don't come to work impaired or use on the job.
 
JSJJ388 said:
I guess we can disagree, but I dont see protecting idiots from themselves anywhere in the constitution.
Click to expand...
They aren't protecting idiots from themselves. They are protecting other people from idiots. That's called providing security, and maybe I'm crazy but it's one of the key things people look for in a government.
The constitution also doesn't say that we should have police, or firemen, or any kind of rules, or people to enforce them. And yet, we all agree its a good idea that we should.
 
JSJJ388 said:
I guess we can disagree, but I dont see protecting idiots from themselves anywhere in the constitution. The job of the federal government is to ensure that the states within the union are in, well, union. At least for the most part. The federal government was never meant to have 98% of the people or authority that it currently has. After the war of northern aggression, this country went downhill in a big hurry. That was due in part to federal overreach, and also lead to more federal overreach.

It really boils down to do you want big tyrants whom you cant control and and typically dont even elect in one central place/organization (federal), or do you want smaller maybe tyrants that are local who you vote about directly and can to with concerns ect (state/local).
Click to expand...
The job of the government is to balance the equation ;)

Added a colon for clarity:
jeepinmatt said:
The job of government is to balance this equation: protect people from themselves and each other while maximizing freedom.
Click to expand...
And I think they are terrible at it. But it's their job.
 
The question is will this actually happen just like the school loan forgiveness it’s a good political tool, but will it actually happen or is it typical pandering

Dems are so far behind in the polls this will help them tremendously amongst moderates
 
Shreddinlettuce said:
The question is will this actually happen just like the school loan forgiveness it’s a good political tool, but will it actually happen or is it typical pandering

Dems are so far behind in the polls this will help them tremendously amongst moderates
Click to expand...
I can't see any reason it wouldn't, at least parts 1 and 3. Nothing stopping Presidential pardons, no matter how unpopular they may be, as our previous Pres proved. And all Biden has done is ask HHS to review the categorization of MJ, not to actually change it. Now, I think it would be surprising if a change of some kind doesn't happen... but will it be fully legalized, or just lowered to Schedule 3 (my prediction)? who knows.
Really its changes at the State level that will matter, and that is up to the Governors, legislatures etc
Frankly for today, the effect on any of us will be minimal, unless you have an old conviction hindering your employment. As long as it remains Federally illegal to manufacture, distribute or sell, we'll still have the same dicey situation even with State legality. If/when it is eventually re-scheduled, they then can adjust those Fed laws accordingly and the doors would be more widely open.
 
Loudmouthbass said:
I can't wait until he sees the commercial advertising the salsa made in "new york city" and his new class action lawsuit.
Click to expand...
So, is he suing the entire Old El Paso brand due to not being made in the old part of El Paso?

This guy deserves a Texas Pete enima. I hope the brand nails him for court fees over a frivolous lawsuit.
 
Back
Top