Colorado legalizes Marijuana

[Underdog07]

Originally Posted by risingstar

If pot becomes legal, I can easily see companies feeling compelled to introduce zero tolerance policies which will enable them to conduct unannounced drug tests on its employees in safety sensitive positons, i.e., construction, electrical, and so on. It's already done in lots of places as I review dozens of substance abuse assessments on a weekly basis. The potential legalization of pot will no doubt cause this number to rise, if only so companies can protect themselves from being sued.

As marijuana typically stays in the system 1-6 days for casual users (much longer than alcohol), that number will be even greater for those who use heavily which means there will be evidence of potential cognitive impairment for a longer period which may result in a temporary job suspension as they will have been deemed a legitimate risk to the safety of their work environments. While it's interesting to see how many people are thrilled by this news, let's not forget that we're still talking about a drug which is often abused and misunderstood. If it's that easily accessible, I can also see it being recklessly used to self medicate for depression, anxiety, ADHD, and so on. Thankfully, there's loads of research out there to be read which will hopefully steer people into making the healthier choice in recreational activity.

Excellent points. And while the unions would fight the testing, think of the news reports "Kindergarten teacher/school crossing guard/bus driver/ youth soccer coach tests positive"

[nbr3bagshotrow]

The issue of which "drug" is better (alcohol vs pot) really isnt the issue. anyone who doesnt realize alcohol causes more problems than pot is kidding themselves.

The issue is government interference in personal lives. So many griping over Obamacare because of the tax involved but then turns around and creates laws where i cant smoke pot in my own house or who can marry who are hypocrits. As long as what i do in my own life doesnt negatively impact others the government should stay the fvck out.

[Teague]

If pot becomes legal, I can easily see companies feeling compelled to introduce zero tolerance policies which will enable them to conduct unannounced drug tests on its employees in safety sensitive positons, i.e., construction, electrical, and so on. It's already done in lots of places as I review dozens of substance abuse assessments on a weekly basis. The potential legalization of pot will no doubt cause this number to rise, if only so companies can protect themselves from being sued.

As marijuana typically stays in the system 1-6 days for casual users (much longer than alcohol), that number will be even greater for those who use heavily which means there will be evidence of potential cognitive impairment for a longer period which may result in a temporary job suspension as they will have been deemed a legitimate risk to the safety of their work environments. While it's interesting to see how many people are thrilled by this news, let's not forget that we're still talking about a drug which is often abused and misunderstood. If it's that easily accessible, I can also see it being recklessly used to self medicate for depression, anxiety, ADHD, and so on. Thankfully, there's loads of research out there to be read which will hopefully steer people into making the healthier choice in recreational activity.

I think its important to note here that supporting the legalization of marijuana isn't the same as promoting the use of marijuana. Like I've said, I don't use, and really never have, in any major way. But I do think that as an issue, it's hypocritical to say alcohol is fine and good, and pot is not.

There will be enforceable company policies about pot use in the same way there are enforceable policies about coming to work drunk. The sticking point--and I agree this is something that'll have to be worked out--is whether or not the lingering evidence of use, post-effect of use--can be legally acted upon, should it be legalized. I assume it can't be, once it's decriminalized.

I do agree with UD that this law has a long way to go in order to make the federal case; that's the next step, I think. But just as some states (including Colorado) decriminalized alcohol before prohibition was lifted nationally...I think the same road will be taken for marijuana.

Originally Posted by nbr3bagshotrow

The issue of which "drug" is better (alcohol vs pot) really isnt the issue. anyone who doesnt realize alcohol causes more problems than pot is kidding themselves.

The issue is government interference in personal lives. So many griping over Obamacare because of the tax involved but then turns around and creates laws where i cant smoke pot in my own house or who can marry who are hypocrits. As long as what i do in my own life doesnt negatively impact others the government should stay the fvck out.

Agreed.

[DarkKni9hT]

Here's an interesting point about the "criminalization" of marijuana from back in the old, old days. It seems that the prohibition of pot had nothing, or very little to do with its narcotic effects. Initially, it was the cotton growers in the South who kicked up a fuss in Congress regarding the much maligned cannabis plant. You see, as most know, marijuana produces not only "pot", but hemp as well: a cheap, fast growing, easily maintained crop which makes for lightweight, incredibly durable fabric. Fearing competition, or outright obsolescence (sp?), the cotton plantation magnates pressured their elected officials to do something about this treacherous menace. Having no real legal way to prevent farmers from growing a viable crop intended for use in fabric making, the prohibition was created based on its narcotic properties, benign and innocuous as they were/are. Therfore, we have Col.Sanders to blame for the ban of pot in North America...which is really a shame because his chicken goes down quite nicely after a doob.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Originally Posted by DarkKni9hT

Here's an interesting point about the "criminalization" of marijuana from back in the old, old days. It seems that the prohibition of pot had nothing, or very little to do with its narcotic effects. Initially, it was the cotton growers in the South who kicked up a fuss in Congress regarding the much maligned cannabis plant. You see, as most know, marijuana produces not only "pot", but hemp as well: a cheap, fast growing, easily maintained crop which makes for lightweight, incredibly durable fabric. Fearing competition, or outright obsolescence (sp?), the cotton plantation magnates pressured their elected officials to do something about this treacherous menace. Having no real legal way to prevent farmers from growing a viable crop intended for use in fabric making, the prohibition was created based on its narcotic properties, benign and innocuous as they were/are. Therfore, we have Col.Sanders to blame for the ban of pot in North America...which is really a shame because his chicken goes down quite nicely after a doob.

LOL

[bat_collector]

Originally Posted by DarkKni9hT

Here's an interesting point about the "criminalization" of marijuana from back in the old, old days. It seems that the prohibition of pot had nothing, or very little to do with its narcotic effects. Initially, it was the cotton growers in the South who kicked up a fuss in Congress regarding the much maligned cannabis plant. You see, as most know, marijuana produces not only "pot", but hemp as well: a cheap, fast growing, easily maintained crop which makes for lightweight, incredibly durable fabric. Fearing competition, or outright obsolescence (sp?), the cotton plantation magnates pressured their elected officials to do something about this treacherous menace. Having no real legal way to prevent farmers from growing a viable crop intended for use in fabric making, the prohibition was created based on its narcotic properties, benign and innocuous as they were/are. Therfore, we have Col.Sanders to blame for the ban of pot in North America...which is really a shame because his chicken goes down quite nicely after a doob.

hahahaha

[risingstar]

Originally Posted by Teague

The sticking point--and I agree this is something that'll have to be worked out--is whether or not the lingering evidence of use, post-effect of use--can be legally acted upon, should it be legalized. I assume it can't be, once it's decriminalized.

I see your point. However, the reality is that it is legally acted upon now as the evidence is not viewed as "lingering", more like "conclusive" . Moreover, work-related substance abuse assessments sometimes result in an inpatient treatment recommendation even for pot use. One might argue that there's simply too much evidence out there on drug use to think the medical community at large would alter their view even slightly on how drugs impact biology simply to convenience people who see no issue with smoking pot. Then again, here we have Colorado so clearly, there are differences in this point of view. I'm in a field where I sometimes have to provide expert witness testimony in court which often covers drug use. I would be hardpressed to see how legalizing it would have any impact on the studies and reports we use to justify or argue point A or B without the risk of debunking a half a century's worth of studies.

P.S. I agree that legalizing/decriminalizing isn't necessarily the same as promoting it. Also, I think we can talk about marijuana without having to also discuss alcohol at the same time. Hopefully, a greater attempt will be made by the medical community to promote caution as the negative impacts of pot use are undeniable.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Originally Posted by risingstar

I see your point. However, the reality is that it is legally acted upon now as the evidence is not viewed as "lingering", more like "conclusive" . Moreover, work-related substance abuse assessments sometimes result in an inpatient treatment recommendation even for pot use. One might argue that there's simply too much evidence out there on drug use to think the medical community at large would alter their view even slightly on how drugs impact biology simply to convenience people who see no issue with smoking pot. Then again, here we have Colorado so clearly, there are differences in this point of view. I'm in a field where I sometimes have to provide expert witness testimony in court which often covers drug use. I would be hardpressed to see how legalizing it would have any impact on the studies and reports we use to justify or argue point A or B without the risk of debunking a half a century's worth of studies.

P.S. I agree that legalizing/decriminalizing isn't necessarily the same as promoting it. Also, I think we can talk about marijuana without having to also discuss alcohol at the same time. Hopefully, a greater attempt will be made by the medical community to promote caution as the negative impacts of pot use are undeniable.

There are negative impacts to a lot of things people are allowed to do (e.g. Skydiving, race car driving, roller skating w/o helmets, skateboards and the list goes on). Just because one of them is inhaled shouldn't make a difference. It's just more instances where a majority decide what to dictate is ok to do vs not ok to do.

[risingstar]

You raise a common argument, i.e., sugar isn't good for you either and that's legal and so on. In my mind, I think that risks turning one discussion into ten other ones at the same time. While I can certainly see your point in comparing drug use to something like skateboarding, it doesn't really move the discussion forward. Also, I don't quite see them as the same type of thing, but that's just my opinion, for whatever it's worth. However, if the majority uses that type of argument and it becomes the standard, i.e., drug use is like rollerblading without a helmet, all I can say is that I sincerely hope they or someone they care about don't one day hurt themselves.

You can't really have a debate on whether it's harmful or not without considering how harmful it's been to have marijuana illegal in a societal scale.

Regardless of whatever harm it may cause (and pretty much all research has shown it's very minimal), the millions of people in jail across the nation for smoking it and the billions of dollars that costs, the economic productivity lost from having a permanent underclass of non-violent non-harmful felons, ridiculously expensive drug war costs, the drug war has been one of the most harmful policies across America for the past few decades. There's plenty of documentaries/books written on this aspect.