Who is making such arguments?
Though I can argue that people don't show up to work high as often when it's illegal.
Bigot businessowner punishes peaceful marijuana users
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
Though I can argue that people don't show up to work high as often when it's illegal.
Odd ... I wonder why he didn't just make a standard rule that anyone who comes to work high OR inebriated would be fired on the spot?
An interesting double standard that I have noticed at the companies I worked for is that they weren't all too concerned when an employee came back from lunch smelling like a brewery.
An interesting double standard that I have noticed at the companies I worked for is that they weren't all too concerned when an employee came back from lunch smelling like a brewery.
Quetzal
New member
That is interesting. Further, I would argue that someone who is intoxicated is more of a risk than someone who is high.
I tend to agree ... insofar as weed VS alcohol. I don't include other drugs in that statement.
Quetzal
New member
Right. I don't have much knowledge on other substances. I think if I owned a business, I would make it a policy to not use any kind of drugs while working. Whatever you want to do when you are off the clock, that is up to you.
There are actually certain prescription drugs that would hinder an employees ability to do their job more so than weed.
Though again, IF I were an employer, I would expect my employees to show up at work without anything in their bloodstream that would affect their job performance.
Quetzal
New member
That's a good point. Especially if its something that is inherently dangerous.
shagster01
New member
If you work in a public place, it is illegal currently. Public consumption and public intoxication are still illegal in CO.
musterion
Well-known member
Maybe drunks weren't a problem at his company.
Most people who have had too much to drink tend to realize it. Most people who are stoned never seem to think they're as impaired as they often appear to others.
Beer on one's breath may be a sign they are oxidizing (because they've had too much), or it may mean they've had a beer but are not impaired. But to smoke pot is to be intoxicated and impaired to some degree...that's the point of smoking it.
Agreed that no one under any form of influence, prescription, legal or not, should report to work if it can endanger themselves or other.
musterion
Well-known member
Originally Posted by shagster01
I think it's funny that the same people around here who argue that making guns illegal won't stop people from having them are usually the ones that think making pot illegal will stop people from smoking it.
Do you think popping + on the pee test, or admitting one is at work stoned, or having all the classic signs of being high, should be an immediate firing offense?
shagster01
New member
Quite the opposite. Marijuana often brings on a paranoia that makes you think everyone knows you are stoned, even if they don't.
That is why stoned drivers are often obeying traffic rules to an extreme (going way under the speed limit, etc...) while drunk drivers drive with reckless abandon.
musterion
Well-known member
That's impairment, you idiot.
shagster01
New member
I didn't say it wasn't.
I said that they are more than aware of their impairment than drunk people.
Last edited:
drbrumley
Well-known member
:rotfl: you don't live in the south do you?
musterion
Well-known member
As a matter o' fact, I do.
musterion
Well-known member
You really don't realize what a giant hole of stupid you keep digging yourself into.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
He's not actually making as stupid a point as you try to make out. Someone thoroughly intoxicated on alcohol is highly unlikely to be particularly aware of their surroundings or actions whereas someone high on weed - despite being impaired - still will be. Given the choice between a motorist driving while 'three sheets to the wind' and one high on dope I'd be picking the latter every time if I was crossing a road. Just to clarify I'm not recommending either...
Whatever the reason, only the sick need medicine. I do not know much about this subject, although I do know there are serious legal problems between Fed and State.I know CO must be more liberal than AL. I also know alcohol sales are state wide illegal in Mississippi.
I think he needs to grow up and take some personal responsibility. He wasn't losing employees because of pot. He was choosing to fire people who didn't meet his expectations. That's his choice, and he's welcome to make it, but he doesn't get to pass the blame for it to other people. Should the government move in with their heavy hands to force people to be the kind of people he wants to employ?
lain: