Legal Weed Is a Reality in America, but Congress Refuses to Admit It

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

You can wait 2 weeks for a doctor's appointment in my postcode easy.

Unless you call up on the day before 9am.

But that does not guarantee you will get to see your own Doctor.

So if you wish to see your own trusted GP it better not be an emergency.

God bless the NHS all the same coz the Tories sure dont.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
You have more chance than the UK though because you pay for your prescription drugs. As I said, in England I pay £8.00 for my medicines, even if the drug actually costs thousands of pounds. In Scotland the don't pay a penny.
The UK government knows for sure if cannabis was a regulated medicine then within days millions of people would be seeing their doctor for a prescription and the costs would amount to billions.
For that reason alone I'm happy for it to be a controlled substance in the UK, it's easy to get hold of, nobody goes to jail for personal possession, and my taxes are not funding stoners to sit on their arse all day lol.
Honestly, with our universal healthcare it would cost the country billions if cannabis was prescribed free/subsidised like other drugs.

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

To much monies to be made by the wrong sort of people, not so much cannabis, but rather a few of the rest.

10s of billions ££££(possibly 100s) of untaxable monies to be had each year that the bent politicians, Police, customs officials and other nefarious bastards are not going to be happy to give up from there importation/distribution of class A, and the rest.

a reply to: andy06shake

Lol, just buy pain relief from pensioners who sell their excess prescription.
I just spoke to my elderly mother and she said if the NHS starts giving out cannabis for depression or whatever she might be tempted to get a prescription. Wholesale price for me, I'd sell it on.
The NHS will have to charge market price for cannabis or it will cost the country billions.

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

I'm just speaking as someone who works for a mid-sized pharmaceutical manufacturing company that deals with the FDA and EMA. All medicine has to meet basic safety standards and meet minimum GMP practices. That is just to manufacture it. To get a drug approved, there is something like a 90% fail rate for any given chemical molecule that a lab is trying to develop as a medicine.

Pot, as a medically prescribed drug, would have to eventually meet these standards too. This is only for the medical side though. Recreational side would probably only have to meet various safety requirements similar to alcohol or tobacco.

a reply to: andy06shake
I agree about class A, but most cannabis is home grown these days, especially since 9 plants or less doesn't mean jail time.
Massive cottage industry in my parts now, some areas absolutely stink of pot plants, I genuinely forget it is illegal sometimes lol

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

"just buy pain relief from pensioners"

Ever seen Twin Town.

Mushrooms for mothers little helper, not a bad swap really. LoL

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

"They" dont like cottage industries through.

Their demise will be in the post at some point, once they want the larger slice of the pie.

IMO Marijuana is one of the biggest threats to our country's economic recovery . Just not in the way that statement implies . During the drug screening process the least harmful drug is the one most often detected because it can stay in your system up to 30 days .

That leads to millions of jobseekers being disqualified almost immediately. It also causes workers who smoked a joint three weeks ago then were tested to lose their job.

In Trumps economy we have more jobs than people seeking of them. Legalization or some form of minimization by law or regulation forbiding insurance companies to disqualify people for it. Would put all those people back in the workforce.

The way I look at it legalization especially now is now a benefit to the country not a detriment .

originally posted by: intrepid
Drug test them to see if their political stance and personal one are the same.

I also see Trump doing this. Like you said, it's a "lay up."

YEs this....

Wal mart drug tests their employees for christs sake..

a reply to: 14377

Correct.
I have been using this example a lot.

Trust me when I say more people smoke than most think. I bet 50% of the employees of most companies, especially labor positions are burners.

So John smokes. Been on the job 5 years. Earns money. Pays taxes.

He gets pulled for a random and fails. He is fired.
Now that's a strain on other employees cause they have to make up the slack.
Now the company has to interview and hire.

Now instead of John making money and paying taxes he is going to go get some food stamps and Medicaid. So now the state is essentially paying him.

How did it benefit anyone by firing him?

Should we talk about how the tests are a joke now anyway? 90% of the 50% that smoke carry synthetic urine on them. They get pulled. They pass.

This is no secret.
You think employees don't know This?
You think the nurse that takes the sample don't know this?

Of course they do.

It's a joke.

Nobody is being helped by these drug laws and employment regulations related to them.

Now can we talk about why it is perfectly fine to drink a 30 rack on the evening and go to work next day? Totally fine.

Can't burn the night before though.

Now can we talk about the millions of people that are throwing back opiates or benzos before work and it's fine as long as you have a script??

Just cause you have a script that don't mean you are responsible and take as directed.

You don't think people that have a script for Vicodin dont go on the curb to score extra?

Or the people that crush their Percocet and rail them off the toilet at lunch?

Their prescription is their legal out.

It is crazy man. Nobody is benefiting from this system.

a reply to: TinySickTears

Drug testing benefited my Company because I refused to do it . In the 90s our insurance company offered a 10% reduction in rates if we tested .

I told them to pound sand in it . In my field stoners are a benefit ( because of skills ) especially in fabrication. My competitors lost some of the best guys because of drug testing. I got to pick them up .

Sometimes when you buck the system you can actually win .

I can still remember the memo that went out to all of us (yes, I'm an evil fed) when it was legalize din Colorado and Washington. Something along the lines of: you may choose to vacation in a couple states where state laws have legalized certain substances. Keep in mind that said substances are still illegal on the federal level. As federal employees, you should keep in mind that regardless of state legality, you will face the same disciplinary actions prescribed to a failed drug test.

a reply to: TinySickTears
One of my brothers works for a major manufacturer in the UK. They test ten thousand or so employees randomly, but get an 'unofficial' warning 6 weeks in advance of testing. It is a running joke because it is like the worst kept secret in the land. They'd lose most of the night shift if they didn't warn them for sure.
The company covers it's insurance liabilities with testing, and the employees keep their jobs.
I was actually laughing at my Bro the other day because he's in pre-test sobriety at the moment, end of this week he'll be done then can carry on for another year or so.
I'm self employed so I do what I like, and when my Bro moans I remind him that he chooses to be a drone employee, nobody is forcing him,

Dope makes dumb people even more stupid - CADpro

Managing a fab shop for many years, there has been quite a few dopers in the ranks. I once had to fire an entire install crew who thought meth would make em work faster & longer. This wasn't the case when after 2-days on the job the GC called to tell me my crew were all tweeking most spinning in circles accomplishing nothing.

Then there was a pot head in my shop that forgot to move his arm in the press break and almost squished his arm off. Let's not forget about bong hit Bobby, who shortly after returning from lunch break dope-toke ran his hand thru the table saw losing a few fingers.

So YES, employers need to screen new hires & current employees for dope. This greatly reduces the liability for the company. If dope is against the law, then you shouldn't be doing it or being under the influence of or in possession of dope.

If you chose to do dope, it shows you to be careless and have no regards for the laws in society. Basically saying you will do dope no matter what anyone says or laws put in place. It's all about you and your dope. F#k everything else and everybody.

It sure would be interesting to see. Trump tries to legalize MJ, and Anti-Trumpers would be against it, as they are with anything he is for.

a reply to: CADpro

So YES, employers need to screen new hires & current employees for dope. This greatly reduces the liability for the company. If dope is against the law, then you shouldn't be doing it or being under the influence of or in possession of dope.

If you chose to do dope, it shows you to be careless and have no regards for the laws in society. Basically saying you will do dope no matter what anyone says or laws put in place. It's all about you and your dope. F#k everything else and everybody.

If someone decides to drink before work bad things can happen too.

All the studies I've read show that alcohol has far worse consequences for the body than marijuana.

Anyone who thinks the government should get to decide if people consume a natural plant are liberty haters IMO.

originally posted by: CADprohave no regards for the laws in society.

I don't have regards for any laws in society, well aside from those which happen to agree with my personal moral code.
I agree with you about following rules in an environment where say a contract is exchanged, but blindly following laws because 'it's the law' is the sign of a weak slave to me.
It was legal to rape your wife in mid 90's Britain, did you support that because it was the law?

No, keep your blind following of the law thanks, despots like Hitler love citizens like that. Cute little worker bees who never complain.
...but yes, if a job is dangerous then any intoxication would seem unwise to me, regardless of the legal status of the substance.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Forgot where I read, either today or yesterday, something like a link between cannabis and schizophrenia and only 1 in 7 adults use. Tried google and there were lots of hits but not the one I remember.

So, apparently some part of the 1 in 7 will become schizophrenic or exacerbate their schizophrenia which would seem to fit the observed phenomena in the States where legalized.

a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

Take what you do not have.

Have what you cannot take.

And never hurt anyone weaker than yourself, seems to be the general rule of thumb laws be darned.

That being said life and society can at times be rather more complex, requiring certain laws to be in place else anarchy would ensure.

Compromise most times seems to be the ticket, but you simply cannot bend too far else you are over a barrel really.