It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cannabis Lover Loses Job After Being First to Buy Legal Pot in Spokane

page: 7
15
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie

well you may not think so but medical science does. not as strong as mushrooms,peyote and other plants, or man made hallucinogens

"Psychoactive" is not the same as "hallucinogenic". This is more ignorance on full display.

If you don't believe me, try both of them and see for yourself what the difference is.

Oh, but go to Colorado or Washington to do it.





posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther
Marijuana is a mild hallucinogen it can and does alters one perception.

I'm all for it but facts are facts.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: sirhumperdink

I know. It's ridiculous. Mind you, hair samples, assuming unchecked growth, can actually tell you all about most of the chemicals put into the body over a long period, not just THC. But you are right, the treatment that this subject receives has always been poorly thought out, and based on prejudice not scientific backing.

I would hope that when this law has been in place a while, that people come to appreciate the reality of the situation, that being the fact that a town full of stoners is better off than a town full of drunks.


And a town full of sober people is better than both...



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

And there is the exact reason why GM is in the #ter



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
a reply to: NthOther



Here's where state law comes into play. If the law has no provision for circumstances such as these, then I'm afraid our protagonist is screwed.

the precedence has to be set. This will be one of the first cases to set it. Ill bet money he wins, as its a privacy issue.



I'll take that bet Darrow...



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Well, every employer should test for all substances, legal, illegal, proper nutrients, absence of too much heavy metals, toxic remnants of roundup-ready seed two counties over... and keep an eye out for philosophic differences, too, and remove the means to live for anyone deemed unworthy.

Barring that, perhaps they should employ, or not, based on whether they can do the job ... or not.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

As a potential employer, I want sharp folks working with me. I personally wouldn't care what you did with your off time, but if you came in high, I'd fire you real quick and in a hurry.

I agree. When I employed people, they were to be sober as well. Like I said, I have zero problem testing for impairment on the job. Most employers don't test for that though. And to be fair, they should be testing for narcotic pain killers as well as pot and alcohol, many pill poppers out there these days.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: TKDRL
a reply to: totallackey
Well in some places like Colorado, peoples rights actually trump "the rules" it seems. When "the rules" try to trump people's rights that way, "the rules" should be slapped down.

If your job wants to test you for impairment on the job fine. They should not however, be able to test if you decided to get impaired on your days off and dismiss you for it. It is simply none of their business what you do on your own time.


And how does the test indicate it was "done on the employee's time..." (as if that is really not allowed)...(in fact, it is).

One thing all the whiners need to get straight is this very simple fact...An employer has the right to hire and fire who they want...period. For any reason, not covered by discrimination laws. Smoking crack, MJ, cigs, or a roll of #ty toilet paper, is not an issue covered by the ADA, EEOC, or any other federal guideline.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: totallackey

And how does the test indicate it was "done on the employee's time..." (as if that is really not allowed)...(in fact, it is).


The test most use, do not indicate when you did it, hence they should have to use one of the tests that prove you are impaired at work, not that you have used some in the past 30 days.


One thing all the whiners need to get straight is this very simple fact...An employer has the right to hire and fire who they want...period.


Unless the state has a law, like Colorado. If someone fires someone for doing any legal activity on their own time, including partaking in marijuana, if the wrongfully dismissed employer sued, they would win. State law is on their side in that case, and if the company wishes to do business in said state, they have to abide by state laws, as well as federal laws.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: totallackey

Not necessarily.

If you had ever met my father, you would understand. Simply put, a sober person is not necessarily any better than a wasted one. I have met people who have been stone cold sober all of the time, and have been total bastards. A persons habits need not define their personality, either when sober as possible, OR under the influence of recreational toxins, like alcohol or the smoke. Everyone is different, and everyone reacts differently to the introduction of recreational compounds. The reality is that whether it is better or worse, positive or negative, depends on the person in question.

However, it could also be argued that being totally straight sober has a similar duality to it, depending on the individual in question. There are no right answers to this issue, because it is a complicated one. No single argument for or against is bullet proof. However, the argument that a town full of sober people is better than a town full of stoned or drunk ones, depends who is in the town, not what the people in the town put in their bodies.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: TKDRL

I'm curious about this:

Unless the state has a law, like Colorado. If someone fires someone for doing any legal activity on their own time, including partaking in marijuana, if the wrongfully dismissed employer sued, they would win. State law is on their side in that case,


You are probably thinking that Title 24 Article 34 Section 402.5 allows for using the drug on their own time, off the job. Check the annotation to that statute. Among other things, it says:


State-licensed medical marijuana use not "lawful activity" for purposes of this section. The statute does not define "lawful", and a plain and ordinary meaning of the word is that which is "permitted by law".

Because medical marijuana use is subject to both state and federal law, for such an activity to be lawful in this state, it must be permitted by, and not contrary to, both state and federal law. Because plaintiff's state-licensed medical marijuana use was, at the time of termination, subject to and prohibited by federal law, it was not "lawful activity". Coats v. Dish Network, L.L.C., 2013 COA 62, 303 P.3d 147.


So, sorry. The employee wasn't wrongfully dismissed and would not win a law suit.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: DodgyDawg
Would they have fired him if he decided to drink in his own time away from work?.

Well, they probably wouldn't want him coming to work drunk, either.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952
Yeah looks like the supreme court #ed it for colorado. Bunch of morons they are in my opinion. Guess they never got the memo that federal law does not get to trump state laws. Push for laws better passed in your state I guess. I am so glad I don't have to live under the rule of idiots anymore lol. Feel sorry for those of you that do.

I hope that every single coloradoian(if that is a real word) fired for failing a piss test sues, clogs up the courts so bad, they have no choice but to write better laws. DDOS the court system folks, that's probably the only way to get er done.


You want changes, you better work for them. Changes for the better rarely or never happen without significant push for them.
edit on Fri, 11 Jul 2014 19:42:11 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Pot stays in your system for up to a month unlike alcohol which is usually gone in 24 hours. I would have fired him too he's a liability. If he hurt someone on the job and tests positive for weed as the employer I could be liable.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther
What becomes of the THC test? Can employers discriminate against people who choose to engage in (off the clock) perfectly legal activities?

There are still federal laws against it, and its not discrimination. To be discrimination it has to fall under a “protected class”, use of any substance does not meet that criteria. You can also be fired for drinking, smoking, or even swearing while “off” company time. EDS (Ross Perot's old IT company that ran GM's IT department) used to be renowned for firing employees for what they considered “unprofessional conduct” while off the clock.



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther




"Psychoactive" is not the same as "hallucinogenic". This is more ignorance on full display.


seeing how your the one who insists on being in a ignorant bliss on the subject i give you a couple of wiki's just cause it's quick.
notice the highlighted and increased the text words for the ignoant.


Hallucinogens are a general group of pharmacological agents that can be divided into three broad categories: psychedelics, dissociatives, and deliriants. These classes of psychoactive drugs have in common that they can cause subjective changes in perception, thought, emotion and consciousness.
Hallucinogen





Classical or serotonergic psychedelics (agonists for the 5-HT2A serotonin receptors) include L.S.D. (also known as "acid"), psilocin (the active constituent of psilocybin mushrooms, commonly known as "magic mushrooms" or "shrooms"), mescaline (the active constituent of peyote), and D.M.T. (the active constituent of ayahuasca and potentially an endogenous psychedelic compound). Salvia divinorum is an atypical psychedelic that has been gaining popularity over the past decade, due to its legality in many US states. It is often compared to D.M.T. due to its short and very intense trip. A few newer synthetics such as MDMA and 2C-B have also enjoyed some popularity. Cannabis is one of the most widely used psychoactive drugs in the world, and certain modern Cannabis strains like Sharkberry Cream are described to produce more psychedelic effects than quasi-psychdelic effects in comparison to most other Cannabis strains and are often preferred over Jack Herer as they produce a cleaner high.
Psychedelic drug




Cannabinoids (CB-1 cannabinoid receptor agonists) The cannabinoid tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and related compounds are capable of activating the brain's endocannabinoid system. Some effects may include a general change in consciousness, mild euphoria, feelings of general well-being, relaxation or stress reduction, enhanced recollection of episodic memory, hunger, increased sensuality, increased awareness of sensation, creative or philosophical thinking, disruption of linear memory, paranoia, agitation, anxiety, potentiation of other psychedelics, and increased awareness of sound, patterns, and color.
Psychedelic drug


notice the effects, compare them with the others in the list

now some of the sciences, i tend to want to argue with. but in the fields of medicine and or illicit drugs, i tend to agree with what they say.



If you don't believe me, try both of them and see for yourself what the difference is.


i have, and at the risk of being censored, i dare say that in my 52 years of life i have indulged in the recreational use of one daily ( it was my beer) and at times the other on a daily basis for a couple of days to a week at a time. for more than 30 years of my life.

oh the stories i could tell.




edit on 11-7-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-7-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Update on this:
Supervisors reviewed his situation. They offered his job back with a "Change of heart because he was not working during the TV interview."
He'll decide Monday if he wants to return to the job.
edit on 11-7-2014 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2014 @ 09:35 PM
link   
That's a tough one. I mean nobody want's to work with a pothead or knowingly hire one. They can't concentrate, lose focus, forget things, lower reaction times, they can be slow and lethargic, and they get that pothead faraway look when you're talking to them, and are generally bad employees. But yeah, it's also a civil rights issue. I'm a big believer in medical marijuana but...not casual use. It leads down a road to a very mediocre life at best.
edit on 11-7-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2014 @ 12:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: dreamingawake
Update on this:
Supervisors reviewed his situation. They offered his job back with a "Change of heart because he was not working during the TV interview."
He'll decide Monday if he wants to return to the job.

Wonderful news.

Washingtonian Fired After Puchasing Legal Marijuana Gets His Job Back



posted on Jul, 12 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: totallackey

Not necessarily.

If you had ever met my father, you would understand. Simply put, a sober person is not necessarily any better than a wasted one. I have met people who have been stone cold sober all of the time, and have been total bastards. A persons habits need not define their personality, either when sober as possible, OR under the influence of recreational toxins, like alcohol or the smoke. Everyone is different, and everyone reacts differently to the introduction of recreational compounds. The reality is that whether it is better or worse, positive or negative, depends on the person in question.

However, it could also be argued that being totally straight sober has a similar duality to it, depending on the individual in question. There are no right answers to this issue, because it is a complicated one. No single argument for or against is bullet proof. However, the argument that a town full of sober people is better than a town full of stoned or drunk ones, depends who is in the town, not what the people in the town put in their bodies.


Sobriety is not really the topic, so I do not want to veer off the OP too far....I am thinking when I write the word sober and you write the word sober, we may be writing two different things...




top topics



 
15
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join