Posted on 10/23/2018 5:12:13 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
If you're older than college age and still imbibe in liquor, you seem so immature and pathetic to me. Unless there is a medical need, of course.
Why do mature adults engage in such reckless, juvenile behavior like drinking alcoholic beverages?
He was a worthless Speaker. Now he’s a highly motivated dope dealer. I always thought he was a POS.
Back then, like a lot of folks, I was getting faulty information
For one thing, it is fairly easy and wide-spread to fool the tests. There is a small industry that sells exactly that. Passing drug tests.
But eventually it will change just like the military and law enforcement agencies had to ease their restrictions on tattoos to find personnel.
Or the military relaxing their weight standards to be able to find and sign-up enough recruits.
It will change when employers can't find enough prospective employees that don't smoke pot.
Ever wonder why employers don't screen their prospects for alcohol use? Alcohol is a real problem in many businesses.
Because if employers restricted their employee hires to those who didn't drink alcohol, their prospective personal pool would shrink to almost nothing.
So it will change like everything else does.
So what happens when the company gets sued because somebody who uses caused an accident. And yes, I'm aware that's also possible with alcohol, but all you're doing is now even further compounding that risk.
If alcohol is legal, weed should be too. Far less harmful
Plus Trump supporting legalization = nice lil boost in youth and black vote
Alcohol damn near killed me. By the grace of God I didn’t kill anyone else when I was behind the wheel driving drunk on my ass. Had alcohol been illegal I would have still gotten hold of it anyway. You need to be 21 to buy ‘’legal’’ alcohol. Drug dealers don’t ask for id.
You conflate people who smoke pot and drink alcohol in their private lives, with those who do it on the job. Two very different things.
I could smoke pot or drink alcohol at home or socially and not do it when I'm working. You assume that will be the case. I don't agree.
Many people imbibe in private but don't bring a six-pack of brewskis or some joints to work with them. Those that do, should suffer the consequences with their employers.
To think that if somebody smokes a joint at home at night that they are going to make a bad or risky employee, is no more valid than if they drank a few beers at night. People do these things. It doesn't make them risky employees.
Besides, those who say making pot legal will makes things worse, don't realize that people smoke pot freely now because it's easy to get illegally.
How does keeping it illegal, change anything on the ground?
The only thing that changed on the most recent policy regarding tats was the number allowed on the legs/arms. Restriction on visible tats below the wrist bone and above the neck line are still in effect. Arms/Legs are now unlimited, as they are visible only during PT and not when in uniform other than PT (OIW, the public won’t see them).
Restrictions on content are still in place.
The military did lower their standards to accommodate tattoos.
You stated a generalization, I clarified. No conflict on my part.
Tats are still limited by the Army, could care less about the other services.
Boehner is an opportunist who senses big $$$ coming his way via cannabis.
I’m all for ending federal prohibition & letting the states decide the matter.
They can't fill empty jobs because federal regulations have made long-haul truck driving an insufferable occupation.
The Army was always a little slow on the uptake. :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.