Texas Cannabis

[toddnjoyce]

TGT leans towards individual liberty, which is classically liberal. The modern use of the word is a perversion from the progressives and marxists who want to confuse language so that they can manipulate people on emotion instead of reason.

That statement actually shows deep insight of the philosophy of politics.

Here’s a great traditional philosophy read that liberalism = liberty and has been corrupted by modern politicians to mean a broader theory of ethics, value and society.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/#NewLib

 

[Lunyfringe]

It's like their use of the term "Progressives"... who's against progress? (ok, but let's not go there yet)

But they embrace old, tired ideas that have already led to the deaths of millions (Marxism)... so in reality, they're "Regressives". The left continually re-defines the language to fit their agenda.

 

[TheDan]

It's like their use of the term "Progressives"... who's against progress? (ok, but let's not go there yet)

But they embrace old, tired ideas that have already led to the deaths of millions (Marxism)... so in reality, they're "Regressives". The left continually re-defines the language to fit their agenda.

Yep, all the various forms of collectivism are a regression.

 

[C_Hallbert]

I am against the use of marijuana for medical and recreational use. It has no life saving properties, it distorts perceptions, impairs judgement, slows reaction times and impedes motor control.

Cannabinoids and their metabolites are cumulative in human tissues and heavy use renders detection possible for months. It is not reaching to assume that when this drug is detectable in urinalysis or blood plasma, it is still rendering some degree of impairment to the perceptions, reaction time and motor control of the drug user.

The quality of almost any employable task is subject to performance impairment or to present a danger to the public when the employed are under the influence of cannabinol. There is no need to list them all, or to describe all the negative implications. Consider a simple list of employment activities with associated negative consequences intuitively impied: hand washing, hand washing techniques in food preparation and service; law enforcement, surgery, or aviation. Any of this should give us reason to pause before lending our support for marijuana legalization.

This is my opinion and it is not subject to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dawico]

I am against the use of marijuana for medical and recreational use. It has no life saving properties, it distorts perceptions, impairs judgement, slows reaction times and impedes motor control.

Cannabinoids and their metabolites are cumulative in human tissues and heavy use renders detection possible for months. It is not reaching to assume that when this drug is detectable in urinalysis or blood plasma, it is still rendering some degree of impairment to the perceptions, reaction time and motor control of the drug user.

The quality of almost any employable task is subject to performance impairment or to present a danger to the public when the employed are under the influence of cannabinol. There is no need to list them all, or to describe all the negative implications. Consider a simple list of employment activities with associated negative consequences intuitively impied: hand washing, hand washing techniques in food preparation and service; law enforcement, surgery, or aviation. Any of this should give us reason to pause before lending our support for marijuana legalization.

This is my opinion and it is not subject to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you think alcohol and tobacco should be illegal too?

Just curious.

I personally support them all being legal. I don't drink or get high but support personal freedom as a general rule.

Harder drugs I am against though.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I would find it difficult to believe that somebody would still be impaired 2 weeks after getting high, but it would still show up in a test.

 

[C_Hallbert]

Do you think alcohol and tobacco should be illegal too?

Just curious.

I personally support them all being legal. I don't drink or get high but support personal freedom as a general rule.

Harder drugs I am against though.

Tobacco injures it’s users and (to a degree) those in its immediate vicinity. It is a personal choice that effects them.

Alcohol intoxication (similar to cannabinol intoxication) presents a danger when it is abused and it presents some social problems but it’s effects are short lived.

Cannabinol is more difficult to detect and it is longer acting. We have enough problems with alcohol without doubling up on them with marijuana.

 

[JeepFiend]

Tobacco injures it’s users and (to a degree) those in its immediate vicinity. It is a personal choice that effects them.

Unless, of course, your like me and allergic to cigarette smoke, in which case, one's personal choice has a fairly significant effect on me if done within a certain proximity.

Alcohol intoxication (similar to cannabinol intoxication) presents a danger when it is abused and it presents some social problems but it’s effects are short lived.

Tell that to the parents of kids and spouses of those that were killed by drunk drivers. The effects of alcohol can have a very long lasting impact on others, even if not habitually abused.

Personally, I tend to lean more towards the viewpoint of "The less laws the better." Just my $0.02.

 

[Younggun]

This is my opinion and it is not subject to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This type of attitude is more dangerous than any drug.


We should all be open to new information and factual information should be considered and allowed to shape/change opinions. Otherwise we will all become parrots living in an alternative reality screeching about things that don't exist like the wage gap and rape culture on college campuses.

Facts should have the ability to influence an opinion.

 

[RoadRunner]

My last employer did random testing.
Some people were tested several times, I was tested twice in 11 years.

I worked at a place that decided that they were going to do random drug testing so they asked everyone to sign a waiver so that they could do the testing. Out of over 300 employees I was one of only three that did not sign a waiver. I told the personnel manager that I was not going to give up any of my rights. Myself nor the other two that did not sign had nothing to hide, none of us drank or did drugs. But out of over 300 people we were the only ones that had the balls to stand up for our rights as American citizens.

.

Guess it didn't help?

I was never asked to take a test and I did not lose my job. I seemed to get more respect after doing what was right. So I guess it did help me.

.

 

[benenglish]

This type of attitude is more dangerous than any drug.

Beat me to it.

 

[benenglish]

When my former employer started drug testing, the old employees (via the union) told management to get stuffed. New hires started being tested before they were hired but, afaik, no one has been tested after their probationary period unless they showed up at work with other signs of intoxication of some sort. IOW, they had to already merit disciplinary action.

In ~30 years, I was never tested. Then again, at my job no one was subject to a "crane operator...spinning 4 ton steel beams over...head," either.

I can see arguments both ways.

 

[V-Tach]

I know of many retired folks that are life long pot smokers. All different professions. All were successful in their lives and professions. They still smoke pot in their late 60's and some now into their 70's. Doesn't prove anything either way......just an observation....

 

[grasshopperglock]

Haven't looked at this thread since my last post. Didn't figure it'd go for 14 pages.

It awesome seeing y'all enjoy a thread. It wasn't two years ago that something like this would get locked and or deleted. Excellent conversation. Respect and brotherly love to everyone of you knuckleheads.

GHG.

 

[Younggun]

Aaaaannnd now it's gay.

 

[grasshopperglock]

Aaaaannnd now it's gay.

Brotherly*

 

[Lunyfringe]

Aaaaannnd now it's gay.

14 pages before it went homoerotic- especially on a topic of drugs... is that some kind of new record?

Is it wrong that I wanted to pick a fight just because GHG said we weren't? Maybe it was they gayness?

 

[grasshopperglock]

14 pages before it went homoerotic- especially on a topic of Herb.... is that some kind of Old record?

Is it wrong that I wanted to pick a Hissy just because GHG said we weren't? Maybe it was they sell self examination?

*kisses

 

[Brains]

I just want to see proof of all these "amazing" benefits of weed come from a non-pothead

 

[Lunyfringe]

*kisses

I'm out...