# drug testing?



## pa-sparky

just wondering if other locals out there have a drug testing system in place...my local is talking about cracking down on us apprentices real hard, since they are "embarrassed" by (some of) us failing drug tests on jobs

i personally dont have a problem and would pass now if i took one. not looking for a speech about how drugs are bad or whatever, just wondering if other locals have tests in place already...


----------



## william1978

Local 379 has a drug test system in place, but they send out letters prior to the test I guess so those that need to study for the test can.


----------



## Charlie K

:thumbsupa Sparky, down the road from you in Md. Drug testing is mandatory for apprentices and voluntary for JW. The JW may have to test on certain jobs. Once a year our local does the voluntary testing and apprentice testing along with a tool and boot sale. Tools are discounted 30% and the boots about 25%. Not a bad deal.

Charlie


----------



## s.kelly

666 in Richmond. Definately mandatory for apprentices and becoming so for JW's. There are some contractors that do not care about JW testing, but to get sent out of the hall "all calls require a drug card"
not sure how this is being enforced, but it is certainly out there.


----------



## BDB

All new apprentices have to take a drug test to get in. Other then that the local does not have drug testing. I have random drug testing for guys that work for me.


----------



## pa-sparky

i totally like the idea, i just hate that it has taken a rash of 'embarrassments' to get the ball really rolling with it.

we just had 2 apprentices fail a test, and another admit to the BA that he wouldnt pass one, before they found an apprentice to send out


----------



## LowVolt McVolty

Local 134 does random drug testing. 

Don't do drugs, because drugs are bad.

Only a dope does dope.


----------



## user5941

257 has drug testing


----------



## Bendezium

Isn't a drug test required for anyone involved in an accident?


----------



## s.kelly

I would say most insurance companies are going to require a drug test for on the job accident. That means most any field, union or non.

At previous employment I got about 6 stitches. Went to the bathroom before driving to Patient first
Then was told about the drug test when I arrived. Many many glasses of water later I could leave. I asked about a blood test since I was already bleeding... nurse said they couldn't. Too expensive. Insurance co sure put a price of $0 on my time


----------



## Toronto Sparky

Bendezium said:


> Isn't a drug test required for anyone involved in an accident?


If you fail a test after a accident..
Don't expect any sort of compensation. They will be happy to ignore you.


----------



## crazymurph

Local 86 in Rochester, NY has made drug testing mandatory for apprentices and on a volunteer basis for JWs'. There are some 86 contractors who hire only off the drug free list. It will probably change to 100%. 
This aint no party! This aint no disko! This aint no foolin around!


----------



## sparky970

Our local has "drug free" cards. Weather it's pre-employment or random, if you pass you get $50. I'd take 1 once a week, but they can only give you 2 randoms per year.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

I have always held the belief that what I do in my personal time is none of works business. As long as I show up on time, sober, and do all my work in a safe and timely manner, then its none of their GD business if I want to go out and tear it up on a friday night.


----------



## HackWork

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I have always held the belief that what I do in my personal time is none of works business. As long as I show up on time, sober, and do all my work in a safe and timely manner, then its none of their GD business if I want to go out and tear it up on a friday night.


I used to agree with you, but then I found myself working with too many crack heads (or heroin or meth addicts) who did plain old stupid things that put other people in danger, nevermind the thievery that goes hand and hand with their habit. 

Weed is the only drug that I don't care if someone near me does. I'd rather have a hippie than someone who abuses alcohol and prescription drugs.

I know multiple men who used to smoke a little weed, nothing else. But then a few years ago when our local started with the Clean Cards they stopped smoking weed and became full blown alcoholics. Good job...


----------



## paul d.

around atlanta area its mandatory testing for most GC's. and all govt. work that i know of. and any injury at all, you get tested. might not be any of their bizness, but they are making it their bizness. oh well.


----------



## John Valdes

BDB said:


> All new apprentices have to take a drug test to get in. Other then that the local does not have drug testing. I have random drug testing for guys that work for me.


Random drug testing is stupid and unnecessary. For "Cause" testing makes much more sense. Wait until the day your project manager or site foreman has a positive test. You gonna fire him? If thats you're policy, you have too.

The point being, many excellent employees may smoke pot after work, or on their own time. Do you want to lump them into the same class as the jerks that get high on the job and some may even drink alcohol on the job. Is your best man the same as these idiots. If you have a policy to fire someone if they fail a drug test, you could find yourself firing one or more of your best guys. I know. I have been on both ends. No one wins with random drug testing. "For Cause" testing makes much more sense. It's fair.


----------



## brian john

I test all the drugs my men use. The apprentices seem to buy a higher quality product than the JW's.


----------



## JohnJ0906

brian john said:


> I test all the drugs my men use. The apprentices seem to buy a higher quality product than the JW's.


 :w00t: :laughing:


----------



## brian john

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I have always held the belief that what I do in my personal time is none of works business. As long as I show up on time, sober, and do all my work in a safe and timely manner, then its none of their GD business if I want to go out and tear it up on a friday night.


I agree with you 100%, so you use a bong or roll your own?


----------



## wildleg

In response to the OP, I think that two of the locals here have a lot of guys that test a lot of drugs.


----------



## Celtic

brian john said:


> I agree with you 100%, so you use a bong or roll your own?


Using a cored out apple is green. :thumbsup:


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

brian john said:


> I agree with you 100%, so you use a bong or roll your own?


well, living in BC, I do both. I have pretty much smoked it in every way that can be thought of.........and while smoking, we found a few new ways too! Pardon me, I gotta go roll one now......

Ok, and while I stand by my former statement, there is a line that is crossed when we talk about meth/heroin/crack, as I have never seen a person recreationally use these, so that I will give you, but for some one who has a smoke, a tab of e, a little toot, every here and there is not someone who should lose there job.


----------



## Bob Badger

_Smoke a lot of pot you see
Cause I don't like reality
It makes me kind of numb to all 
the f**ed up s*it we've got today_​


----------



## paul d.

BCSparkyGirl said:


> well, living in BC, I do both. I have pretty much smoked it in every way that can be thought of.........and while smoking, we found a few new ways too! Pardon me, I gotta go roll one now......
> 
> Ok, and while I stand by my former statement, there is a line that is crossed when we talk about meth/heroin/crack, as I have never seen a person recreationally use these, so that I will give you, but for some one who has a smoke, a tab of e, a little toot, every here and there is not someone who should lose there job.


 i 'm 55 y.o. and been tested 3 times this year. 1 random and 2 security clearance to work in a jail. we lost 2 guys last week due to testing. just the way it is. dont want to be tested ..... stick to resi.


----------



## captkirk

As long as they are not on anything when they show up for work and they show up on time and ready to work I dont care if they dress up in chicken suits and throw pickles at each other......


----------



## brian john

BCSparkyGirl said:


> Ok, and while I stand by my former statement, there is a line that is crossed when we talk about meth/heroin/crack, as I have never seen a person recreationally use these, .



Some people say that about pot.


----------



## captkirk

Its been said that if younger people smoke pot they can stunt their mental development. Like if a 16 year old smokes a lot of dubbie he will kind of get stuck in that age....mentally. And you know what .........I acually think its true. My best friend smoked a lot of pot and when you talk to him its like your talking to spiccoli from fast times. It was always kind of funny when we were younger but not so much now.....


----------



## randomkiller

captkirk said:


> Its been said that if younger people smoke pot they can stunt their mental development. Like if a 16 year old smokes a lot of dubbie he will kind of get stuck in that age....mentally. And you know what .........I acually think its true. My best friend smoked a lot of pot and when you talk to him its like your talking to spiccoli from fast times. It was always kind of funny when we were younger but not so much now.....


 
I agree with your conclusion, I have met many guys on the job that seem to be mentally stunted that are/were heavy tokers. 

As for testing, if they didn't do anything wrong testing wouldn't be an issue, I will pee in a jar anytime they ask. Ok on weekends it might smell more like burbon but that's nothing illegal.


----------



## B4T

randomkiller said:


> Ok on weekends it might smell more like burbon but that's nothing illegal.


Wild turkey.. 101 :thumbup:


----------



## captkirk

randomkiller said:


> I agree with your conclusion, I have met many guys on the job that seem to be mentally stunted that are/were heavy tokers.
> 
> As for testing, if they didn't do anything wrong testing wouldn't be an issue, I will pee in a jar anytime they ask. Ok on weekends it might smell more like burbon but that's nothing illegal.


 That was acually from a seminar my wife had to attend for work. But you know the type.


----------



## brian john

captkirk said:


> . It was always kind of funny when we were younger but not so much now.....


I had a freind that use to come to school drunk and sometimes drank at school. We all thought he was funny, cool and thumbing his nose at authority. When he was 21 it was no longer funny as he lost job after job, wife left him and he went into a downward spiral for years.

Abusing anything is not good.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

I smoked for years, and did a variety of rave drugs, etc. Stop when I want, and still pull A's at school. So the thought that drugs melt your brain may be true in some cases, but not mine. I am a fully functioning and capable human being.


----------



## brian john

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I smoked for years, and did a variety of rave drugs, etc. Stop when I want, and still pull A's at school. So the thought that drugs melt your brain may be true in some cases, but not mine. I am a fully functioning and capable human being.


Went you suppose to go to medical school?


----------



## Lone Crapshooter

What you do on your time is your business, however you must take respsonsibility for your actions. If contractors will not hire you because you check positive I do not want to hear that you cant find a job. If you want to smoke pot or do drugs go to work at Mc Donalds.
LC


----------



## Celtic

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I I am a fully functioning and capable human being.


Hence the XXXXL super hero outfit :thumbsup:

:laughing:


----------



## PhatElvis

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I have always held the belief that what I do in my personal time is none of works business. As long as I show up on time, sober, and do all my work in a safe and timely manner, then its none of their GD business if I want to go out and tear it up on a friday night.



I completely agree too, however my insurance MANDATES a drug test for every accident and if you fail, you will need a lawyer and good luck settling your workman's comp claim. 

Speaking of insurance big GCs can save lots of money in good insurance modifiers and running safe jobs, so much so it starts to look like a profit center in its self. So smart GCs put drug testing requirements in our contracts that ECs like me have to sign or we don't get the work. The bottom line, it doesn't mean jack what your local requires their will be more and more jobs that will require it or you don't work. 

Currently I am running three jobs which require a drug test to start, at least one random per year and mandatory testing for everyone involved in any accidents, and yeah its embarrassing as hell when one or your guys fail a tests. Typically I get a butt chewing and the electrician gets removed form the job, and if I don't have a place to put them it becomes a termination with cause.

Party all you want, you can be right or you can be employed but you may not be able to be both and for what it's worth I would rather have a crew pot smokers any day over a crew of drunks, but I don't get what I want either.


----------



## brian john

There was a case in Northern VA where a lineman get his leg caught while augering a pole, took his foot. He tested positive for drugs and was denied Workers Comp. He had to sue and I never did hear the outcome.

Right or wrong all involved with the exception of the injured are looking for an out.


----------



## user4818

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I am a fully functioning and capable human being.



And mighty attractive too, I might add. :thumbsup:


----------



## william1978

....................


----------



## william1978

Peter D said:


> And mighty attractive too, I might add. :thumbsup:


 Only you Peter.:laughing:


----------



## user4818

.....................


----------



## user4818

william1978 said:


> Only you Peter.:laughing:


What, you don't like fat chicks? :whistling2:


----------



## william1978

Peter D said:


> What, you don't like fat chicks? :whistling2:


 Well...............................................NO.:laughing:


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

brian john said:


> Went you suppose to go to medical school?


good lord, no. I would never wish those hours on anyone.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

william1978 said:


> Well...............................................NO.:laughing:


ha......you hesitated.:laughing:


----------



## user4818

william1978 said:


> Well...............................................NO.:laughing:



Why not? :blink:


----------



## william1978

BCSparkyGirl said:


> ha......you hesitated.:laughing:


 :laughing:


----------



## william1978

Peter D said:


> Why not? :blink:


 Well, Lets not get in that tonight.:laughing:


----------



## user4818

william1978 said:


> Well, Lets not get in that tonight.:laughing:


No, tell us what's so bad about fat women. :laughing:


----------



## william1978

Peter D said:


> No, tell us what's so bad about fat women. :laughing:


 Well I don't want to take any of your women so I leave the fat one's for you.:thumbup:


----------



## captkirk

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I smoked for years, and did a variety of rave drugs, etc. Stop when I want, and still pull A's at school. So the thought that drugs melt your brain may be true in some cases, but not mine. I am a fully functioning and capable human being.


 To bad Syd Barret cant say the same thing....


----------



## Bob Badger

captkirk said:


> To bad Syd Barret cant say the same thing....




People die scuba diveing......... I guess no one should do that.

People die jogging ........ I guess no one should do that.

People die chocking on hard candy ....... I guess those should be banned.

People are injured and killed from doctor prescribed pharmaceuticals.

The list is endless.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I smoked for years, and did a variety of rave drugs, etc. Stop when I want, and still pull A's at school. So the thought that drugs melt your brain may be true in some cases, but not mine. I am a fully functioning and capable human being.


So much Denial here. These rave drugs that your talking about do irreversible damage to your brain. But what you do on your own time is your business.


----------



## brian john

But like everything in life things change and I do believe drug testing is here to stay and the scope will only be widened, with the impact on careers damaging.

We have an employee that has a bust for possession , a very small amount. He is not limited to what jobs we can put him on. Not a good position to be in when times are tough.


----------



## user4818

Bob Badger said:


> People die scuba diveing......... I guess no one should do that.
> 
> People die jogging ........ I guess no one should do that.
> 
> People die chocking on hard candy ....... I guess those should be banned.
> 
> People are injured and killed from doctor prescribed pharmaceuticals.
> 
> The list is endless.



Oh c'mon. That's so silly. Of course people die in all kinds of ways. Illegal drugs are dangerous and kill people at a much higher rate than the things you mentioned above, with the exception of the abuse of prescription drugs. A bag of hard candy and a bag of illegal chemicals are not the same.


----------



## Bob Badger

Peter D said:


> Oh c'mon. That's so silly. Of course people die in all kinds of ways. Illegal drugs are dangerous and kill people at a much higher rate than the things you mentioned above, with the exception of the abuse of prescription drugs.


Step up to the plate and prove it.

And if I choose to abuse my body with fatty foods how is that different then choosing to smoke a bone or do a line? As long as I am not driving or working neither should be anyones damn business but my own.





> A bag of hard candy and a bag of illegal chemicals are not the same.



Now you confusing the issue, the fact that certain substances are illegal does not change the safety of those substances.

A bag of pot is also not the same as a bag of Heroin.


----------



## Bob Badger

al13nw4r3LC76 said:


> So much Denial here.


So much hypocrisy here.




> These rave drugs that your talking about do irreversible damage to your brain.


So can alcohol abuse but that OK because it is big business.


----------



## miller_elex

Bob Badger said:


> how is that different then choosing to smoke a bone ? As long as I am not driving or working neither should be anyones damn business but my own.


 
Smoking the bone at work, could get you promoted!! The boss loves bone-smokers. As far as driving goes, I never smoked a bone while driving, could be awfully hard to see. It felt strange getting the bone smoked while driving, the bone went soft, but hell, I'll try anything.


----------



## miller_elex

Bob Badger said:


> So much hypocrisy here.
> So can alcohol abuse but that OK because it is big business.


There's so much hypocrisy everywhere. It's wearin me down. Point well taken though. Anybody who can't pass the whiz quiz here, goes to work residential. When you go to commercial, your apprentice fills the bottle for you, then you tuck it under a wing and head off to the test.
As far as the rave drugs go, I thought they were mixed with meth, coke, and heroin to get the kids hooked.


----------



## PhatElvis

Category 1 language is parts of the inside agreement that IBEW mandates that it be included verbatim in ALL Inside Construction Agreements between IBEW Local Unions and NECA chapters. We call it "god language" There is a category 1 Substance abuse article (if NECA is involved) in all our agreements that MADATES a substance abuse program with mandatory testing. So if you think you local does not do testing, you may want to re-read your agreement.


----------



## brian john

Barring the laws against pot.

What is the difference between abusing pot and alcohol?


----------



## BDB

brian john said:


> Barring the laws against pot.
> 
> What is the difference between abusing pot and alcohol?


Well that is like asking, barring the law against murder, what is the difference in shooting a can and shooting a person.:blink:


----------



## brian john

BDB said:


> Well that is like asking, barring the law against murder, what is the difference in shooting a can and shooting a person.:blink:


NOT AT ALL. From a worker's perspective. 
Can you perform the next morning? 
Are you a PIA because you are hung over or fuzzy headed?
Are you more likely to screw up?
Be late?
Not show up?

Is safety anymore compromised from a drunk or a pothead?
Is safety anymore compromised from a occasional drinker or an occasional pot smoker?


----------



## NewPavement

BDB said:


> Well that is like asking, barring the law against murder, what is the difference in shooting a can and shooting a person.:blink:


That's a pretty ignorant analogy.

You don't need a law to tell you that murder is wrong.

On the other hand, when looking at both Weed and Alcohol, the only thing that says weed is wrong is the law. If it weren't for the law, weed would be considered better than alcohol, prescription meds, or even McDonalds.

To this date, not a single person has died from weed. More people are hurt each year by vending machines, or by cleaning their ears with Q-Tips.


----------



## brian john

NewPavement said:


> That's a pretty ignorant analogy.
> 
> You don't need a law to tell you that murder is wrong.
> 
> On the other hand, when looking at both Weed and Alcohol, the only thing that says weed is wrong is the law. If it weren't for the law, weed would be considered better than alcohol, prescription meds, or even McDonalds.
> 
> To this date, not a single person has died from weed. More people are hurt each year by vending machines, or by cleaning their ears with Q-Tips.


Ever been at an drinking party where there was a fight? Seen a few?

Ever been to a weed party with a fight? Not that I know of.


----------



## John Valdes

I think most of us are missing the point. Of course we are testing for insurance purposes, contracts and pre-employment. Theres not much that can be done about that. Where the real problem lies is with the inception (Ronald Reagan) of the "War on Drugs". This is when the general population was lied too, scared into believing marijuana was a threat to society, see "Reefer Madness", that black men if smoking marijuana would become crazed and would rape the first white women they came across and many other myths that some still believe to be true. This so called "War on Drugs" is directly responsible for the requirements of authority to continue arresting, incarcerating, and testing the innocent.

We can blame the insurance companies, but the real problem lies in Washington. Until we have a congress that has the balls to stand up for whats right, you will be firing your people.
Hats off to California. They have shown that enough motivated people can change archaic laws. To bad they still have to look over their shoulders for the F##k#ng feds.

Ps......Look for a series of shows on the history channel regarding all illegal drugs. They take a look at each drug or class of drugs and do a one hour show on each. In particular for this discussion see the show titled "Marijuana". Very informative and it does come around periodically. So keep an eye out for the next showing. You will be amazed at what the US government has done.


----------



## BDB

NewPavement said:


> That's a pretty ignorant analogy.


No, Ignorance is "barring" the law on just those items YOU do not like them being used for.


----------



## NewPavement

BDB said:


> No, Ignorance is "barring" the law on just those items YOU do not like them being used for.


Another ignorant statement.

What you are saying is that the law is the only thing that matters, no other thought should be put into it. 

So when the law allowed slaves, you feel we should have just kept going with that and not thought about the act itself (deeming it wrong and changing the law)? Hey, it was law so BDB says not to question it!


----------



## BDB

NewPavement said:


> Another ignorant statement.
> 
> What you are saying is that the law is the only thing that matters, no other thought should be put into it.
> 
> So when the law allowed slaves, you feel we should have just kept going with that and not thought about the act itself (deeming it wrong and changing the law)? Hey, it was law so BDB says not to question it!


So now you are going to speak for me? Did not say that. But until the law is changed, it IS the law, go get it changed then come talk to me.

You can question anything/law you wish, but until it is not law then you either abide by it or pay the price, simple as that.


----------



## NewPavement

BDB said:


> So now you are going to speak for me? Did not say that. But until the law is changed, it IS the law, go get it changed then come talk to me.


 So what is your point? We are here talking about how much of a lesser evil weed is compared to other legal substances. Brian John asked a fair question, he took the law out of it to make it a fair comparison, yet you have a problem with that. You got your panties in a bunch when he wanted to bar the law for the sake of discussion, why? If we are discussing something in a way to try and change the law, what purpose is there in saying "it's against the law"? The fact that it is against the law is not a qualifier when questioning if something should or should not be against the law. Do you understand? If so, what is your point? 


> You can question anything/law you wish, but until it is not law then you either abide by it or pay the price, simple as that.


Not a single person here question that. See above, that is the issue in which you got yourself into.


----------



## BDB

Mr/Mrs NewPavement,
Until you have laid eyes on my panties, do not assume they are in a bunch. I have no problem talking about changing anything BUT what ever It is that is being talked about being changed, it should be(or in MY opinion) be talked about with OUT changing or taking out anything.
You can see things your way and I can see things my way, like it or not. Now if you will excuse me I have to go readjust.


----------



## NewPavement

BDB said:


> Mr/Mrs NewPavement,
> Until you have laid eyes on my panties, do not assume they are in a bunch. I have no problem talking about changing anything BUT what ever It is that is being talked about being changed, it should be(or in MY opinion) be talked about with OUT changing or taking out anything.
> You can see things your way and I can see things my way, like it or not. Now if you will excuse me I have to go readjust.


Once again, that is an ignorant statement.

You can't use the fact that something is against the law as a reason why it should be against the law.


----------



## BDB

NewPavement said:


> Once again, that is an ignorant statement.
> 
> You can't use the fact that something is against the law as a reason why it should be against the law.


Ok Mr/Mrs perfect/know it all, Show me/quote me, where anytime I said it SHOULD be against the law. Try reading what someone says and not what you want it to say.

BTW, for a new guy you sure do like using the ignorant word.:no: I myself try to refrain from name calling(although I did stoop to your level on this post), try it you may like it.:whistling2:


----------



## MDShunk

NewPavement, would you knock it off. So far you've registered under a boatload of user names. Who do you think you're fooling? Are you really BirdLaw, CharlieKelly, DayMan, Decepticon, Electriad, HackWork, NewBack, NewPavement, Raco, or TurdMerger? Those are all your user names. Seems like you brand yourself a new one every few days to irritate people in a whole new way.


----------



## NewPavement

BDB said:


> Ok Mr/Mrs perfect/know it all, Show me/quote me, where anytime I said it SHOULD be against the law. Try reading what someone says and not what you want it to say.


 I never said that you said it should be against the law, did I?

While WE were discussing whether something should be legal or not, you came in trying to say that we shouldn't bar the fact that it is already illegal (for the sake of a fair comparison). 

I explained that very clearly, many times. If you still don't understand, which isn't a surprise to me, then you should go back and read a little more carefully. 



> BTW, for a new guy you sure do like using the ignorant word.:no: I myself try to refrain from name calling(although I did stoop to your level on this post), try it you may like it.:whistling2:


Trust me, I held back when I said your statements were ignorant. I would be perfectly justified in using much harsher terminology. Saying a statement is ignorant is NOT "name calling". It seems like your panties are back up there.


----------



## NewPavement

MDShunk said:


> NewPavement, would you knock it off. So far you've registered under a boatload of user names. Who do you think you're fooling? Are you really BirdLaw, CharlieKelly, DayMan, Decepticon, Electriad, HackWork, NewBack, NewPavement, Raco, or TurdMerger? Those are all your user names. Seems like you brand yourself a new one every few days to irritate people in a whole new way.


That's only a couple of them.


----------



## MDShunk

NewPavement said:


> That's only a couple of them.


I know. :thumbsup:


----------



## NewPavement

MDShunk said:


> I know. :thumbsup:


If you ask me to stop I will.


----------



## BDB

NewPavement said:


> While WE were discussing whether something should be legal or not,


One last item before I let this subject alone...

Sounds as if you need to remember what user name you login with, because I did not see one post by NewPavement in this discussion until we had our little back and forth.So how do you figure "WE were discussing":whistling2:


----------



## MDShunk

I guess that's what "knock it off" means. Otherwise, it's going to be a pain in the ass to ban all couple dozen of your alter-ego's. I really don't want to do that, because every once in a while one of your personalities has something useful or novel to contribute.


----------



## NewPavement

MDShunk said:


> I guess that's what "knock it off" means.  Otherwise, it's going to be a pain in the ass to ban all couple dozen of your alter-ego's. I really don't want to do that, because every once in a while one of your personalities has something useful or novel to contribute.


Deal, I'll stop.


----------



## brian john

In 1972 there was a relaxed mentality regarding pot, about that time I read an article stating, the big crime organizations were not involved because there was not enough money involved, cops looked the other way and there were to many small time dealers, and any man with a VW micro-bus could hop the border to buy a few pounds. The article went on to say if the Feds ever got involved and did a crack down on the small time dealers, organized crime would move in and prices would rise.

Seems like that author knew what he was talking about.


----------



## captkirk

First of all the idea that pot is illegal is absurd. You really cant compare pot with other illegal drugs. And if you do maybe you should get your self a bag and see what it is all about. It used to be legal until the liquor companies had their hand at it. Could you think of anything more damaging to them...... Also the government would loose out on tons of cash if folks stated to grow their own weed for their own consumption. think of all the tax money they would loose out on if we didnt buy alcohol and used our own home grown dubbie. 

With all that being said, i would never condone someone smoking weed and driving or going to work high. And if they are straight at work but happened to pop on a piss test I think that is unfair. The only difference here with alcohol and pot is alcohol leaves your system after a few hours but THC stays in your fat cells for about three to four weeks. I never heard of anyone overdosing on weed but heard of plenty of folks getting sick and dieing from alcohol poisoning .

For crying out loud,.....whats the worst thing someone smoking pot in their own home is going to do ? eat an entire bag of Doritos...? 

For what its worth Bob, Syd Barret is one of the original members of Pink Floyd and was just beginning his great career before he OD'd on some kind of home brewed lsd and was never quite the same after. I was just making a point to BC girl to the dangers of unregulated home brewed drugs.


----------



## brian john

captkirk said:


> . For crying out loud,.....whats the worst thing someone smoking pot in their own home is going to do ? eat an entire bag of Doritos...?



It was the second box of Twinkies that killed him.:laughing::laughing:


----------



## captkirk

brian john said:


> It was the second box of Twinkies that killed him.:laughing::laughing:


 Back in the day I was an Oreo's worst nightmare. I would eat them by the clip.


----------



## brian john

captkirk said:


> Back in the day I was an Oreo's worst nightmare. I would eat them by the clip.


I know nothing about this subject, BUT I can tell you a dozen hot Krispy Kreme donuts will turn to lead in you stomach at 2:00 AM. They went down so easyyyyyyyyyy.


----------



## Celtic

captkirk said:


> eat an entire bag of Doritos...?





captkirk said:


> Back in the day I was an Oreo's worst nightmare. I would eat them by the clip.





brian john said:


> I know nothing about this subject, BUT I can tell you a dozen hot Krispy Kreme donuts will turn to lead in you stomach at 2:00 AM. They went down so easyyyyyyyyyy.



I'd probably be in the Guinness Book of World Records for "fat azz" if I smoked pot...

I'll kill a bag a Doritos just because it's there...
Oreo's...a clip?...nah, the WHOLE package in one sitting [but only if there is enough milk to drown each one]
Donuts? Had 5 today as a "snack"....the good ones from DO, too :thumbsup:
I plan on having a DO pecan pie for breakfast tom'row and a quart of milk.

Thankfully, I don't smoke...it'd be quite the cash crunch buying both.


----------



## miller_elex

It doesn't take much, but I speculate by 2010, pot will be fully legalized and highly regulated in California. All our questions will be answered.

This is because the state is broke, and it opens doors to a whole new slew of taxes. Its all they've got left.

Will it leave the state?? It already does, and bringing the high grade dope up from Cali is more common than you would think here. P.S. I'm not a stoner, but am just related to alot of worthless douchebags, that's how I know.

Before the day comes when it is legalized, we need to have a test that will stand up in court, as to how stoned someone is, so they can either be sent home, or sent to the drunk tank and fined alot of $$$$.

And all other drugs, I say we hang the dope-dealers from the nearest telephone pole. Let the church come cut em down and give them a burial.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

captkirk said:


> For what its worth Bob, Syd Barret is one of the original members of Pink Floyd and was just beginning his great career before he OD'd on some kind of home brewed lsd and was never quite the same after. I was just making a point to BC girl to the dangers of unregulated home brewed drugs.



Thank you, I do sincerely appreciate your concern for my well being. I never did anything in my former years without being accutely aware of the risks I was taking. I never blamed anyone but myself if something was to go wrong (and never did)

Those years are now behind me. And yup, if it did kill some brain cells, maybe I coulda been a rocket scientist, but I have way more fun with you guys, so here I am.


----------



## JohnJ0906

brian john said:


> Barring the laws against pot.
> 
> What is the difference between abusing pot and alcohol?


Pot causes less damage to the human body.


----------



## captkirk

BCSparkyGirl said:


> Thank you, I do sincerely appreciate your concern for my well being. I never did anything in my former years without being accutely aware of the risks I was taking. I never blamed anyone but myself if something was to go wrong (and never did)
> 
> Those years are now behind me. And yup, if it did kill some brain cells, maybe I coulda been a rocket scientist, but I have way more fun with you guys, so here I am.


 Believe me it wasn't a jab at you.....God knows Ive done my fair share of "stuff" . ANd I cant help but wonder if I didnt go down that road i might be in a better position today...I was acually a pretty smart kid as a freshman, sophmore. But it all changed junior and senior year.


----------



## user4818

Bob Badger said:


> Step up to the plate and prove it.
> 
> And if I choose to abuse my body with fatty foods how is that different then choosing to smoke a bone or do a line? As long as I am not driving or working neither should be anyones damn business but my own.
> 
> 
> Now you confusing the issue, the fact that certain substances are illegal does not change the safety of those substances.
> 
> A bag of pot is also not the same as a bag of Heroin.


I was going to respond to this point by point but I realize that's a waste of time. We're at totally opposite ends of the scale on this and I doubt we are going to change each other's minds. 

You're pro-drug and if I read your posts correctly you're pro-legalization as well. I am not. Going back and forth is not going to get us anywhere. :no:


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

can we all at least agree to disagree? There are facts posted by both sides that have their merits. Alas, the debate will never end.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76

from your pic sparky girl it looks like you toke up pretty often! Try dipping some double stuff oreos in milk after you light one up.


----------



## user4818

al13nw4r3LC76 said:


> from your pic sparky girl it looks like you toke up pretty often! Try dipping some double stuff oreos in milk after you light one up.



She's pretty hot, don't you think?


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76

sure I do.... :whistling2:


----------



## captkirk

BCSparkyGirl said:


> can we all at least agree to disagree? There are facts posted by both sides that have their merits. Alas, the debate will never end.


 But seriously I wasnt jabbing at you. I gave that up after many battles with Peter D and some other cats here. Live and let live I say. But a funny thing happened to me the moment my daughter was born. Im starting to turn into my father. But I really dont want my little girl to make the same mistakes I did,..... I want her to go to work in a suit or in doctors clothes......not as a monkey like me.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

al13nw4r3LC76 said:


> from your pic sparky girl it looks like you toke up pretty often! Try dipping some double stuff oreos in milk after you light one up.


honey, I dip my double stuffed oreos in whipping cream.......gotta hold my figure.:laughing:


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

captkirk said:


> But seriously I wasnt jabbing at you. I gave that up after many battles with Peter D and some other cats here. Live and let live I say. But a funny thing happened to me the moment my daughter was born. Im starting to turn into my father. But I really dont want my little girl to make the same mistakes I did,..... I want her to go to work in a suit or in doctors clothes......not as a monkey like me.


I know you were not jabbing at me, hon....I was just saying lets all agree to disagree in general. I am the same way as you when it comes to my younger sisters, and my daughter, to be honest.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76

I stand corrected. Mmm whip cream :thumbsup: :whistling2:


----------



## captkirk

i swear to god I'm going through this doritto kick right now. I'm presently doing a bag a day......I really think they are putting a little bit of crack in every bag or something. And they are definitely more "Nacho" cheesier.


----------



## shakey pete

*heavy load*

sup dudes, man you seppo's have it tough. in australia if we have 2 positive drug tests in a week we get a warning, that is only if the same drug appears twice in a row. we can have two tests that show positive readings for, let's say ,mary jane on the 1st then aqlcohol on the second and then there's ya problem!! cool site by the way dudes:thumbsup:


----------



## brian john

Never liked Oreo's I bet in 57 years I have eaten less that 1/2 a dozen.

One issue with pot is smoking it taking anything into you lungs and holding it for a period of time cannot be good for you. Not sure of the consequences of eating it.


----------



## slow cooker

*sepositories*



brian john said:


> Never liked Oreo's I bet in 57 years I have eaten less that 1/2 a dozen.
> 
> One issue with pot is smoking it taking anything into you lungs and holding it for a period of time cannot be good for you. Not sure of the consequences of eating it.


Man you think you struggled with that, Try smoking sapisitories, they are useless nothing near a high, for all the good they did me i might as well have shoved them up my ass.


----------



## traveler

Sorry.

Your "right" to be a pot-head ends when I have to work with you.

Last thing I need when working on live 480 switchgear, is to have the other JW *NOT* be at 100%.

~Joe


----------



## brian john

traveler said:


> Sorry.
> 
> Your "right" to be a pot-head ends when I have to work with you.
> 
> Last thing I need when working on live 480 switchgear, is to have the other JW *NOT* be at 100%.
> 
> ~Joe


And a guy hung over or still buzzing from booze can be just as bad plus they stink.


And why are you working on live gear?


----------



## BryanMD

brian john said:


> One issue with pot is smoking it taking anything into you lungs and holding it


not that you would know about that... 

learn:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0rVnDSs0w


----------



## brian john

BryanMD said:


> not that you would know about that...
> 
> learn:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ0rVnDSs0w


 
Nice yellow (incandescent) hue to the video.The camera man was too stoned to set the white balance on the video camera?


----------



## traveler

brian john said:


> And a guy hung over or still buzzing from booze can be just as bad plus they stink.
> 
> 
> And why are you working on live gear?


Local 113....2 JW's are allowed to work on live gear....one is ensure that the other dosen't do anything stupid.

Same goes for drunks....If I can tell you are not at 100% I'll refuse to work with you.

~Joe


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

ya but we were not talking about being high at work, I was talking about the weekend, when I didn't have to be at work, and had lots of time to sober up before returning to work.


----------



## BryanMD

BCSparkyGirl said:


> I was talking about the weekend


Everybody's working for the weekend
Everybody wants a little romance
Everybody's goin' off the deep end
Everybody needs a second chance, oh


----------



## PhatElvis

I had a guy injured on a Monday, he had been drinking on Sunday and he thought 12 hours was enough time to be sober, but blood test showed otherwise. To be honest before this incident I would have thought that a good nights rest and plenty of water would have been enough too but it's not.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

PhatElvis said:


> I had a guy injured on a Monday, he had been drinking on Sunday and he thought 12 hours was enough time to be sober, but blood test showed otherwise. To be honest before this incident I would have thought that a good nights rest and plenty of water would have been enough too but it's not.


ya, but how much did he drink?


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

BryanMD said:


> Everybody's working for the weekend
> Everybody wants a little romance
> Everybody's goin' off the deep end
> Everybody needs a second chance, oh


ahhhhh..... good ol' Mike Reno....he lives here in Vancouver....just saw them a couple of times here, at a Canada Day festival, and the PNE. Classic.:thumbsup:


----------



## william1978

There was a guy that cut the tip of his finger off yesturday at work and the made him pee, blow and a blood test.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

my god, you guys are harsh in the states. I am so glad I live in Canada. We don't test here.


----------



## PhatElvis

BCSparkyGirl said:


> my god, you guys are harsh in the states. I am so glad I live in Canada. We don't test here.


 Oh you are a Canuck, don't they pay you guys in beer anyways?


----------



## user4818

PhatElvis said:


> Oh you are a Canuck, don't they pay you guys in beer anyways?


Hockey pucks and Loverboy albums. :laughing:


----------



## BryanMD

BCSparkyGirl said:


> my god, you guys are harsh in the states. I am so glad I live in Canada. We don't test here.


ya, it can totally harsh the mellow.

was in your Vancouver in July of '04 visiting a friend (Abbotsford)
she took me in to see the GINORMOUS fireworks spectacle.

Good times.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

PhatElvis said:


> Oh you are a Canuck, don't they pay you guys in beer anyways?


beer and crown royal.:thumbsup:


----------



## randomkiller

BCSparkyGirl said:


> my god, you guys are harsh in the states. I am so glad I live in Canada. We don't test here.


 
Like it makes a difference if a Canadian is stoned or not, who could tell?:laughing:


----------



## pa-sparky

well i will let everyone know what the outcome is tomorrow when we have the big code of excellence meeting


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

BryanMD said:


> ya, it can totally harsh the mellow.
> 
> was in your Vancouver in July of '04 visiting a friend (Abbotsford)
> she took me in to see the GINORMOUS fireworks spectacle.
> 
> Good times.


oh, you don't need to be an ass. what I was getting at is that I am glad everytime I had a workplace accident, I wasn't treated like a criminal. Of the the times I have had an accident, it happens when I am stone cold sober, so being told I need to take a drug test would just annoy the hell out of me.

Was it the fireworks at the end of July at english bay you went to?


----------



## BryanMD

BCSparkyGirl said:


> Was it the fireworks at the end of July at english bay you went to?


be an ass you say? 

it was part of an international competition and was over some water
(just googled the area) I enjoyed myself a lot. nice people and very clean too.


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

meh, the first sentence sounded ass-ish, but I may have mistaken the context of what you were saying......the joys of the internet and not being able to hear the tone of how people say things.......LOL

Ya, the fireworks are pretty cool, this past summer is the first year I have missed them in 15 years (was finishing the last 2 weeks of school, was all buckled down) and I am glad to hear you had a good time.


----------



## brian john

BCSparkyGirl said:


> meh, the first sentence sounded ass-ish, but I may have mistaken the context of what you were saying......the joys of the internet and not being able to hear the tone of how people say things.......LOL


Or too much Crown Royal and pot?:laughing:


----------



## BCSparkyGirl

brian john said:


> Or too much Crown Royal and pot?:laughing:


ah, brian john, you see right through me.....:laughing:


----------



## PhatElvis

*on the other side...*

This probably wont win me any friends but to be fair anyone that has an accident or causes an accident while under the influence of drugs or alcohol on a job site is a criminal. We work medium voltage gear all time and I have enough stupid people around me as it is, the last thing I need is a drunk or stoned stupid person working on my crews.

If you have an accident your employer has the right and and an obligation to review what happened, to determine if you were under the influence, stupid, or just in the wrong place at the wrong time...or maybe even all three.

That may sound harsh but if I don't investigate and there is a second accident who's fault is that?


----------



## brian john

PhatElvis said:


> This probably wont win me any friends but to be fair anyone that has an accident or causes an accident while under the influence of drugs or alcohol on a job site is a criminal. We work medium voltage gear all time and I have enough stupid people around me as it is, the last thing I need is a drunk or stoned stupid person working on my crews.
> 
> If you have an accident your employer has the right and and an obligation to review what happened, to determine if you were under the influence, stupid, or just in the wrong place at the wrong time...or maybe even all three.
> 
> That may sound harsh but if I don't investigate and there is a second accident who's fault is that?


 
I do not think anyone disagrees with your statement. The issues at hand is, should a worker that took a toke on Friday be fired the following Thursday not because of an accident but because he pee was tainted.


----------



## BDB

brian john said:


> I do not think anyone disagrees with your statement. The issues at hand is, should a worker that took a toke on Friday be fired the following Thursday not because of an accident but because he pee was tainted.


My feeling is: If it is still in your system then you are still affected by it, same with alcohol or anything else. So my vote is YES you should be fired.


----------



## miller_elex

BDB said:


> My feeling is: If it is still in your system then you are still affected by it,


Rosie O'Donnel still has fried chicken in her system from 1996.

This obviously impairs her ability to move about freely and with finesse, and some fatty tissue has crossed the blood-brain barrier, jamming itself in the membrane of a braincell, causing the entire braincell to operate at a reduced capacity. 

Thereby, if a fatass has an accident, they should be fired too, and as if you couldn't see them coming a mile away.


----------



## BryanMD

BDB said:


> My feeling is: If it is still in your system then you are still affected by it, *same with alcohol* or anything else. So my vote is YES you should be fired.


This is not an uncommon view and not to dump on you personally but... You should look into how the metabolism of various substances works and any residual intoxication effect beyond X hours.

In other words... get beyond "feelings" on things and base business decisions on actual facts.


----------



## PhatElvis

brian john said:


> I do not think anyone disagrees with your statement. The issues at hand is, should a worker that took a toke on Friday be fired the following Thursday not because of an accident but because he pee was tainted.


That's a political question, the problem is the other guy's lawyer says yes tainted pee is the problem and you are gonna have to pay, then I have to weigh that against my roll of keeping 50 men with families gainfully employed and safe, as well as my own interests. 

Mary Jane and I were friends for many years, so I am somewhat sympathetic to the issues, but when I became an owner and all the risks that come with it we had to part ways, and I have to follow all same rules my employees do. 

If you don't like it or think it is not fair address the legal system, tort reform, bad laws and insurance companies who would do anything not to pay a claim, because IBEW and the ECs are not the problem on this issue we are just playing by a set of politically correct rules and liabilities created by lawyers, politicians and insurance companies.


----------



## BryanMD

PhatElvis said:


> That's a political question...


er, no. It's a science question.



> ...we are just playing by a set of politically correct rules and liabilities created by lawyers, politicians and insurance companies.


think about that for a while.


----------



## PhatElvis

I have thought about it longer than you think... but, I am a businessman and and electrician, and you can be right or you can stay in business. I choose the paycheck.

I will say this, my mental performance and ability have dramatically improved since I quit drinking. I don't care what anyone says, any drug you put in your body has an effect, even your diet and exercise can dramatically effect your mental and physical capacity. Anyone who goes on a binge on Friday at quitting time only to show up hungover on Monday is pretty much worthless, even if they are technically sober.

As for tokers anything you put in your body as some effect but how much I don't really know, but I do know what the liability is.


----------



## brian john

> we are just playing by a set of politically correct rules and liabilities created by lawyers, politicians and insurance companies.


And that is about 99.9% correct..

We had a worthless employee that we had trouble shedding as she had health, drug issues. When we finally had to let her go (no showing up for 3-4 days a week over a period of months) we were listed in an unfair discharge suit as her drugs addiction was considered a medical ailment.


----------



## BDB

brian john said:


> we were listed in an unfair discharge suit as her drugs addiction was considered a medical ailment.


And what was the outcome?


----------



## brian john

BDB said:


> And what was the outcome?


 
We hired a lawyer and paid out dollars to said legal counsel over a two year period as we waited for the exemployee to make another move. One day we received a letter saying that the case was dropped.


----------



## PhatElvis

brian john said:


> And that is about 99.9% correct..
> 
> We had a worthless employee that we had trouble shedding as she had health, drug issues. When we finally had to let her go (no showing up for 3-4 days a week over a period of months) we were listed in an unfair discharge suit as her drugs addiction was considered a medical ailment.


 I fired a guy once, that turned around and sued me for discrimination. He claimed he was an alcoholic which is a legal disability and that I did not provide time for him to go to AA, give him the opportunity to go to rehab, or offer it to him, $12k later in legal bills he filled another discrimination claim that I used the N-word; in his presences and even though he was a 28 year old white guy with a college degree it is technically still discrimination and there was an TEC investigation and that cost me another $5 in legal bills, while he joked with the with the TEC investigator how much money he was going to make me spend.

Six months after I finally got rid of this guy, I get a call for a reference for him, and just hung up on them. 

When I fire somebody now, there is a very specific procedure I use and there is a girl in my office who goes to great pains to ensure all our warnings and paperwork are in order....and again there is a DAMN good reason to do drug testing and an investigation after every accident.


----------



## brian john

PhatElvis said:


> I fired a guy once, that turned around and sued me for discrimination. He claimed he was an alcoholic which is a legal disability and that I did not provide time for him to go to AA, give him the opportunity to go to rehab, or offer it to him, $12k later in legal bills he filled another discrimination claim that I used the N-word; in his presences and even though he was a 28 year old white guy with a college degree it is technically still discrimination and there was an TEC investigation and that cost me another $5 in legal bills, while he joked with the with the TEC investigator how much money he was going to make me spend.
> 
> Six months after I finally got rid of this guy, I get a call for a reference for him, and just hung up on them.
> 
> When I fire somebody now, there is a very specific procedure I use and there is a girl in my office who goes to great pains to ensure all our warnings and paperwork are in order....and again there is a DAMN good reason to do drug testing and an investigation after every accident.


Yes and it cost us money NO MATTER WHAT. I have been sued maybe 5 times in 24 years and had threats of additionally suits. 

Once had a customer threathening to sue claiming we had stole stuff from her, but said she prefered to settle if we'd just give her cash. We said better yet lets call the cops. Cased closed.

Folks see a business and SOME think the gravy train has arrived.


----------



## sparky970

Had a random last week, now I'm just waiting for my $50.


----------



## RIVETER

*Drug Testing*

If it shows up in your system at a test on their time, it IS their business. If there was proof that drugs did not affect either the quality of your work or the safety of your work it would not be worth their time to give the test.I am not a prude...I am 

RIVETER


----------



## brian john

riveter said:


> if it shows up in your system at a test on their time, it is their business. If there was proof that drugs did not affect either the quality of your work or the safety of your work it would not be worth their time to give the test.i am not a prude...i am
> 
> riveter


misguided? If you do this with pot I think alcohol should be on that list as well.


----------



## Celtic

Doesn't heroin leave the blood stream/urinary tract/body the quickest?


----------



## BryanMD

brian john said:


> misguided? If you do this with pot I think alcohol should be on that list as well.


+1

all these different things metabolize at VASTLY different rates and that rate is completely independent of any residual effects of intoxication.


----------



## al13nw4r3LC76

Celtic said:


> Doesn't heroin leave the blood stream/urinary tract/body the quickest?


Yes. Cocaine is not detected after 3 days.


----------



## PhatElvis

I would suspect for a jobsite accident involving either permanent disability or death that once the insurance companies, lawyers and maybe even the law got involved that the level of drug screening may escalate. I don't really know (thankfully) but once the turkey buzzards and sharks start to circle all bets are off.

Just to chime in on the alcohol comment, IMHO alcoholics are far more dangerous than pot smokers even when sober, for a multitude of reasons. The problem is the rule book states one is legal while the other is intolerable. While I don't agree with it, I have to follow it because if something bad happens they lawyers always target the white man with money.


----------



## Bendezium

BryanMD said:


> +1
> 
> all these different things metabolize at VASTLY different rates and that rate is completely independent of any residual effects of intoxication.


Yah, drug tests are complete BS in my opinion. They are only in place to give people a false sense of security. You could drop acid every Friday night for years, and never have it show up in a drug test by Monday morning. Chances are it won't even be tested. Imagine how taking acid every week for a few years would affect your work performance... 

Or there is a whole batch of legal drugs that you can do every night after you get off work. I don't think that would be too good on your performance either after an extended period of time. 

And as mentioned, cocaine is out of your system after just a few days. How is that an accurate method of testing someone?

But what about the guy that smokes a pack of cigarettes every night after he gets off work? I bet he has a raging nicotine fit right before lunchtime hits that definitely affects his performance. That OK though... 

And of course its ok to stay up late slugging back brews, get 5-6 hours of sleep, stumble onto the job site and do your best to put in a solid day of work without hurting anyone.

Unfortunately the least dangerous drug, and imo the one that should be legal above all others, gets the 30 day shaft.


----------



## PhatElvis

Bendezium said:


> ... You could drop acid every Friday night for years, and never have it show up in a drug test by Monday morning.


Well that is assuming you actually showed up at work ever Monday morning after dropping acid ever every Friday night for years. 

What I was hinting at is if there is a death, the turkey buzzards may not be satisfied with just pee, they may want some hair and that kind of test tells a different kind of story.


----------



## miller_elex

PhatElvis said:


> What I was hinting at is if there is a death, the turkey buzzards may not be satisfied with just pee, they may want some hair and that kind of test tells a different kind of story.


Right, I heard somewhere that they want hair before you work on the North Slope now.


----------



## Bendezium

PhatElvis said:


> Well that is assuming you actually showed up at work ever Monday morning after dropping acid ever every Friday night for years.
> 
> What I was hinting at is if there is a death, the turkey buzzards may not be satisfied with just pee, they may want some hair and that kind of test tells a different kind of story.


I know, I wasn't commenting on your post. I do see the reason for that, although I don't agree with drug testing, because the more serious drugs seem to exit your system in a urine test much faster than THC. But I think it would be ridiculous to hold someone accountable for a serious accident if THC showed up in a hair sample but not a urine test, meaning someone who took a few tokes off a joint more than a month prior to the incident is being held liable.


----------



## PhatElvis

Bendezium said:


> ...But I think it would be ridiculous to hold someone accountable for a serious accident if THC showed up in a hair sample but not a urine test, ....


I completely agree, but imagine what a good lawyer could do with that info and how he could use it against you, and what an insurance company could with it. 

You have to remember there is criminal court, then there is civil court, and if there is an accident anything and everything will be used against you. Play devil's advocate for a minute, put yourself in the shoes of the attorney representing the insurance company or the family of a person who was injured and one of the parties involved proved to be a marijuana user, or if you were playing lawyer you could call him a drug addict, and point our his faculties and mental capacity was impaired by he drug use and that he was not really even fit to be an electrician. 

I am not making stuff up, when something bad happens the turkey vultures come out and the white man with money had better watch out.


----------



## brian john

PhatElvis said:


> I completely agree, but imagine what a good lawyer could do with that info and how he could use it against you, and what an insurance company could with it.


Reality means nothing perception is everything even with a poor lawyer with a good lawyer you better watch out, they'll pin you.


----------

