Quote:
Originally Posted by
AquaKnight http:///forum/thread/381128/i-got-a-letter-from-the-democrats#post_3318563
No on the basis that the 'kinks' aren't worked out yet. As mentioned above, there is not currently an accurate way to test 'how under the influence' someone is. I simply can't imagine that legalizing weed would also mean that if you used a legal product, you couldn't drive or work for 30 days or however long THC stays in your system. (as I understand it, it's simply a Yes/No test, you either test positive or negative for THC. Not like a BAC reading)
I've used this example many times, but also who would get to use legal weed? By that, if I lived in apartment/condo/etc, I, in theory, could consume as much alcohol (just a reference, not directly comparing) as I wanted and none of my neighbors would know I did. But if I were to smoke weed and that said apartment, the tenant above my apartment would definitely know, with the very strong, unpleasant (to me at least
) odor that smoking weed puts out penetrates into their apartment as well. What if that tenant above me, was a single mother with 2 young kids, do I have that right to make them put up with that? And whatever side-effects come along?
Thats one of the things that will have to be placed in a legalization law. THC in your system can be used against you in court if you are cracked for DUI. Sucks but it is evidence of use of a drug so....
There is an issue here now with people using "medical marijuana
" failing corporate drug tests. Well last I heard if you needed morphine for pain you wouldn't be cleared to work either. It has to be like the Ricky Williams syndrome. You have to decide what's more important, weed or work.