I think that testing for drugs such as Marijuana as a prerequisite to hiring someone is useless and stupid. There are plenty of legitimate uses for it, as well as times/places where the use of marijuana is legal. Amsterdam is a perfect example. I think that so long as someone is not intoxicated on the job, or using company money/property, it shouldn't even be a question asked.
Say, for example, someone walks in wearing a nice suit for a really good job, does excellent in all the tests needed, has every bit of skill needed, and has no criminal record. He is sure to be hired, because he's the best suited for the job. Now what if he likes to smoke marijuana sometimes? Even once a month is enough. They take his urine sample, it comes back positive for THC, and he doesn't get the job. Even if he smoked almost a month ago, he still doesn't get the job.

Now take the young Jamaican, who, as part of his religion and spirituality, smokes a little of the herb. This is a rare case probably, as few rastafarians like to submit themselves to the tedium of corporate work, but just give me some leeway here. Anyway, the man goes in, gets tested, does well, then does his drug test. Turns up positive of course. He is rejected for smoking weed, even though this is his religious practice. Legally, this shouldn't be allowed, but it is, as there are no questions posed as to what the marijuana is used for. It's simply assumed, no matter what, that it is for illegal purposes. I still think this is illegal, and discriminatory. Discuss.

1. The war on Drugs is all about keeping the price up. (Just as our current war stems from the Bush bunch wanting to get their hands on more mid-Asian oil but that's another story.)

2. Buy the book Drug Testing at Work by Beverly A. Potter, Ph.D. and J. Sebastian Orfali, M.A. It gives an even handed overview of this issue and provides some work-arounds to the tests. They explain what tests exists, what your legal rights are, what mimics you can take to make your positive look like a false positive and so on.

quote:

---

The war on Drugs is all about keeping the price up.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

(Just as our current war stems from the Bush bunch wanting to get their hands on more mid-Asian oil but that's another story.)

---

I'd wager that both republican and democrat administrations do this.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

(Just as our current war stems from the Bush bunch wanting to get their hands on more mid-Asian oil but that's another story.)

---

I'd wager that both republican and democrat administrations do this.

---

The reasons for the War on Drugs are very complicated, so much so that it's fair to say that there's no such thing. It's a bundle of (mostly stupid) ideas that can be mobilized for many different purposes and programs, at the local, national, and international levels, by both states and private interests. So (for example) drug testing at Avondale Shipyards in New Orleans and crop defoliation in Colombia are both done in the name of the drug war, but the real agendas underlying these policies have absolutely nothing in common. Absolutely nothing. This drug war stuff is just a way of shutting down debate. It's like saying you're against evil.

quote:

---

It's like saying you're against evil.

---

My senior year of college, I took a class called "The Chemistry of Drugs and Drug Dependency". The professor was an intriguingly insane ex-Jesuit by the name of Dan Perrine. The text, written by Perrine himself, is probably the most lucid and engaging treatment of the subject of illicit drugs I've ever seen. Here's a quote. Of all the textbooks I've read, this is the only one I recommend to other people. Yes, it does contain sections on the actual chemistry of the drugs being discussed. He told us to skip those parts when studying.

While I'm dispensing quotes, here are two more that relate to boorite's post about smokescreen issues.

To me, it (the war in Afghanistan) seems like a distractionary tactic. This is probably the case for a lot of American-started wars. I mean, the American people need a lot to distr-
Ooooh, shiny!

I think everyone should have the right to make their own decisions. I fully support a person's right to do to their own body what they wish. If you want to use drugs, have long hair, pierce your nose, jump off a cliff... you go right ahead and do it.

But I also think that if a particular company doesn't want its employees to use drugs, or wishes to enforce a dress code, that is completely within their right. I don't particularly like dressing up for work, but I do it because I'm required to. I'd much prefer to wear shorts and t-shirts to work, but I suck it up because I'd rather have a job I enjoy than work at McDonalds. (Where they'd make me wear even faggier outfits.)

If you don't like the way a company runs then go start your own. Then you can wear bunny slippers to work and smoke dope to your hearts content.

Why have I not read this thread until now?

I guess anything worth saying has already been said, I'm very pro-marijuana and take quite frequent trips to Amsterdam, more or less everyone I know (including my boss) knows I'm a stoner, but they don't really care, so long as I get the job done.

But if I were going for a new job, I'd accept that I'd have to cut down and even stop for a period of adjustment in order to better myself. Of course, once my foot was in the door....

sorry, I forgot what I was talking about!