Marijuana Cleansers

[Therealbubba]

I've got a test coming up this week and it's not the kind I can study for.

I need the straight dope on cleansers that either mask or remove signs of smoking dope from the urine.

Thanks!

If you live near any headshops, you can usually find something called "Cleartest"(sp?) for sale for around $20-$25. I haven't used it myself, but know a couple of people who have. My understanding is that the product guarantees if used as directed that you will pass a pee test, or get you money back (once you get out of jail?).

However, another 'dodge' I've heard about, and this is from someone who's been doing periodic pee testing for the last year or so, despite almost daily tokin': dip the fingers of your hand in bleach and allow it to dry in place (obviously this is something you wouldn't want to do until the morning of the test). As you give your sample, let your urine stream run over your fingers, washing away the bleach residue. After turning in the sample, rinse your fingers thoroughly of all remaining bleach. I have been assured this somehow 'fools' the test, and as I said, the friend who told it to me has been undergoing testing for the last year and has yet to be 'called out'.

Hope this helps.

[heatherlee]

GOLDSEAL KICK ASS STUFF

[mangeorge]

A guy where I work got fired just last week for using an unspecified adulterant at his random drug test. They won't say what it was, but if I can find out I'll advise.
Peace,
mangeorge


------------------
Work like you don't need the money.....
Love like you've never been hurt.....
Dance like nobody's watching! ....(Paraphrased)

[Pooch]

I must have been the all time piss testee in my days in the army due to a little personality clash with the first seargent. Well, I didn't really partake in drugs at that time. Except for one night. At 6 AM the following morn, not a wrinkle on my bed, licking my lips, twiddling my fingers, cigarette butts up the wazoo, I heard the familiar call, "Pooch! Piss Test!!"

I poured salt into a little homemade paper cone and neatly tucked it safely under my belt. I slipped the salt into the bottle and never heard anything about it. All the while I was wondering if they were going to find any urine mixed in with the beer and crank. I can only guess it worked.

[pldennison]

If y'all are so proud of being pot smokers, why are you trying so desperately to dodge the consequences of your noble acts of civil disobedience? Be a martyr for the cause!

[BurnMeUp]

i must also say, if you drink a lot of cranberry juice for about 2 weeks beforehand it can help, since it cleanses the kidneys.

------------------
To deal with men by force is as impractical as to deal with nature by persuasion.

[BoBettie]

I hate to tell you, but last time I had to take a piss test (to work at WAL MART!! Can you believe that?) The nurse checked my person (frisked me, basically), checked my hands carefully..(smelling for bleach?). She stood only half turned away, so periferally she could see what I was doing, and then immediately took the temp of my sample, to make sure nothing was smuggled. And I don't even smoke!
A good friend of mine who is a pharmacist and a smoker has said that he's never failed a test because he just abstains for a week or two before. Apparently the tests aren't THAT accurate (accoring to him- don't argue this with me). Anyway, he always tests negative and he smokes like a chimmney..
Worse comes to worse, you can certainly argue the results and demand a re-test. These things aren't always right.

------------------
An optimist sees an opportunity in every calamity; A pessimist sees a calamity in every opportunity.

[BurnMeUp]

You know what I find funny, many companies like aerospace firms and whatnot use the "pee test" but Blockbuster video used a hair test, which basically shows anything you've taken in the last year.

------------------
To deal with men by force is as impractical as to deal with nature by persuasion.

[handy]

Isn't a hair test expensive?

Anyway, just cause a person gives a pee sample doesn't mean they actually test it...

The reasoning being that if you are clean, you'd be happy to give a pee test....

[mangeorge]

"If y'all are so proud of being pot smokers, why are you trying so desperately to dodge the consequences of your noble acts of civil disobedience? Be a martyr for the cause!"
---pldennison
-------------------------------------
Well, pld, here's my martyr's story;
In mid September, 1996, I smoked a couple joints with a friend. In late October I got called for a random drug test and tested positive for THC. That's 6 weeks after my last toke! And the time before Sept. had been in early spring. So don't let anyone tell you 2-3 weeks is long enough to clear your system.
Anyway, the result was that I had to go to 4 weeks of "treatment", 8 hours a day. With alcholics, junkies, crackheads, and other people with real problems. I felt like a pretender, taking up a slot that could have been filled by someone who would really benefit from it. Anyone who has been through rehab, or one of the 12 step programs knows how soul wrenching it can be, esp. if you don't really have your own story to tell.
After completion and returning to work, I was compelled to do 2 years of weekly testing and monthly counseling. They wanted me to do MA, but I refused.
What a total waste. As soon as I end my employment here I'll go right back to my occasional enjoyment of a nice fat one.
And I make no secret of it.
All things considered, marijuana is a good thing.
Peace,
mangeorge

------------------
Work like you don't need the money.....
Love like you've never been hurt.....
Dance like nobody's watching! ....(Paraphrased)

[mangeorge]

By the way, Therealbubba, how'd you do on your test? Are you still around?
Where'd he/she go? :)
Peace,
mangeorge

[Therealbubba]

I PASSED! I am a bona fide model citizen!

I did some research and here's a summary if some of the tricks I learned:

Goldenseal and other organic cleansers are for the most part a waste of money. Most of them are natual diuretics that simply dilute the urine sample. The same can be accomplished by drinking 8 glasses of water 1 to 2 hours before the whiz quiz.

Adulterates ( things you add after you pee) are often tested for and can get you into alot of hot water.

The pee test tests for the metabolites that are fat soluable and stored inside your fat cells, not the THC (the stuff that gets you high). If you can either dilute your sample by drinking tons of water right before the test and/or using diuretics, you avoid having a large enough amount of these metabolites floating around in your blood where they can get you into trouble.

Atheletes who smoke eliminate the metabolites faster than other folks because they burn fat at a much faster rate. However, if you work out, you should stop working out a week before your test. This slows down your metabolism keeping the bad stuff inside the fat cells. (Remember, it's the stuff that's in the blood that eventually ends up in your bladder that gets tested.)

Labs often reject samples that are too clear because diluted urine gives a false negative. High doses of vitamin B2 (not time released) taken in the morning with your 8 glasses of water 1-2 hours before the test will give your diluted urine that desirable yellow look. 50-100 mcg is the desired dose. Labs also will often check the creatine levels of your urine if they suspect a diluted sample. This can be fixed by eating lots and lots of red meat 2 to 3 days prior to the test.

A high fiber diet or using laxatives like Metamucil(sp.) helps eliminate the metabolites through your stool rather than through the urine.

Cranberry juice is a natural diuretic that has shown some promise in diluting your sample. In a pinch, 80mg of Lasix ( a perscription diuretic) can really do the trick.

If a hair sample is required (not in my case), there are several shampoos for sale that you'll find on the web that say they work. I heard Head n' Shoulders for oily hair has shown to cause false negatives. Hair tests are expensive and unreliable.

Thanks to all that posted, and I hope this will help some poor innocent smoker like me persue life, liberty and happiness.

Therealbubba

[pldennison]

Well, mangeorge, at least you have the courage of your convictions. Every single other person posting here who uses is a big hypocrite.

[AuntiePam]

We drug test and the doc in charge says Goldenseal doesn't work, and like a poster has said, they also test for adulterates (adulterants? - whatever). We reject diluted tests and don't allow re-takes.

You will cause some eye rolling if you alert the tester to your possible false positive due to the poppyseed muffin you had for breakfast.

What I'd like to know is how a urine sample can be 107 degrees when handed in for testing. Can it possibly come out of your body at that temp?

What is the normal temp for pee?

[mangeorge]

AuntiePam touched on an interesting point regarding the drug testing business. Labs, clinics, doctors et al have a huge stake in obtaining positive results from their subjects. No positives, no need for their services.
My company recently lowered the threshold for a positive result. The number of referrals had been dropping off dramatically, though they claimed this fact was not the reason for the change in policy.
BTW; Try as they might, they were never able to correlate drug testing with a drop in recordable accidents.
Industrial accidents are invariably caused by lack of safety education, lack of safety procedures, and lack of communication between workers and managment.
I'll shaddup now. :)
Peace,
mangeorge

[AuntiePam]

Mangeorge, you're 99% right about the cause of industrial accidents -- but I still prefer lift truck operators unimpaired.

Awhile back, we decided to test people if they had more than the usual number of accidents. We've only done it once -- to a guy (a good friend of mine) managed to cut himself three times (needed sutures) in just a few weeks.

He tested positive for just about everything -- marijuana, meth, and cocaine. (He can't stand the taste of beer.) Went for treatment -- had a great time, he said.

He just brings his own band-aids to work now.

[bantmof]

but I still prefer lift truck operators unimpaired.
Along those lines, I think if safety is an issue (drivers/pilots/etc) then the test should be for impairment, not for drugs. One can be impared for other reasons, like not getting enough sleep, or having the flu, or just being a bad driver/pilot/lift-truck operator.

I like that approach because (1) it gets the gubbamints nose out of what you do in your own home - no "victimless" crimes, and (2) it address the real safety related problems by testing for impairment in general, not just impairment due to one of many possible causes.

There are people I'd sooner ride with as a passenger 24 hrs after they smoked pot, then other people who haven't touched the stuff in their lives.
--
peas on earth

[Therealbubba]

The temperature of urine should be near body temperature. My understanding is that 91-97 degrees F is the range labs look for.

As for impairment on the job, the whiz quiz does nothing to address that. A guy who smoked a fatty 2 weeks ago at a party will come up as a positive while the guy who snorted three lines of coke in the bathroom at work three days ago will come up negative. The guy who drank beer at lunch will also come up negative.

I equate urine tests as being as invasive as having a cavity search. Why not just bust down my door and search my house while you're at it. I want my 4th amendment back please.

Therealbubba

[BugZap]

Well, mangeorge, at least you have the courage of your convictions. Every single other person posting here who uses is a big hypocrite.
--------------

Thanks Barney, we'll let you know when to put the bullet in the gun.

Let's hear your rehab story next.
Otherwise how am I gonna get some criteria for callin' hypocrites?

Oh, I get it now! If you went to jail, you walked the walk, you talked the talk.
Some human sacrifice kind of thing.
So mangeorge is ok now with you? An exclusive club of one?

Come on everybody! Tell us your rehab story!
Then pld can tell you if you pass or not.

Too funny.

[mangeorge]

"Oh, I get it now! If you went to jail, you walked the walk, you talked the talk."
---BugZap
---------------------------------------
I didn't go to jail, just rehab. And no, it didn't do me any good.
Impairment testimg is not acceptable to the "powers that be", I suspect for the very reasons that bantmof states. It works.
Peace,
mangeorge

[DW3]

I can't believe you guys don't know about marijuana.com They have several forums with one dedicated to this subject alone. I don't smoke anything but fish and I know about this site. Hmmm.

[mangeorge]

I've known about it for a log time. Got it bookmarked, as a matter of fact. It came up on another topic months ago. Good reference for when people try to bullshit you.
Any of you other dummies know about this big secret? ;)
Peace,
mangeorge

[Brother Haus]

To all of those out there considering the purchase of drug cleansers on-line, PLEASE BE VERY CAUTIOUS. I have recently found out that some Marijuana websites are actually government run sites to catch newbies. It is along site but check it out if you are interested. Click here- www.members.tripod.com/spookbusters/ (http://www.members.tripod.com/spookbusters/)

It has alot of info for those who aren't wise to our Government and their wicked ways.

------------------
I am not weird, I'm just normle challenged.

[pldennison]

The point, BZ, besides the one at the top of your tiny little head, is that so many SDMBers love to talk about how much they love pot, and how great pot is, and how pot should be legal, and everyone should use pot; but the minute it might be discovered that they actually do smoke pot, and might have to suffer the consequences of its current illegal status, they clamor for ways to hide the fact that they use it.

That's pretty much what hypocrisy means. If you're so behind the pro-pot cause, step up to the plate and take one for the team.

[jane_says]

As a reformed pothead, I can only tell you that some of that stuff works, some of it does not. Spend the extra money and get the good stuff. Terminator Gold always worked for me (on several tests, over several years, and I smoked every day). Steer clear of the powdered stuff that you mix with water, because it is useless. My sister got fired from a home-improvement store because she was too cheap to spring for the Terminator. The only drawback is that you have to refill the bottle it comes in with water and drink it. It helps if you know at least a few minutes in advance.
When my dad does "random" piss tests on his employees, he usually takes them directly from work to the lab in a company van, making the Terminator useless, since the manufacturer suggests a waiting time of 2 hours. However, I have had good results in as little as 1/2 hour or so.

[phouka]

pldennison:

Take a hit for the team? Nyuk nyuk. Not bad.

Seriously, I *am* pro-pot. I think it ought to be regulated and taxed. I don't think the government's prohibition policy is doing any good. More, I think it's doing a lot of harm.

I've smoked pot seven times, and all that has been in the last two years. Am I going to martyr myself for the legalization cause? No. Why?

- I don't think it'll do any good. I'm not a celebrity. I'm not a spokesperson. Putting me in jail isn't going to make the general public go all misty eyed and come to their senses. There are - what? - several hundred thousand people already in jail for drug possession. Adding me to their numbers isn't going to make a difference to the campaign to regulate marijuana or other drugs.

- I don't think I should have to. I think we should be able to come up with a drug policy that works without me giving up my freedom, my possesions, my credit, my friends, and my civil rights.

In the meantime, if I decide to enjoy an illegal substance, I will:

- keep out of the eye of the law (no accidentally calling 911 for pizza when I've got the munchies, thank you).

- not work for a company that tests for drugs (hell, if they did where I work, the company would go belly up).

- vote for politicians who support reforming the US drug policy.

- continue trying to convince those in my life that injesting marijuana is not a good enough reason to ruin someone's life.

Does that make me hypocritical? I don't think so, but that's just me.

------------------
"I'm surprised that you've never been told before, that you're lovely, that you're perfect, and that somebody wants you." - Semisonic, f.n.p

[BugZap]

Thanks pld, I'm out shoppin' for a smaller hat right now.

They do whine don't they?
I see your point.

They should all step right up and take their lumps in a court of law. That would be the brave thing to do. You could even wave the flag over that! Dopers of america turn yourself in everywhere! It would so overload the system from top to bottom, they couldn't even begin to process.

And you could enter that new and rising field of Law Enforcement Data Processing, just like described on that book of matches you picked up at last weeks bar gig.
Pinhead huh? Did I say Rick 4001's sucked?

Join the team!
Turn yourself in!
Pay mucho dinero in fines, and let us run your life for awhile.
You'll be better for it, we promise.

Nice bait though.

[Brother Haus]

pldennison writes:so many SDMBers love to talk about how much they love pot, and how great pot is, and how pot should be legal, and everyone should use pot
Brother Haus says: YES I do love smoking Marijuana, YES I do believe Marijuana is great, YES I do believe Marijuana should be legal for all responsible adults to use or not use as they please, NO I do not believe everyone should use Marijuana.

I also believe drinking alcohol, using tobacco, ingesting caffiene, running for public office, and writting on the SDMB's is not for everyone. But, far be it from me to deny these things from anyone who wishes too :).

IMO, I think that, I (and others) would like those who think this plant is the scourge of the earth to look at the other side of the issue. Go into it with an open mind, and maybe, just maybe you and others will see that the Federal government has not been telling us the truth about Marijuana.He who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; and he who dares not is a slave. -- William Drummond

pldennison also writes:but the minute it might be discovered that they actually do smoke pot, and might have to suffer the consequences of its current illegal status, they clamor for ways to hide the fact that they use it.
What the urine test can reveal:
If someone had drunk an excessive amount of alcohol before the test.
If someone had ingested any Marijuana or Hemp product within the past 30 (?) days.
That's it, and that's all. Maybe you don't mind pissing in a cup for your employer whenever they want you to, but some of us DO!

As far as 'taking one for the team' (well, it's not really a team), I'm with jane-says on this one.

------------------
I am not weird, I'm just normle challenged.

[Big Iron]

[[If y'all are so proud of being pot smokers, why are you trying so desperately to dodge the consequences of your noble acts of civil disobedience? Be a martyr for the cause!]]

and


[[The point, BZ, besides the one at the top of your tiny little head, is that so many SDMBers love to talk about how much they love pot, and how great pot is, and how pot should be legal, and everyone should use pot; but the minute it might be discovered that they actually do smoke pot, and might have to suffer the consequences of its current illegal status, they clamor for ways to hide the fact that they use it.
That's pretty much what hypocrisy means. If you're so behind the pro-pot cause, step up to the plate and take one for the team.]]PLD


Give it a rest with this tedious nonsense, Phil -- it's not making any more sense with time, and is below your usual standards of reasoning.

Or do you refuse to slow down when you are exceeding the speed limit in your car and see a speed trap?

There is nothing hypocritical about not wanting to lose your job, or not wanting to be hassled by the police. Should gay men in Georgia refuse to defend themselves if charged under that state's sodomy law? Better still, should they refrain from conducting their sexual activities in private places if they want to be able to claim "pride" withoiut being dubbed "hypocrites"?

[pldennison]

Brother Haus: The old "I-and-only-people-who-think-like-me-are-in-possession-of-the-TRUTH-and-anyone-who-disagrees-is-brainwashed-by-the-government" line of crap? Please. Did it ever occur to you that people may have perfectly valid reasons for objecting to the legalization of marijuana that have nothing to do with "brainwashing"? What makes you think my opinion has anything to do with government policy? Way to assume. You're beginning to excel at it.

Oh, BTW, my employer doesn't conduct drug tests, but in any case, I have nothing to hide. You, OTOH, apparently feel you do have something to hide.

Bob: So what you're saying is that current marijuana law doesn't result in enough injustice to make it worth fighting for or committing visible acts of civil disobedience for? Huh. Well, that speaks volumes. Don't you think it would make some impact for the pro-legalization crowd if some very visible and important people went to jail for it? Apparently not.

Your speed trap analogy remains silly, as I do not spend a single erg of energy attending pro-speeding rallies, attempting to convince others of the immense injustice of laws against speeding, and bitching that I am not allowed to speed.

Usually, when people feel a civil right is being abrogated, they feel strongly enough about it to do something, including being made an example of.

BZ: Please explain what my being a part-time musician or playing a Rickenbacker has to do with the topic at hand? Oh, that's right--you're to stupid to think of anything relevant or important to say. I forgot. Grow up, sonny.

[Big Iron]

[[Bob: So what you're saying is that current marijuana law doesn't result in enough injustice to make it worth fighting for or committing visible acts of civil disobedience for? Huh.]] PLD


It is not an where area civil disobedience, especially in small numbers, makes sense. First, it is not a real civil rights issue, per se, such as gay rights or racism. Second, the only serious injustices are to the sellers (who are not involved in your exercise in name-calling) -- and given the sentencing they face, it is preposterous to suggest that they should treat their prosecution as a situation in which to engage in civil disobedience.


[[ Well, that speaks volumes.]]


Actually, it says little beyond the unremarkable observations that people prefer not to lose their jobs or go to jail.

[[ Don't you think it would make some impact for the pro-legalization crowd if some very visible and important people went to jail for it? Apparently not.]]


I can't imagine what such an arrest (say, Paul McCartney's) could possibly accomplish, since it has long ago been established that pot smoking presents little or no impediment to a productive/creative life.


[[Your speed trap analogy remains silly, as I do not spend a single erg of energy attending pro-speeding rallies, attempting to convince others of the immense injustice of laws against speeding, and bitching that I am not allowed to speed.]]


Of course, neither do most people who smoke pot do such things regarding that paerticular offense -- meanwhile, at the political rallies that are held, there in fact are plenty of acts of public civil disobedience.


[[Usually, when people feel a civil right is being abrogated, they feel strongly enough about it to do something, including being made an example of.]]

But the overwhelming majority of pot smokers don't look at it that way, so you may now cease roughing up that particular straw man.

[phouka]

Gee, pld ignored me. Should I be hurt or feel lucky? ;)

I'll restate what I said earlier:

If I thought that visible civil disobedience on my part would do any good toward legalizing/regulating marijuana, I'd join in.

But I don't think it will. In the meantime, I'll use the avenues I think will do some good and keep my head out of the firing line.

I also don't work for a company that drug tests, and that *was* a specific decision of mine.

I don't think I'm a hypocrite, pldennison. I believe that the laws, as they stand now, are unfair, and that the consequences for opposing these laws by breaking them in a flagrant, confrontational manner are so severe and horrendous, that I don't stand a chance of making my point in a way that will do any good. So, I'll work in my own way.

The jails are full of people convicted of possessing marijuana. It hasn't changed things. Therefore, I will find a different way to change our government's drug policy.

Civil disobedience isn't the only tool available, pldennison. Not by a long shot.

------------------
"I'm surprised that you've never been told before, that you're lovely, that you're perfect, and that somebody wants you." - Semisonic, f.n.p

[pldennison]

Bob, in your last sentence, are you claiming that the vast majority of pot smokers don't look upon it as a civil rights issue? Because the vast majority of SDMB-ers who are pro-legalization (admittedly a nonscientific sample) definitely argue it from a civil-rights standpoint.

And to state:
Of course, neither do most people who smoke pot do such things regarding that paerticular offense is either disingenuous or simply stupid, since there have been at least 5 threads devoted to convincing people to legalize not only marijuana but all drugs in the last two months alone.

It simply strikes me as odd that the zeal with which people will support a cause flies right out the window when they discover that there may be some consequences for it. It especially strikes me as odd that those same people apparently feel that laws only apply to other people, and that they are doing themselves a favor by violating their employment agreement. Don't like the policy? Get a job elsewhere.

We aren't talking about government action in the vast majority of these cases. If you are an at-will employee, as probably 95% of employees in this country are, your employer can put all sorts of conditions on your employment. They can refuse to hire smokers, they can refuse to hire homosexuals (in many states), they can refuse to hire child molesters, and they can refuse to hire marijuana users.

It simply appears to me that most of the people who use or would use these products take some childish pleasure in "getting away with it." I fail to see how that supports the pro-legalization cause.

[Doug Bowe]

If it helps, here are the latest figures of those who "stepped up to the plate."
http://www.drugsense.org/wadclock.htm

[Doug Bowe]

whoops! one letter is off. Try this:
http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

[Brother Haus]

pldennison writes:Brother Haus: The old "I-and-only-people-who-think-like-me-are-in-possession-of-the-TRUTH-and-anyone-who-disagrees-is-brainwashed-by-the-government" line of crap? Please. Did it ever occur to you that people may have perfectly valid reasons for objecting to the legalization of marijuana that have nothing to do with "brainwashing"?Why does being lied to, have to mean the same thing as someone being "brainwashed"? This is you assuming things. I have been lied to by our Federal government, and you have to (I'm assuming you do know what the government has said about Marijuana). Brainwashing is your assumption, not mine. I do know one thing, my Marijuana smoking has never led to what the Federal government has said it might, and it never will. So, by them making it a crime to smoke and/or possess Marijuana is UNJUST in my eyes.What makes you think my opinion has anything to do with government policy? Way to assume. You're beginning to excel at it.Not once did I say or think your views on Marijuana was based on what government policy is. What I did assume is that, you, have not been told the truth about Marijuana by the government. But, if you have not heard what the government has said about Marijuana, you either a) don't care about it, or b) have never heard about it in the first place.

I cannot think of any personal reasons why people would want Marijuana to remain at it's illegal status. I have noticed that their reasons usually mimic what the majority of government officials say about Marijuana. I have always been open to hear anyone's reason for keeping it illegal, and have hoped that they would listen to my reason why we should make it legal. So, if you have already posted your reason, please direct me to that post or post it here so I can observe it.Oh, BTW, my employer doesn't conduct drug tests, but in any case, I have nothing to hide. You, OTOH, apparently feel you do have something to hide.I'm not sure where you got the opinion that I have something hide. I have never taken any "test-clean" products to hide the fact that I smoke Marijuana. I just stop smoking when I go to get another job. I'm not hiding anything because there is nothing to hide. Smoking Marijuana has NO bad side-effects on my work performance at my job. It does make my time there more enjoyable.

I do smoke with the boss, of my department, at my job. So, I don't need to worry about random Marijuana drug testing.

My uncle quit a very plush job working at a plumbing business (riding around in the company truck, telling people what to do). He did not want to do the random drug testing that they required. His reason for quiting is one that I hold dear to my heart. He told them that, if they wanted to pay him 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, he would gladly do any drug test they wanted him to. He quit. They found another asshole to do the job. Oh well. Life moves on.

All of this doesn't matter to you because you don't smoke Marijuana. There's no reason for you to care. And, why would you anyways. We have our standards, even though you may find them ridiculous. Pissing in a cup, to keep a job, will always be wrong to us. Period.

Maybe you should ask your employer to start Marijuana drug testing (that's the piss-in-a-cup-method). You might find out someone has been smoking Marijuana at your job. =I'm assuming you have other co-workers.=

------------------
Confusious Say:
-Man who stand on toilet,
Is high on pot-

[pldennison]

My opinion is based on the fact that there are always some social costs associated with the legalization of any mind-altering substance. For it to be worthwhile, the benefits should outweigh the costs.

Since alcohol is the most common analogy made: Despite the fact that arrests for drunk driving and public drunkenness decreased drastically during the Prohibition era, despite the fact that alcohol consumption per capita decreased drastically, and despite the fact that alcohol as a contributing factor in acts of assault decreased, we decided the benefits of legal alcohol outweighed all those costs. Was that the right decision? It's arguable from both sides.

I have seen nothing to convince me that the benefits of legal marijuana would outweigh the costs. I don't agree with the current sentencing policies and think they could be reduced, but I still am not in favor of legalization.

As far as employment goes, as I said, if your employer has a drug-test policy and you don't like it, go work elsewhere. If you're an at-will employee, your boss can put pretty much whatever conditions he likes on your continued employment. And that applies whether the activity in question is legal or not. Many businesses are now explicitly advertising for "non-smokers only." You think there are many homosexuals employed at the 700 Club? If your employer has a policy you dislike, request that they change it or move on. But trying to "beat the rap," as it were, is a bit morally distasteful, and unfair the the rest of the employees. You aren't doing anyone any favors.

[Brother Haus]

pldennison writes :(about his thoughts on Marijuana)My opinion is based on the fact that there are always some social costs associated with the legalization of any mind-altering substance. For it to be worthwhile, the benefits should outweigh the costs.This is very interesting. I do recall reading about this before in another thread, possibly from you. I stand corrected.

It would be very difficult to present the cost and benefit analysis on just Marijuana. I'm aware of the benefits of Marijuana (and also Hemp; the other form of Cannabis Sativa), and as well, I hope you are too. Trying to convert you is not my goal. Presenting the information, the facts as I see them, so you can convert yourself, is. If you have already seen an analysis like this, I would love to see it also. IMO, I think the social cost of keeping it illegal, does not outweigh the benefits of making it legal, especially for sick and dying people who have found that Marijuana improves their lives better than what is offered to them now. But, alas, I will research this for myself.

As for ending alcohol prohibition, I believe it had a lot to do with taking it out the hands of the bootleggers and violent mob affiliations, thus ending their stranglehold on that market and reducing the crime that went with it. Their market is now illegal drugs, including Marijuana. As I write this, I realize another theory for keeping Marijuana prohibition is that, in the hopes, the illegal drug pushers don't significantly push the real addictive drugs like cocaine and heroin. Just a theory, of course.If you're an at-will employee, your boss can put pretty much whatever conditions he likes on your continued employment. And that applies whether the activity in question is legal or not. Many businesses are now explicitly advertising for "non-smokers only."Though I have never heard of "non-smokers only" advertising, it may exist. What I have heard of is "non-smoking workplaces", and that is just fine with me. I've worked at bingo halls before, and on some days I have wished no one was allowed to smoke in there (smoke was everywhere). "Non-smoking" rooms were a plus; especially for the "non-smokers." In the light of only "non-smoking" businesses, if they exist, I'm sure they wouldn't do employee testing for nicotine.You think there are many homosexuals employed at the 700 Club?I'm not aware of the 700 Club's policies, but from your statement I guess they don't like homosexuals. But, I seriously doubt they follow their employees around to make sure they are not though.If your employer has a policy you dislike, request that they change it or move on. But trying to "beat the rap," as it were, is a bit morally distasteful, and unfair the the rest of the employees. You aren't doing anyone any favors.I agree with you on the policy statement. If someone doesn't like their employers policies, move on or ask that they be changed. Or stay there and deal with it. Which is what most of us do. I have never tried to "beat the rap", as you say. When changing jobs, I'll just stop smoking Marijuana if they do pre-employment Marijuana testing. I have never come across "random" Marijuana testing. If they do, I might have to consider a test clean product, depending on the last time I smoked. Working is not "morally distasteful", and neither is trying to keep your job in all of it's aspects. As far as being unfair to the rest of your co-workers, are you implying that if they don't smoke Marijuana and I do it is unfair in that way?? Where does it say, anywhere, that I have to do anyone any favors at all? Don't get me wrong, I like doing favors, but I don't see how that goes with anything.

------------------
Confusious Say:
-Man who stand on toilet,
Is high on pot-

[Big Iron]

[[Bob, in your last sentence, are you claiming that the vast majority of pot smokers don't look upon it as a civil rights issue? Because the vast majority of SDMB-ers who are pro-legalization (admittedly a nonscientific sample) definitely argue it from a civil-rights standpoint.]] PLD


We must be reading different message boards -- I see just a few taking that angle.


[[Of course, neither do most people who smoke pot do such things regarding that paerticular offense


is either disingenuous or simply stupid, since there have been at least 5 threads devoted to convincing people to legalize not only marijuana but all drugs in the last two months alone.]]


When you make a mistake as big as you just did, it really should make you regret tossing words like "stupid" around. A few people HERE initiating a discussion of a change in public policy that they think is advisable (and how "all drugs" fits your thesis, such as it is, remains a mystery) is not the equivalent of a majority of pot-smokers "attending pro-speeding rallies, attempting to convince others of the immense injustice of laws against speeding, and bitching that I am not allowed to speed."


[[It especially strikes me as odd that those same people apparently feel that laws only apply to other people,]]


"Just put your mind on hold, do what you're told ... "


[[ and that they are doing themselves a favor by violating their employment agreement. Don't like the policy? Get a job elsewhere.]]


Or they could do what's right for them without a whit of concern over ignorant accusations that they are somehow being "hypocrites."


[[It simply appears to me that most of the people who use or would use these products take some childish pleasure in "getting away with it." I fail to see how that supports the pro-legalization cause.]]


Yes, how childish it is to want to keep your job or not be arrested.