People will walk down the street in San Francisco smoking a joint like it’s a cigarette. My Dad was out to visit and we were at some shop in Chinatown, and he turns around and says, “What’s up with this city, that’s the fourth time I’ve smelled pot.”
“Yeah, that’ll happen.”
Five minutes later. “You got any? I haven’t smoked up in years.”
I don’t know where you’re from or where you live, but this goes completely against my experience. I know many many many middle class pot smokers, with homes and good jobs and cars and all the rest.
Another vote for realism. The vast majority of people who smoke weed don’t get busted (or act stupid). Possession charges arise out of street crime “prevention.”
And it’s not a purpose of art to instill virtue. (IMHO).
I just watched the aptly named “Superbad”. All about some underaged guys trying to score booze and, with the help of the booze, girls. Heck, so many “teen movies” are all about underage drinking - that’s pretty dang illegal.
OK. That solves that one. Now why do they portray booze drinking so much? What political ideology is that? And because I’m a curious sort–what politics are implied by coffee, cigarette and antacid usage in films/TV?
It depends on context, but alcohol is used to denote a range of different moods and characterizations. Sipping whiskey from a flask is a time honored trademark for hardboiled tough guys. It can be used to illustrate stress if a character goes to the mini bar for a belt after hearing bad news. It can be used to signify anarchy and fun (many, many party scenes).
The use of coffee and cigarettes, I think, is largely a device to give actors something to do with their hands while engaged in dialogue in static situations.
Or film, television or radio–at least in the large American markets.
Who the hell are you going to get to do any quality creative-type work if you drug-test? (I don’t mean to say that all “creative-type” workers use drugs, just that A) many of them may do so at least infrequently and B) among the creative types I know who* don’t* use any illegal drugs whatsoever, many of them wouldn’t work at a place that drug-tested anyway because they’re afraid it might be like working for the Westboro Baptist Church or WalMart.
For varying levels of silly and noticeably, but yeah. I guess what I mean is that I get a little silly and act what I’d reckon is noticeably different. Could just be the SSRIs though.
As for the OP, put me in the ‘it’s a good thing’ camp.
Not saying that there aren’t non-testing employers out there, but still the majority do test.
As for its being a criminal activity, and why they show it, and whether they should be allowed to show it, I think another factor is that it’s basically a cultural phenomenon. People may not approve of it, and it is illegal, but surely very few people regard it in the same kind of light as murder, assault, and similar offenses that have been illegal since time immemorial.
Cannabis use certainly is not always portrayed in a positive light. On Six Feet Under Nate always seemed to go a little crazy on the herb.
Anecdotal, not statistics, but…most of the pot smokers I know work for corporations that have drug testing. None of them have ever been tested, but they know there’s a chance. I’m retired now, but I worked under a corporate drug-testing regime for over a decade without a single test. I believe that if corporations really went after all the pot-smoking fiends in their employ, the effects on the US economy would make the current home mortgage/gas price situation look like happy fun time in comparison.
In the employee orientation at my last job, my new supervisor was going through the HR/personnel policies binder and came to a section about drugs and alcohol. She stops reading, looks around at us and says “if we did any testing here, we’d have to fire half the staff. So… just don’t show up to work loaded. Otherwise, we don’t care what you do on your own time. Next policy…”