Medicinal marijuana and road laws
- Thread starter safreek
- Start date
pink poodle
ここには見るべきものは何もありません
Your quote has a typo bringing out a contradiction...so
I have edited your post to what I think you meant...(assuming it was directed to me), apologies if I have misconstrued. It must be the THC still in my system or the air. I heard it can travel from a neighbours house and infiltrate the innocents. That is why you are supposed to Dutch oven.
As I said individuals all experience different effects. The simple answer is zero...if you rocked up to work and supplied THC in a pee test, would you be allowed to operate the crane despite having been away from the bong for 2 weeks? Plus in our current legal situation consumption of marijuana is illegal. So having it in your system is a crime.
Alternatively you may have meant...
In which case a different means for measuring would be required and technology doesn't allow for that. In which case how would insurance companies and the sort know who to blame for accidents?
A friend of mine in the forgotten years worked in a heavy industry where drug testing was common. While he would prefer pot over any other form of substance, it was his least used because of the lingering. By default he (and some associates) were "pushed" towards speed and pills etc because of how quickly they left the system. It wasn't a good long term scenario hut nobody wanted to loose their job.
Calvin27
Eats Squid
Yep this is rife in mining communities. Pot can be ridiculously stubborn in the system even if it has no more effect physically, the trace hang in there for a while.
pink poodle
ここには見るべきものは何もありません
Funny you should mention mining.
Hamsta
Likes Bikes and Dirt
I have worked alongside people who get pretty baked on their time off but they are smart with their timing and the opiates/stimulants/psychedelics have been metabolised by the time they return to work. They will pass a drug test. If they declare using codeine and barbiturates prior to taking a drug test then they will be fine. Whilst what they choose to use during their time off work is ultimately their business, however, if they choose to drive stoned/tripping then they are indeed an idiot and should face the wrath of the law if caught.
The somewhat annoying thing is that if I was to vape a cone every second day during my days off, it is in no way going to affect my ability to do my job safely and efficiently when I return to work. Weed doesn't turn everyone into a stoner retard catastrophic accident waiting to happen, despite the antiquated views of insurance underwriters.
Last edited:
pink poodle
ここには見るべきものは何もありません
I saw the adds man! One slight whiff of pot will turn you into a sloth!
Hamsta
Likes Bikes and Dirt
And smoking some heroin will turn you into a total deviant like Bill Cosby, or worse, a Real Estate Agent!
pink poodle
ここには見るべきものは何もありません
We all know real estate agents take cocaine. It is the Drug of choice for the rich and powerful.
tasty.dirt74
Likes Bikes and Dirt
The issue I have with this is there is actually no prescribed content, unlike 0.05 BAC with alcohol. The THC test just shows there is THC in your system. it does not tell what percentage. It is either a yes, it is in your system, or no, it is not in your system..
There needs to be a method to test what percentage just like blood alcohol content if they are to test for it.
Plankosaurus
Spongeplank Dalepantski
effects are so massively varied that it'd be near impossible to work out a 'safe' level. given that it's also an illegal substance, 0 to me seems a reasonable level :dunno:
when I was younger and stupider I could smoke fair quantity of prime bud and still function mostly ok. years down the track after not touching it, and a couple of tokes on a communal spliff sent me into the giggles, full munchies and I couldn't cope with a thread of thought for half a minute before losing myself completely. minimal amount in my system, but wouldn't want me on the road in a state like that!
(fwiw - I personally think drugs, including alcohol, all needs a big policy revamp across the board. harm vs policy seems to be inconsistent and telling kids to "just say no" before the entire country starts a week long Xmas grog binge comes across kinda hypocritical...)
slippy
Likes Bikes and Dirt
@Plankosaurus
A reasonable level does not exist. As you said, a small amount could be enough to make one person legless and the same level in another person may indicate use many days ago that is not effecting them in any way.
Have a read of this in today's news: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...-system-for-up-to-12-hours-questioned/7216720
Australia has its approach all wrong. We should be testing impairment like the UK does.
A reasonable level does not exist. As you said, a small amount could be enough to make one person legless and the same level in another person may indicate use many days ago that is not effecting them in any way.
Have a read of this in today's news: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...-system-for-up-to-12-hours-questioned/7216720
Australia has its approach all wrong. We should be testing impairment like the UK does.
Conradd Copperfield
Cannon Fodder
I'm a stage 2 Pancreatic cancer survivor. Doctors declared that im now cancer free and i'm so glad to hear that. Since then marijuana products like this https://www.bonzaseeds.com/blog/bruce-banner/ has been a great help to me so i decided to grow my own marijuana for my personal use only. But growing marijuana requires more knowledge and need to understand its life cycle. I have encountered many different problems in growing myself but that doesn't help me stop from growing my own herbal medicine.
link1896
Mr Greenfield
Take a holiday to California?
Comic Book Guy
Likes Bikes and Dirt
Bruce Banner...FFS...how dumb do you think people are.
Alcohol is different because it is a legal and socially acceptable drug. Therefore the law has to make allowance for there to be alcohol in your system.
I think as employers (former in my case) we made a mess of the whole drug testing regime. Yes employers have to be confident that fellow workers aren't off their tits on something and a risk to themselves or others. However, the lingering effects of thc mean that regardless of whether someone had last smoked 1 week, 3 weeks etc ago and is very unlikely to be impaired they are still classed as not fit for duty. Part of that is as said above the drug is not currently legal and so there is no need for an impairment level, any is bad. This is not my moral position necessarily just a statement of the current laws. Nor have I as a former employer any interest in a person's private activities provided they don't impact on me or the business in a negative way.
This tbough has definitely pushed people onto harder drugs so that they can maintain their employment because these usually are clear within a few hours.
I am old so I grew up with lots of people who smoked marijuana and I also knew plenty doing harder drugs (some of whom aren't here any more but same goes to a couple of guys who hit the booze hard). I never saw any evidence that the weed smokers went onto heavier drugs, mostly they were happy to do what they were doing. Obviously not a huge sample but enough to make me feel that that argument is flawed.
The drugs that are able to be processed more quickly in my observations are worse for the user and those around them.
Testing metnodology improves all the time and that causes the push to synthetic or altered drugs, partly because it might be a grey area of the law and mean a less harsh treatment if caught but these tend to beat the testing, for a while at least.
If medical marijuana is legalised then legislation and testing is going to have to catch up but given how the majority of pollies are arsehats I can just see the law allowing the drug to also remove driving privilidges.
By the way fatigue, problems at home, general ill health all increase risk in the workplace, especially around heavy equipment etc. Most companies have policies on these too but apart from an eye reflex test (which still isn't 100%) it is up to employees to declare their problems which doesn't happen. By the time changes are observed by supervision it could well be too late.
This tbough has definitely pushed people onto harder drugs so that they can maintain their employment because these usually are clear within a few hours.
I am old so I grew up with lots of people who smoked marijuana and I also knew plenty doing harder drugs (some of whom aren't here any more but same goes to a couple of guys who hit the booze hard). I never saw any evidence that the weed smokers went onto heavier drugs, mostly they were happy to do what they were doing. Obviously not a huge sample but enough to make me feel that that argument is flawed.
The drugs that are able to be processed more quickly in my observations are worse for the user and those around them.
Testing metnodology improves all the time and that causes the push to synthetic or altered drugs, partly because it might be a grey area of the law and mean a less harsh treatment if caught but these tend to beat the testing, for a while at least.
If medical marijuana is legalised then legislation and testing is going to have to catch up but given how the majority of pollies are arsehats I can just see the law allowing the drug to also remove driving privilidges.
By the way fatigue, problems at home, general ill health all increase risk in the workplace, especially around heavy equipment etc. Most companies have policies on these too but apart from an eye reflex test (which still isn't 100%) it is up to employees to declare their problems which doesn't happen. By the time changes are observed by supervision it could well be too late.
Last edited:
John U
MTB Precision
The ‘marijuana is a gateway drug’ argument is a complete misrepresentation of the facts. As you’ve stated, it is highly unlikely that someone who smokes dope is going to move onto heroin. At the same time it is highly likely that someone on heroin at some point smoked dope.
