politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You had me at stop testing for cannabis.
I get what you're saying, but if you are, for instance, a heavy machinery operator, it is worth making sure you are not using substances that could potentially impair your judgment. Those people usually are tested for alcohol, which is why I find it acceptable.
I think the primary difference here is that Marijuana tests detect thc going back months and months while alcohol is a much shorter duration. When those people are tested for alcohol, is that to stop them from being actually drunk on the job or to actually forbid them from drinking at any point while they're employed?
That is true and it is a problem. As I said to @aelwero, I wonder if there is a way to test whether or not you've used it recently enough to impair your ability to operate heavy machinery? I am a heavy user of cannabis myself because I use it to treat a nerve condition and I would never operate heavy machinery or drive a car while under the influence, but plenty of people are happy to drive a car while high, so I'm sure plenty of people will be happy to work that metal press while high. I don't know what the answer here is.
A better test. Before the breathalyzer a suspected drunk would have to get a urine test at the police station, or a blood test in an ED. Whoever cracks the THC test will be rich.
Yeah the UK police do a test that can tell if the THC in your blood is still active, it still over measures a bit but can tell the difference between someone smoking a bit the night before and having had one before work in the morning or in the lunch break.
I'm guessing that won't make it to the U.S. cops any time soon. Not when they have arrest quotas to make.
Blood tests would be positive during any impairment and a few hours afterwards.
In order of how long it would take to pass a given test after use, it goes blood, saliva, sweat, urine, hair.
Most workplace testing does use swabs these days. I personally haven't seen any workplace testing for a decade tbh, but I'm sure it's still out there.
They only test for alcohol after a reportable incident. Nobody cares if you drink on your own time. Source; I have been through OSHA 30 training. They do screen for MJ though, which is bullshit since it's legal in so many states now. IBEW, UA and a few other powerful trade unions are currently leaning on the feds to end the screening requirements in states where it's legal, so we may see real progress relatively sooner than people think, unless Trump wins.
That is really great to hear. Thanks. I truly wish them luck!