fred wrote:

"what are your reasons for continuing it. so far, everyone says it is a total waste of money and people still get drugs." I asked you first.

and i asked 2nd.

Kermie wrote:

It's none of my business what a person does after work,it is my business when that person is still feeling the effects when he /she is at work.I have no problem with urine screening as long the company screens everyone.If you smell of alcohol or like the weed you just smoked then you are asking for trouble.I have never seen a person get stone from any type of tabacco,but I have seen plenty come to work with either a alcohol or marijuana buzz which then it becomes by business because that person are endangering thier co / works well being.

AMEN!!

AND JC, you never came out and said anything like this in all the 7 pages on this thread. NICE TRY!!

MP

"and i asked 2nd."

There is no doubt in my mind that if drugs were legal more people would use them and I would assume that we can agree, that wouldn't be a good thing.

all drugs legal and anyone free to take what ever they like.

Cops already have stun guns and tasers now imagine one of them high on crack pulling you over for a speeding tix.

nice picture

stoney wrote:

AND JC, you never came out and said anything like this in all the 7 pages on this thread.

actually i have said that. many times. consistently (except for my initial comment which (like yours) was just to spur on the debate). at any rate, wouldn't an employee being drunk or high on duty be proof that the employee might harm the business and/or constitute a danger to the public (depending on the business). and wouldn't that prove the need for testing. really, i figured that was a no brainer. i'm surprised you don't agree.

i do not support the use of drug testing where there is no proven need for that

unless they can first prove that employee drug use is presenting an actual danger to the public or actually harming their business.

a company should be able to use substance abuse testing IF it can prove that employee substance abuse is actually harming the business

fred wrote:

"and i asked 2nd." There is no doubt in my mind that if drugs were legal more people would use them and I would assume that we can agree, that wouldn't be a good thing.

you have a low opinion of people, don't you. fortunately, i do not share that or assume that people will do things to harm themselves just because they can. i also do not necessarily agree that more people would use drugs if they were legal, though that is certainly a possibility. what is also a posssibility (actually, more like a fact) is that many of the people who develop serious substance abuse problems in spite of your precious "war ond rugs" could actually be helped to overcome those problems if we weren't wasting all of our resources trying to police something that just about everyone agrees is not policeable. i also do not agree that people using drugs is necessarily a bad thing, any more than i agree that having a cocktail after a hard day at the office is a bad thing or someone lighting up their once a week cigar is all that big a deal. at any rate, wasting billions of dollars a year for 40+ years on the "war on drugs" hasn't stopped drug use and your lies about all drugs and all drug use being "bad" is not going to do it either. that is exactly the kind of bullshit hippy was talking about - lies and scare tactics that do not work any better than the government's "war on drugs".

I never said I was for the war on drugs. I am pretty much anti-drugs though. At least the addictive ones.

fred wrote:

I never said I was for the war on drugs. I am pretty much anti-drugs though. At least the addictive ones.

you don't smoke or drink?

I smoke a cigar now and then and I do know that nicotine is mildly addictive. When you quit there is a day or two that your body goes through withdrawals about the same as caffeine. Beer is not addictive. Saying all that, I would be healthier if I didn't smoke my cigar or drink beer.

stoney wrote:

fred wrote: I never said I was for the war on drugs. I am pretty much anti-drugs though. At least the addictive ones. you don't smoke or drink?

he only has alcohol so he can give it to beggars.

jc wrote:

stoney wrote: fred wrote: I never said I was for the war on drugs. I am pretty much anti-drugs though. At least the addictive ones. you don't smoke or drink? he only has alcohol so he can give it to beggars.

cheap wine at that

fred wrote:

Beer is not addictive.

beer is THE gateway drug for every addict. show me an addict (any drug) and i will show you someone whose first drug use was beer.

jc wrote:

fred wrote: Beer is not addictive. beer is THE gateway drug for every addict. show me an addict (any drug) and i will show you someone whose first drug use was beer.

I must respectfully disagree. I can think of several friends from my youth who would have nothing to do with alcohol but would dabble with illicit drugs.

The real gateway beverage is milk. Show me any alcohol, tobacco, or drug user/abuser and I can almost guarantee that they were given milk as a child.

BAN MILK!!!11!1!

Thunder Dan wrote:

jc wrote: fred wrote: Beer is not addictive. beer is THE gateway drug for every addict. show me an addict (any drug) and i will show you someone whose first drug use was beer. I must respectfully disagree. I can think of several friends from my youth who would have nothing to do with alcohol but would dabble with illicit drugs. The real gateway beverage is milk. Show me any alcohol, tobacco, or drug user/abuser and I can almost guarantee that they were given milk as a child. BAN MILK!!!11!1!

there are exceptions to every rule and i'm sure all of your friends are an exception to at least one of them.
btw-where do you buy your milk. i can't find any of the "good stuff" locally.

In my middle-aged and decrepit state I can only handle 2% these days. If you want the 'good stuff,' you gotta go straight to the source:

Thunder Dan wrote:

In my middle-aged and decrepit state I can only handle 2% these days. If you want the 'good stuff,' you gotta go straight to the source:

i hope that cow has been eating cannibus.........'cause otherwise i don't think the little tykes will get enough of a buzz from the milk to want crack in a few years.

. Beer is not addictive.

That depends on the person

Be serious.

fred wrote:

Be serious.

as a heartattack

Just like some people are addicted to chocolate, right?