Your company allows people on prescription drugs that specifically state not to operate heavy machinery to operate heavy machinery? Seriously? That is truly beyond stupid.
That I totally agree with. Either show there are long term affects or find a test that can tell how stoned someone is.
I don’t understand why y’all are arguing about marijuana. It will become ok to smoke it and do certain jobs as soon as a test comes along that can determine current real time levels of intoxication. Insurance companies will not back off this . Nobody is going to make them and as former business owner I really don’t give a damn if you smoke but, to think I would open myself up to the liability of not being able to tell if you are currently affected is quite simply mind boggling . Give me a test where I can tell (or at least the law recognizes as an acceptable level ) and I’ll hire a pot smoker. Until then if you test positive you’re not getting hired. I’m not putting myself at risk for lawsuits because of someone’s activities and neither should an insurance company.
That’s not entirely true. A short term, casual user probably won’t test positive as little as a day later.
And who’s gonna give that test and how well does that stand up in court ? Too many variables and open to interpretation. I want a standard that is solid and indisputable in court . Sorta like BAC. Yeah it affects everyone differently but at least the law recognizes certain levels and standards .
And those affected by the laws know there's a quantifiable test to prove or disprove intoxication level.
For the same reason you can pass a sobriety test with flying colors, blow above the legal limit, and still be charged with DUI. I'm not saying I agree with this.
I look forward to being greatly amused by Congresswoman Dunning-Kruger. New York is well on its way to being even more successful than Venezuela. The free states must remain vigilant lest a migrant caravan from New York approaches our borders.
Not always This. It may have changed, but at one time, BAC had nothing to do with the criminal charges here in MO. It only had to do with your driving privileges through the Dept of Revenue (DMV in layman's terms). If you refused to blow, or if you blew above a certain percentage, you lost your license. The actual criminal proceedings were entirely based upon the evidence of your physical impairment collected by the cop during the stop. It was his testimony about your slurred speech, smell of booze, lack of motor function, etc that got you to into legal trouble.
What about Bush 2? Genuinely curious, but too lazy to look for myself. ***EDIT***Akshully it was pretty easy to find. +8 and +1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_midterm_election