Colorado......what this means

DVXSteverino · Nov 7, 2012

or have a BIG party in CO and call it the annual Smoke Bowl.....(patent pending)..lmao

desert dude · Nov 7, 2012

Carne Seca said:
I just had a disturbing thought. When and if Colorado implements the law, what are they going to do about employer drug testing? How are they going to find a work-around? Most employers follow federal guidelines.

When in doubt, read the manual, in this case read the amendment itself. As I read it, no employer is required to hire a cannabis user:

" (a) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO REQUIRE AN EMPLOYER TO PERMIT OR ACCOMMODATE THE USE, CONSUMPTION, POSSESSION, TRANSFER, DISPLAY, TRANSPORTATION, SALE OR GROWING OF MARIJUANA IN THE WORKPLACE OR TO AFFECT THE ABILITY OF EMPLOYERS TO HAVE POLICIES RESTRICTING THE USE OF MARIJUANA BY EMPLOYEES."

http://www.regulatemarijuana.org/s/regulate-marijuana-alcohol-act-2012

Carne Seca · Nov 7, 2012

desert dude said:
When in doubt, read the manual, in this case read the amendment itself. As I read it, no employer is required to hire a cannabis user:

" (a) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO REQUIRE AN EMPLOYER TO PERMIT OR ACCOMMODATE THE USE, CONSUMPTION, POSSESSION, TRANSFER, DISPLAY, TRANSPORTATION, SALE OR GROWING OF MARIJUANA IN THE WORKPLACE OR TO AFFECT THE ABILITY OF EMPLOYERS TO HAVE POLICIES RESTRICTING THE USE OF MARIJUANA BY EMPLOYEES."

http://www.regulatemarijuana.org/s/regulate-marijuana-alcohol-act-2012

That was my point. The law doesn't cover drug testing. People are going to get fired or not get a job because of testing dirty. When this goes into effect (if it ever does), how many people are going to be ignorant of that fact and end up losing their jobs?

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

Carne Seca said:
I just had a disturbing thought. When and if Colorado implements the law, what are they going to do about employer drug testing? How are they going to find a work-around? Most employers follow federal guidelines.

Some jobs, say like aerospace manufacting, transportation workers, etc. will still require pot free employees by federal law. I don't know how they can reconcile those.

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

budlover13 said:
Good point. i say Colorado throws a big "fuck you" to the feds and requires companies doing business in the state to follow state law.

The new law doesn't say you have use pot, I don't know if it requires businesses to employ pot users. I think you'll find the strictest interpretation will prevail. Example: There is no Federal law against murder, but all states outlaw it

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

budlover13 said:
Then they should leave the state or abide by state law.

Does state law require employers to "hold harmless" pot users? I don't think it has any effect employment-wise, it just means you won't be arrested for it. I suspect you can still be charged for driving under it's influence.

UncleBuck · Nov 7, 2012

Red1966 said:
Does state law require employers to "hold harmless" pot users? I don't think it has any effect employment-wise, it just means you won't be arrested for it. I suspect you can still be charged for driving under it's influence.

*its

you really want us to believe you work with nobel peace prize winners?

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

noxiously said:
The one thing that I am finding odd is, and maybe I just haven't seen it, but from all the hours of watching CNN, MSNBC, and yes FOX news, no one is really talking about this. Anderson Cooper briefly showed the results on CNN, but no one has talked about the effect this will have on all the other states, as well as how the fed will handle this situation. I have a feeling that someone is going to try and step in to shut down the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington. Sorry Oregon, you were the one state everyone predicted it passing in, maybe next time.

Will the government just ignore what the people want? I don't think they can anymore. This is something they will have to deal with sooner or later. After thinking about it throughout the night, I have a gut feeling that the federal government will not recognize what the people of those two states want. I think the feds will make a big push to have it over turned on the state level.

That is what my gut is telling me will most likely happen. On the other hand, my heart is telling me that the feds will be forced to look at marijuana in a true medical sense and they will reclassify it, possibly decriminalize it across the board, but have steep penalties for the illegal sale of it. Eventually, they will get their hooks into the industry and make it illegal to grow, even if for medical usage, unless you have a permit and are a "certified grower". I think since Obama is in his last term he could possibly make a push for medical use across the country. Hell, he can't run for office again so it's not going to hurt him. I think many politicians are actually for the legalization, or the medical use of marijuana, but they are too afraid to do something about it out of fear of losing votes.

The senate and the house won't make a real push for it either. The people who are already in those positions will not want to risk losing votes in the next election. Another scenario is this: More and more states will slowly pass marijuana for medical use over the next few years. There are some states that will never pass it, like Kentucky, WV, and the more redneck states, but it will get to a point where 75 to 85% of the country will have it legal for medical use, and the federal government will be forced to take a new look at it. Again, if they do, I feel they will try and take complete control of it. Making it only legal for certain groups to be allowed to grow and distribute it, taking it out of the homes of medical users. They will try to turn it into a regular prescription and hand it over to Pfizer or some other big pharma company.

The largest export of Kentucky by weight is pot. Or at least it was at one time. Greater than tobacco, liqueur, coal, or anything else. Eventually, but maybe not soon, pot growing and distribution will be regulated like tobacco or liqueur.

NoDrama · Nov 7, 2012

Carne Seca said:
I just had a disturbing thought. When and if Colorado implements the law, what are they going to do about employer drug testing? How are they going to find a work-around? Most employers follow federal guidelines.

It may be legal, but no company will keep you as an employee when the Insurance company refuses to insure the company that has known drug users on the employment role.
Basically if you pop on the pee test you say bye bye to the job regardless of MJ legality. Unions will have a clause in their contracts about this issue also, and it will include you losing the job for smoking pot, even if you are a medical user with cancer about to die.

NoDrama · Nov 7, 2012

UncleBuck said:
*its

you really want us to believe you work with nobel peace prize winners?

Any idea how many people don't know when to use affect over effect? Are those people also unlikely to have more than 2 brain cells?

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

NoDrama said:
Any idea how many people don't know when to use affect over effect? Are those people also unlikely to have more than 2 brain cells?

Idiot UncleShitBritches thinks the only Nobel prize is the peace prize. Poor fool sits waiting all day hoping I'll post something with an error in it. Odd how important I am to him. I should feel flattered at how he hangs on my every word..lol.

WeedPublican · Nov 7, 2012

NoDrama said:
It may be legal, but no company will keep you as an employee when the Insurance company refuses to insure the company that has known drug users on the employment role.
Basically if you pop on the pee test you say bye bye to the job regardless of MJ legality. Unions will have a clause in their contracts about this issue also, and it will include you losing the job for smoking pot, even if you are a medical user with cancer about to die.

I dunno about that, what if an employer fired an employee because they smoked cigarettes? That employer would more than likely have a "wrongful termination" lawsuit on their hands. Since marijuana is now just as legal as cigarettes, I think the same will apply.

Red1966 · Nov 7, 2012

WeedPublican said:
I dunno about that, what if an employer fired an employee because they smoked cigarettes? That employer would more than likely have a "wrongful termination" lawsuit on their hands. Since marijuana is now just as legal as cigarettes, I think the same will apply.

It's already happened. Several times even. Courts sided with the employer.

ChesusRice · Nov 7, 2012

Courts have sided with employers firing employees for nicotine in their system.

UncleBuck · Nov 7, 2012

Red1966 said:
Idiot UncleShitBritches thinks the only Nobel prize is the peace prize. Poor fool sits waiting all day hoping I'll post something with an error in it. Odd how important I am to him. I should feel flattered at how he hangs on my every word..lol.

the guy who can't even spell 'its' properly is still claiming to work with nobel prize winners now.

do you also post on stormfront with your nobel prize buddies?

cannabineer · Nov 7, 2012

NoDrama said:
It may be legal, but no company will keep you as an employee when the Insurance company refuses to insure the company that has known drug users on the employment role.
Basically if you pop on the pee test you say bye bye to the job regardless of MJ legality. Unions will have a clause in their contracts about this issue also, and it will include you losing the job for smoking pot, even if you are a medical user with cancer about to die.

The insurers are the hinge of it. In a liability-driven society they have amassed tremendous and well-concealed power. I wonder if "actuariocracy" is a word ... cn

althor · Nov 7, 2012

Insurance companies use any reason they can find to raise insurance rates.
Companies find any way possible to keep their insurance rates as low as possible.
Obamacare will help in this regard. Many companies will simply drop insurance, or hire part time only to avoid insurance.

ChesusRice · Nov 7, 2012

althor said:
Insurance companies use any reason they can find to raise insurance rates.
Companies find any way possible to keep their insurance rates as low as possible.
Obamacare will help in this regard. Many companies will simply drop insurance, or hire part time only to avoid insurance.

Which is ok becuase then they will be subisdizing insurance exchanges with the fines

NoDrama · Nov 7, 2012

WeedPublican said:
I dunno about that, what if an employer fired an employee because they smoked cigarettes? That employer would more than likely have a "wrongful termination" lawsuit on their hands. Since marijuana is now just as legal as cigarettes, I think the same will apply.

So now you can go to work drunk? Alcohol is legal right? See the error in your logic?

NoDrama · Nov 7, 2012

cannabineer said:
The insurers are the hinge of it. In a liability-driven society they have amassed tremendous and well-concealed power. I wonder if "actuariocracy" is a word ... cn

For sure, without insurance you cannot legally operate a business, no license will be given. Actuaryocracy has a nice ring to it. A new paradigm for the conspiracy buff.

Colorado......what this means

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Ursus marijanus

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member