Marijuana

Aituk7

Winger
It is legal in 10 U.S states now after last nights elections, not just for medicinal purposes but recreationally.

It is now legal to smoke weed in cities such Los Angeles, Las Vegas, San Francisco, Seattle and Detroit.

Surely it won't be long till it's legal in the rest of the western world? I certainly would be for legalising it, selling it in cafes and taxing it.


In the interest of balance I have included this short trailer demonstrating how evil weed is.
"You will see the ease with which this vicious plant can be grown in your neighbours yard, rolled into harmless looking cigarettes" :lol:
 

offshore

Midfield
I’m all for legalising it and the revenue from sales. In the states you don’t need to smoke it as you can buy it in cake and snack form.. will be loads more stoned drivers around also..
 
More research needs to be done...





Marry Joanna what shh aye its alright by me but I wouldn't recommend it unless it was for recreational purposes, might aswell sell it in a limited amount of cafe's to trial it - probably what all these shisha cafes are waiting for.
 

Dave Herbal

Striker
Legalise it all you want. I can’t see many companies declassifying it in D&A tests.

You’ll not go to chokey, but you’ll be sacked for being a stoner.
That’s a world of potential human rights abuse claims right there. I’m no lawyer, but surely firms can’t sack people for doing something in their own time that’s legal? And as it’s detectable for so long after you’re no longer intoxicated, the piss test is no good at determining this. It’s like being sacked for being pissed a week ago. I would think they’d need to introduce blood tests, or they’re on very shaky ground.

Will never be legal here thankfully.
Within 10 years. Nailed on.
 

Kevj

Striker
That’s a world of potential human rights abuse claims right there. I’m no lawyer, but surely firms can’t sack people for doing something in their own time that’s legal? And as it’s detectable for so long after you’re no longer intoxicated, the piss test is no good at determining this. It’s like being sacked for being pissed a week ago. I would think they’d need to introduce blood tests, or they’re on very shaky ground.


Within 10 years. Nailed on.
Dave, I can agree on your philosophy. I’d counter argue that while many companies state that this substance is prohibited and is sackable if found under the influence, the HR department or equivalent will be massively reluctant to change this policy.

Lets see how this pans out as mine is an opinion only.
 

Top