May as well? The government never had the consent of the people to restrict anything they put into their bodies in the first place! They have as much right to tell us what we can consume as they do to tell us what we are to think.
Even Thomas Jefferson said “If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny”
Did you know that . according to the CDC, an American dies every 19 minutes from an unintended overdose of prescription drugs. Yet nobody, since recorded history, has ever died from a marijuana overdose! If the government seriously wanted to prevent mishaps, they wouldn't let the pharmaceutical companies "climb in bed" with the FDA.
July 8, 2014 at 4:55 p.m.
Seems like "Vindy" has become nothing but a shill for the local government. We didn't realize that the sheriff, prosecutor, and coroner had anything to do with "safety". We realize that the word "safety", when used by the government, is nothing but a euphemism for "control".
July 3, 2014 at 7:06 a.m.
"today's increase in the number of high-powered firearms on the streets necessitates law-enforcement personnel to supplement or replace those weapons with." (citation needed) Really? 97%+ are knives and handguns, along with the occasional hammer and screwdriver......hardly "high-powered"
The creeping militarization of today's police is evident here. Why should civilian police be able to use a fully automatic machine gun? Look at Fort Hood. Even expert military soldiers are not permitted to possess these weapons of war on a military base, let alone carry them on city streets!! With a cyclic rate of 700-900 rounds per minute, these "Billy Blue Lights" are able to spray 30 rounds of ammo in 2 seconds! How many innocents will die before we realize the police have no need for military firepower? Are they really at war with the American people?
April 9, 2014 at 4:13 p.m.
"POW's are in prison camp and have no due process of law because they are caught during battle" Really? The Geneva Convention outlines how prisoners are to be treated. And you don't think a "camp" could be considered an entire community or state?
"Property forfeiture is, once again, quantified as a penalty under LAW!" Law? Do you realize all the atrocities carried out by Hitler and Stalin were "legal" under the LAW?
"Any raid is legitimized by a search warrant, issued by a judge and executed by enforcement officials (you would call them Gestapo)" Well if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
"And, if you believe mandatory drug testing in the workplace is a violation of privacy, you are most certainly incorrect" Sorry to inform you, but the Ohio Supreme Court, whom you seem to worship, seem to disagree. See AFL-CIO vs. OBWC
"Most studies are small, non-controlled groups or are anecdotal in nature" I'm sure Dr Sanjay Gupta would disagree.
"What is being enacted in the states now is just a convoluted way to legalize it" And your point is?
April 8, 2014 at 4:34 p.m.
Oh the vitriol coming from the uneducated.......
@sobchek: "Very poor analogy comparing POW's with prisoners in jail" Really? So you don't think everyone in the community is affected by the war on drugs? Seriously? Sooo, you don't mind that your privacy and 4th amendment rights can be violated? You don't mind no-knock raids and killing innocent people or animals? You don't mind the asset forfeiture laws that allow the government to steal you property, even if not convicted of any crime? All over a plant that God placed here? That is nothing more than "legitimized" theft! If any other group of individuals perpetrated the crimes against the people that the government does, they would be in prison.
"The research into the medical use of marijuana has concluded there are little or no quantifiable benefits". Sorry to bust your myth, but there are thousands of pages of peer reviewed studies available which demonstrate efficacy and need. Go on. See for yourself. The US government even has a patent on it. Search for patent 6,630,507.
However, I am glad to see that you would give a terminally ill person a chance. I mean, what could that hurt? They're going to die anyway, right? I mean, what's the sense of helping people if we can't profit from it?
However, it may be that you're part of the prison industrial complex or the "police for profit" scam. In that case, you may need to get another job. Educated people don't believe the "reefer madness" routine anymore.
On another note, people may get "high"?......you mean sleepy, smiling, happy, non-confrontational?......Heaven forbid! I'd much rather be with a drunk or a person strung out on caffeine and sugar any day! Martinis and nicotine is how I get off.....everyone else must comply. And by the way, if the government would suddenly make ice cream illegal, would eating it make it wrong?
April 7, 2014 at 4:11 p.m.
Wow, lots of misinformation in this "article".
Angela McClellan: “The data tells us that most people with substance-abuse issues have already used marijuana during their journey to full-blown substance". But what she omitted was that these people have also used milk and alcohol..........And that the majority of people that have used marijuana have never tried "harder" drugs!
Pardee: "A blood test for marijuana is unfair because the active ingredient in marijuana remains in the bloodstream for weeks, compared to hours for alcohol". Not really, Only the inactive metabolite COOH remains detectable. This is what urine tests detect. It does NOT indicate impairment, only historical use. The active component Delta 9-THC is much like alcohol and remains in the system for several hours.
Alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous than marijuana, but are legal. The days of “Reefer Madness” propaganda are long over. According to the CDC, an American dies every 19 minutes from an unintended overdose of prescription drugs. Yet nobody, since recorded history, has ever died from a marijuana overdose!
People are educating themselves on the facts of marijuana and not believing government misinformation or innuendos.
The “Drug War” has been an actual war. And we need to keep remembering it’s truly a war against the American people, their freedoms and their liberty. This means half the people in our bulging prisons, their families, friends, acquaintances and communities are all casualties of and prisoners of war.
April 7, 2014 at 6:14 a.m.
When anybody says it's for "safety" you can bet that it's a euphemism for control and / or revenue. It seems that this was an exercise to get the students acclimated to being probed by the government. Remember the pictures of the gulags? Jack boots and dogs. But, I'm sure the children felt safer.
April 3, 2014 at 5:56 a.m.
I would not test school employees for the same reason no other person should be subjected to a search without probable cause! Employers are NOT law enforcement officers. Also, I see you succumb to some of the greatest fallacies of the failed drug war…..you assume that “drug use” only means “illicit” drugs and that any use equals “abuse”. That is erroneous. According to the CDC, an American dies of an unintended overdose every 19 minutes from Prescription drugs! Besides, your assertion that “use” costs employers X amount of dollars has never been able to be qualified or quantified. Employers lose much more in lost time and accidents due to tired and overworked employees. What a person does on their own time, should not be a concern of yours, or anyone else’s….that is unless you’re a member of the Gestapo and don’t believe in individual freedom.
March 26, 2014 at 1:27 p.m.
The previous comment is erroneous. All public employees are NOT tested, only those in "safety sensitive" positions. Additionally, why would anyone be for an unconstitutional search such as "random", without probable cause? This is against the US 4th amendment and Sec. 14 of the Ohio constitution!
, I am not in favor of workplace impairment. However, the urine “tests” employers give, only indicates historical usage, NOT potential impairment.
An employer wouldn't be randomly checking their employees tax returns to see if they had broken federal law, would they? Or how about checking if employees had received traffic tickets? That conduct is against the law..........shouldn't they?"Drug testing", especially for marijuana, does not show or test for impairment!! It only shows latent residual metabolites...which can last for a week or more after use. There are tests that employers may use which actually measure impairment which are seen by employees & employers as fair and not intrusive....and constitutional.
March 25, 2014 at 6:10 a.m.
Because his article has so many “straw-man” arguments in it, it would take a book to explain them all. It sounds as if Mr. Colaluca is part of the fading “Harry Anslinger” neo-Nazi movement from the “Reefer Madness” era. Alas, it appears that many of the board members have succumbed to some of the false tacit lies which permeate the “drug war”. Such as:1) That "drug use" is understood to only refer to drugs that are "illicit". 2) That using "legal" drugs does not count as drug use.3) That any use at all, under any circumstances, is "abuse".4) That zero tolerance prohibition is the only acceptable policy.5) That availability "promotes" use. So....what about tobacco, etc ??Clearly, “drug testing” proves nothing, especially for marijuana. The test for marijuana (cannabis) looks for inactive metabolites which only indicate historical usage. Testing for the other drugs found in a typical “drug panel” may show recent ingestion, but does not show or indicate impairment! The main reason for testing has come down to the proliferation of the failed “drug war” and for revenue. Did any journalist inquire if any of the board members had relatives, friends or acquaintances in the drug testing business?I am disappointed that members of the applicable communities would allow these unconstitutional heinous searches, without probable cause, to be permitted.
March 18, 2014 at 1:04 p.m.