Jim Kennedy wrote:
> "Malcolm Dew-Jones" <yf110_at_vtn1.victoria.tc.ca> wrote in message
> news:400637ff_at_news.victoria.tc.ca...
>
>>Daniel Morgan (damorgan_at_x.washington.edu) wrote:
>>: Haximus wrote:
>>
>>: >>Among the best of the language's oxymorons: "Marijuana initiative".
>>: >
>>: >
>>: > Or "smart drugs."
>>: >
>>: > Gotta wonder about a guy whose #1 career priority is maintaining his
>
> THC
>
>>: > level.
>>
>>: Got to wonder about the sanity of any employer that would allow him on
>>: the premises.
>>
>>: Lets see ... I think I'll bring in someone that has an admitted criminal
>>: background,
>>
>>I didn't see that in anything he said. In fact he emphasized he would
>>only do this where it was legal
>>
>>: who will be less lucid than they could be,
>>
>>also true for anyone who takes cold medicine, or turns up hung over after
>>a night out, or drinks too much coffee and gets hyper
>>
>>
>>: who may well
>>: bring materials to the job site that put the company in jepoardy,
>>
>>why would you say this? for example, I know people who drink, but they
>>never bring alchol to work (and what was that post about scotch again?)
>>
>>
>>: who is
>>: willing to identify himself as a felon on a public forum,
>>
>>I don't think he admitted to anything except a desire
>>
>>: and then trust
>>: them with sensitive data on which our company relies.
>>
>>of course most sensible people do not trust sensitive data to anyone until
>>they have had practical experience with that person and know how far they
>>can depend on them.
>>
>
>
> My understanding is in Canada it is only available for medical uses. (but I
> could be wrong about that) This type of person (the original poster) is
> probably an addict. In his request for work the important thing was to get
> "kind bud". This is indicative of a chemical addition. The same could be
> said for someone who wanted to be paid in cough syrup. (or any drug, legal
> or not) Addiction is the continuing to do a behavior that has negative life
> consequences. I am (and I think Daniel) is distinguishing between someone
> who uses drugs (eg Scotch) and someone who is a drug addict. (eg an
> alcoholic) The drug that the addict uses is irrelevant.
> Jim
Exactly. Thanks for providing the clarity I didn't. I wouldn't want
someone willing to work for cheeseburgers either.
--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
Received on Thu Jan 15 2004 - 09:57:48 CST
