Drug Testing in Schools - Thoughts?

[Community Advocate]

Pot is not addictive, ergo "its for the kids" is invalid. Alcohol causes more broken families than all of the other vices combined.

Pot can be addictive, both phsiologically and psychologically. Teens have told me they are addicted, hence their pet name 'chron'.

I personally know people who are addicted in both those ways.

To say that alcohol causes more broken families than all the other vices combined is true, I believe. But that is changing, and crack cocaine, crystal meth, and heroine are factors nowadays as well. So, alcohol is the legal drug. Marijuana causes less harm than alcohol. Well, it would if it were legal, right? The fact that it is illegal is causing harm to people now. I have no problem with grown adults making their own decisions. When it comes to the kids (not as invalid as you think) I believe that parents who are held accountable and responsible for them have a role to play in keeping them away from the harmful effects of drugs, and when they know there is an addiction problem, they need to step in. I'm not talking about a kid smoking pot on the weekends. I'm talking about kids who are addicted to serious drugs, who started out smoking pot.

Political talk about drugs always gets turned away from the really bad drugs back to the pot by the pot users. We are talking about drugs here, illegal drugs, not just marijuana. But the arguements are often turned around to take the focus off the more harmfull drugs, to compare mj with alcohol. Happens all the time.

Kids in school do not do well on drugs. This is proven, and anyone who takes these drugs would know. Even pot interferes with a kids education when he's stoned at school. We are still talking about drug testing in schools, right?

[Community Advocate]

And Mr. Community advocate; are you fishing to get a consensus on having drug testing in schools so that a proper bill can be drawn up and passed into legislation? The thread is about "drug testing in schools" and not about "drugs", after all. It is just my opinion but I think your employment in the drug rehabilitation industry, whether paid or voluntary, would advocate drug testing in schools and any move toward that would secure a future for you, not only that you would be "helping". How can anyone be condemned for that?

If I look at the interests of both of you I find your arguments about "drugs" to be rather redundant. Drugs is not the argument here. Personal interests regarding drugs is what drives the argument and they are both rather self-indulgent interests.

Thanks for your insight. I posted this link for discussions around testing kids in school for drug use. Whenever a mj activist enters the discussions, that is what the discussions turn to arguing the merits of pot over alcohol, and pot is not legal but alcohol is. They often become quite agitated by those who are trying to protect children and youth from the harmful effects of drugs, and resort to insulting of other peoplewho do not completely agree with them. It's a self-defense mechanism that seems to kick in on any discussions like these.

I have no personal interest regarding drugs, other than to keep kids away from them, until their brains have developed, and they are of adult age. That's it.

No other agenda here. Nothing towards making adult pot smokers into criminals whatsoever. Just to make that clear for y'all. It is about the kids for me.

[guyser]

We need to to be honest here. Every single person on this board , and every single person in this country over the age of 5 has used drugs.

Pot can be addictive, both phsiologically and psychologically. Teens have told me they are addicted, hence their pet name 'chron'.

I personally know people who are addicted in both those ways.

Teens are , have and always will be drama queens. Lets be honest about this. I am not saying they are lying , but whatever name they came up with is not in any way indicative of the addictive properties of drugs.

I have never read a credible third party report that indicated Pot was addictive physically.

To say that alcohol causes more broken families than all the other vices combined is true, I believe. But that is changing, and crack cocaine, crystal meth, and heroine are factors nowadays as well. So, alcohol is the legal drug. Marijuana causes less harm than alcohol. Well, it would if it were legal, right? The fact that it is illegal is causing harm to people now.

Crack, coke and meth are a whole 'nother ballgame. We know the repurcussions from those drugs, from addictive properties to mind wasting and unhealthy attributes.I have no interest in those being legalized , and in fact no interest in those being tested for in school. None.

I am unsure what you meant by "it would if it were legal, right?" would it cause more harm?But I will try. No I dont think so. I dont think more harm will come should we legalize it. I look to the anti tobacco lobby and see that the numbers of smokers is dropping all the time . I think it is because smoking cigs is very uncool now, and younger kids dont take it up.

As for causing harm to people now that is a bit of a misnomer. It is not, for the most part, the inhalation of the drug that is doing harm, but the illegality of it that is. That is the difference.

I have no problem with grown adults making their own decisions. When it comes to the kids (not as invalid as you think) I believe that parents who are held accountable and responsible for them have a role to play in keeping them away from the harmful effects of drugs, and when they know there is an addiction problem, they need to step in. I'm not talking about a kid smoking pot on the weekends. I'm talking about kids who are addicted to serious drugs, who started out smoking pot.

The gateway angle you mean? I dont buy it for a second. If that were true, then alcohol is the absolute worst gateway we have , but no one advocates it being criminalized. Legal or not, kids will venture down the path to drugs and booze no matter. The same way some kids will venture down the path of petty crime, much like most of have at one time or another, only to figure it is not worth it to keep on that same track. The same applies both ways.

As for the parents, I concur. But the message we send our kids each and everyday is one of hypocrisy. Got a cold, headache, backache, migraine,limp penis, PMS, take a drug. High cholesterol from eating crappy food, take a drug, and on and on.

We answer to our kids , got a prob, take a drug, each and every day. Now that is confusing.

Political talk about drugs always gets turned away from the really bad drugs back to the pot by the pot users. We are talking about drugs here, illegal drugs, not just marijuana. But the arguements are often turned around to take the focus off the more harmfull drugs, to compare mj with alcohol. Happens all the time.

Of course it gets turned around. No one is advocating harder drugs being legal. All the "bad" drugs you mentioned are small potatoes compared to the social cost of booze. One would be foolish to include hard drugs in an effort to get mj legalized. They are not the same as mj, entirely different properties and entirely different body and mental effects.

Kids in school do not do well on drugs. This is proven, and anyone who takes these drugs would know. Even pot interferes with a kids education when he's stoned at school. We are still talking about drug testing in schools, right?

People do not do well on drugs period. Adults do not do well on alcohol either. But that is different than saying some people enjoy a drink, a mj doobie or hash , or their own time. Why the double standard.

Yes we are talking about drug testing in schools.

And I am dead set against it for anyones kids. School admins will use the info for corrupt reasons. I have no doubt about that.

[DrGreenthumb]

"Political talk about drugs always gets turned away from the really bad drugs back to the pot by the pot users. We are talking about drugs here, illegal drugs, not just marijuana. But the arguements are often turned around to take the focus off the more harmfull drugs, to compare mj with alcohol. Happens all the time."--Community busybody

You are the one who came in here with bullshit stories about meth laced pot. You are the one trying to justify cannabis prohibition by linking Cannabis in with dangerous drugs. Don't come into any conversation that I can read and try to pass off lies and exagerations about cannabis or you will get called on it.

In fact let me edit your post to reflect reality.

Political talk about drugs always gets turned away from the cannabis back to the really bad drugs by the prohibitionists biblethumpers. We are talking about alcohol here, alcohol, not just marijuana. But the arguements are often turned around to take the focus off the more harmless cannabis, to link mj with crystal meth. Happens all the time, when those that earn their living from prohibition are around.

[Who's Doing What?]

Pot can be addictive, both phsiologically and psychologically. Teens have told me they are addicted, hence their pet name 'chron'.

I personally know people who are addicted in both those ways.

You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[Pliny]

Thanks for your insight. I posted this link for discussions around testing kids in school for drug use. Whenever a mj activist enters the discussions, that is what the discussions turn to arguing the merits of pot over alcohol, and pot is not legal but alcohol is. They often become quite agitated by those who are trying to protect children and youth from the harmful effects of drugs, and resort to insulting of other peoplewho do not completely agree with them. It's a self-defense mechanism that seems to kick in on any discussions like these.

I have no personal interest regarding drugs, other than to keep kids away from them, until their brains have developed, and they are of adult age. That's it.

No other agenda here. Nothing towards making adult pot smokers into criminals whatsoever. Just to make that clear for y'all. It is about the kids for me.

Fair enough. Does anyone else you are closely associated with benefit, such as your wife or ????

Kids are important and they need to get proper information. As long as they are under the responsibility of an adult they should not be doing drugs after that they are adults and must be responsible and accountable for their actions and the consequences of their actions. I believe the area that needs addressing is responsibility.

There is such a thing as being over-protective as well. Kids need to do, they need to know that their actions have effects and consequences that affect not only themselves but others. They do realize this but are often not held accountable for anything because they are kids. Adults too often face confrontation, conflict and even litigation because of the inability to realize and be accountable for their own actions.

Privileges and earned rights seem to become entitlements under such irresponsible attitudes. Those that should be responsible for the kids are attempting to shuck the responsibility to someone else because their kids are just kids.

Adults are a different story. They have no one to to take accountability for them and their activities. Of course, the irresponsible and criminal element are victims of society or circumstance and again are not held accountable or responsible for anything that happens to them or around them. It's a sorry state. People that do actually suffer from adverse circumstance unfortunately get shuffled in with those malcontents.

Marijuana activists do tend to think alcohol is more damaging to society than mj. The argument is old and as you point out, alcohol is used by a huge factor more than mj. I believe the same problems in the same percentages would occur with mj if it were legal as occur with alcohol.

A lesson that might be beneficial would be that adult activities are adult activities and you can do them when you are an adult and have learned what it means to be responsible and accountable - some learn that easily and those that don't generally wind up being politicians.

I am wary of people that wish to "help". Especially if enabled by government and a job or even a bureaucracy is at stake if a problem is solved. And of course government never solves social problems but seems only to exacerbate them. Valuable positions at the trough cannot be forfeit it seems. Therefore, I would not endorse drug testing in schools.

[Pliny]

We need to to be honest here. Every single person on this board , and every single person in this country over the age of 5 has used drugs.

Teens are , have and always will be drama queens. Lets be honest about this. I am not saying they are lying , but whatever name they came up with is not in any way indicative of the addictive properties of drugs.

I have never read a credible third party report that indicated Pot was addictive physically.

Unfortunately experts on addiction are drowned out by vested interests so there is no accurate measure of addiction in the mainstream. Allan Carr perhaps has the best insight on addiction. From what I myself know and have experienced I would say Pot was addictive. I must also say I am not an expert.

As for the parents, I concur. But the message we send our kids each and everyday is one of hypocrisy. Got a cold, headache, backache, migraine,limp penis, PMS, take a drug. High cholesterol from eating crappy food, take a drug, and on and on.

I never advocate a drug as a remedy for anything. I use very few in my life but I do use them.

No one is advocating harder drugs being legal. All the "bad" drugs you mentioned are small potatoes compared to the social cost of booze. One would be foolish to include hard drugs in an effort to get mj legalized. They are not the same as mj, entirely different properties and entirely different body and mental effects.

I have advocated even harder drugs being made legal. If we understand drugs we will use them properly. If we don't we die. Simple. We needn't have a law to protect us from our stupidity - that is unless we all are subject to a public education.

Yes we are talking about drug testing in schools.

And I am dead set against it for anyones kids. School admins will use the info for corrupt reasons. I have no doubt about that.

Agreed!

[DrGreenthumb]

I have to disagree that pot would equal alcohol in destructiveness no matter how many used it. The very effects of alcohol are what makes it dangerous. Also it might surprise you that in the under 40 crowd, pot use is just as common, if not more common than alcohol use already. Pot does not impair you the way alcohol does, does not lower your inhibitions, does not make folks violent, and does not cause one to act impulsively. Pot is all around safer than alcohol, you don't even need to smoke it anymore, a good vaporizor removes exposure to ALL carcinogens.

[Pliny]

I have to disagree that pot would equal alcohol in destructiveness no matter how many used it. The very effects of alcohol are what makes it dangerous. Also it might surprise you that in the under 40 crowd, pot use is just as common, if not more common than alcohol use already. Pot does not impair you the way alcohol does, does not lower your inhibitions, does not make folks violent, and does not cause one to act impulsively. Pot is all around safer than alcohol, you don't even need to smoke it anymore, a good vaporizor removes exposure to ALL carcinogens.

I can't argue as I think the point rather moot. You could be right. I still don't advocate it's use but I do not advocate it be illegal. I just won't go where it is prevalent, like rock concerts and high schools.

Before anyone jumps on me for saying I do advocate the legalization of even hard drugs let me say that i do not stand alone if you advocate that an adult should be able to put whatever he wants into his body. Is that not the same thing as advocating the legalization of all drugs? Is it not self-righteous morality to deny another adult control over his own body? I believe you said that, drgreenthumb?

[DrGreenthumb]

I can't argue as I think the point rather moot. You could be right. I still don't advocate it's use but I do not advocate it be illegal. I just won't go where it is prevalent, like rock concerts and high schools.

Before anyone jumps on me for saying I do advocate the legalization of even hard drugs let me say that i do not stand alone if you advocate that an adult should be able to put whatever he wants into his body. Is that not the same thing as advocating the legalization of all drugs? Is it not self-righteous morality to deny another adult control over his own body? I believe you said that, drgreenthumb?

I agree 100% Pliny. I do not think that advocating legalization equals advocating use. I think that criminalization is the absolute worst way to discourage use in fact. I would never use meth, or cocaine, nor would I encourage anyone else to use it, that does not mean that I for one minute think that people who do choose to use them belong in jail. I think our jails should be reserved for those people in our society who pose a direct threat to others. As far as I'm concerned the best way to discourage harmful drug use is for it to be out in the open where everyone can see the results. I'd also rather addicts be given maitenance doses that the pharma companies could produce for pennies than have them be forced to steal to feed their addictions. Will some people die from overuse? Of course, and as cruel as it may sound, that may act as a deterrent to others. If people want to "use" themselves into an early grave, so be it. There are fat people eating themselves to death all the time.

I would like to see laws changed so that nobody can use impairment by mind altering substances as a defence for other crimes. Unless you were given a mind altering substance without your knowledge and consent you should bear full responsibility for any actions you take while under the influence. We don't let people use alcohol impairment as a defence for drunk driving so why should we let them use impairment as an excuse for any other bad behavior. I think we need a major shift away from the nanny state and towards personal responsibility.

I guess that would cut really deep into the incomes of cops, foster parents, community advocates, and social workers though.(not to mention prison guards).

Maybe if we didn't fill up our jails with non-violent drug offenders we would have the resources to keep violent offenders and car thieves inside where they belong.

[blueblood]

I agree 100% Pliny. I do not think that advocating legalization equals advocating use. I think that criminalization is the absolute worst way to discourage use in fact. I would never use meth, or cocaine, nor would I encourage anyone else to use it, that does not mean that I for one minute think that people who do choose to use them belong in jail. I think our jails should be reserved for those people in our society who pose a direct threat to others. As far as I'm concerned the best way to discourage harmful drug use is for it to be out in the open where everyone can see the results. I'd also rather addicts be given maitenance doses that the pharma companies could produce for pennies than have them be forced to steal to feed their addictions. Will some people die from overuse? Of course, and as cruel as it may sound, that may act as a deterrent to others. If people want to "use" themselves into an early grave, so be it. There are fat people eating themselves to death all the time.

I would like to see laws changed so that nobody can use impairment by mind altering substances as a defence for other crimes. Unless you were given a mind altering substance without your knowledge and consent you should bear full responsibility for any actions you take while under the influence. We don't let people use alcohol impairment as a defence for drunk driving so why should we let them use impairment as an excuse for any other bad behavior. I think we need a major shift away from the nanny state and towards personal responsibility.

I guess that would cut really deep into the incomes of cops, foster parents, community advocates, and social workers though.(not to mention prison guards).

Maybe if we didn't fill up our jails with non-violent drug offenders we would have the resources to keep violent offenders and car thieves inside where they belong.

Just one question, how about the people that don't do drugs just because they are illegal? If booze was illegal, I wouldn't drink. There are some people who just follow the law, what about them.

I only think it should be illegal as a matter of principle, if it were legal we'd be having a fight similar to this in 20-50 yrs. concerning cocaine should be legal. If you feel so oppressed, might I suggest emigration? Just because pot is illegal it is not stopping you from getting high either. Why waste parliament's time and money passing a law.

[Community Advocate]

Fair enough. Does anyone else you are closely associated with benefit, such as your wife or ????

Benefit? Are you talking about personal gain from advocating for the community on this issue? Not at all. I am in a position where I have the time, energy, knowledge and contacts to make positive change for my community. It's solely about the youth addicted to drugs, and the family stress and turmoil around that issue. I am adovcating for dads who have taken leave from their jobs to retreive their daughters without police assistance from drug houses where they are running drugs and prosituting. Also for parents, especially single parents, who are watching their children self-destruct on illicit drugs, and there's nothing they can legally do to help them. Drug testing in schools is an issue that is part of the whole picture. Some schools already do this, but as a negative option.

Kids are important and they need to get proper information. As long as they are under the responsibility of an adult they should not be doing drugs after that they are adults and must be responsible and accountable for their actions and the consequences of their actions. I believe the area that needs addressing is responsibility.

I agree. Here's the thing. In my province, parents are held personally liable for their kids until the age of 19. Up to and including 19. However, our kids have full freedom at the age of 14, even though there are laws saying they do not. But, there is no way to enforce those laws. If your teen is addicted to drugs and living out of your home (has no other address), you have no recourse to make them leave your home, unless you provide an alternative, and if they leave on their own valition after the age of 16, there are no laws to make them return home. If they have moved out of your home, from the age of 16, it would be difficult for the courts to find the parent guilty of not providing adequate supervision for their child, and unlikely that the court would NOT punish the parents for the child's actions. However, if the child is living in your home, you can be charged for up to $10,000 in damages caused by your teen.

The issue of responsibility is certainly huge. How would you address that issue?

There is such a thing as being over-protective as well. Kids need to do, they need to know that their actions have effects and consequences that affect not only themselves but others. They do realize this but are often not held accountable for anything because they are kids. Adults too often face confrontation, conflict and even litigation because of the inability to realize and be accountable for their own actions.

Agreed. And I've learned that age is much less of a measuring tool than maturity in this respect. Accountability is scarce and entitlement is abundant. Even the courts do not effectively hold youth accountable for their actions.

Privileges and earned rights seem to become entitlements under such irresponsible attitudes. Those that should be responsible for the kids are attempting to shuck the responsibility to someone else because their kids are just kids.

Also agreed. And the gap is the awareness of the responsiblities that go along with those rights and privileges.

Adults are a different story. They have no one to to take accountability for them and their activities. Of course, the irresponsible and criminal element are victims of society or circumstance and again are not held accountable or responsible for anything that happens to them or around them. It's a sorry state. People that do actually suffer from adverse circumstance unfortunately get shuffled in with those malcontents.

Agree again. Adults are only accountable to the courts and the government. The 'shuffling' is indeed unfortunate.

Marijuana activists do tend to think alcohol is more damaging to society than mj. The argument is old and as you point out, alcohol is used by a huge factor more than mj. I believe the same problems in the same percentages would occur with mj if it were legal as occur with alcohol.

Interesting. I do think that alcohol is far more damaging than mj to society, even including the grow op closures. What boggles my mind is the amount of people who would not drink and drive, but have no problem driving high on pot. Many kids are out there driving high, and they've told me "it makes me a better driver - I focus more." I wish more people had the sense to stay straight when they're driving the highways...

A lesson that might be beneficial would be that adult activities are adult activities and you can do them when you are an adult and have learned what it means to be responsible and accountable - some learn that easily and those that don't generally wind up being politicians.

If only. When is one an adult? At 18? 19? Is there a magic day, or is it more about maturity?

I am wary of people that wish to "help". Especially if enabled by government and a job or even a bureaucracy is at stake if a problem is solved. And of course government never solves social problems but seems only to exacerbate them. Valuable positions at the trough cannot be forfeit it seems. Therefore, I would not endorse drug testing in schools.

Your paradigm is not unusual. I appreciate hearing your views, your respectful way of presenting them, and your insightful intelligent response to the original question.

Edited January 24, 2008 by Community Advocate

[Community Advocate]

You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You are so wrong about that.

[DrGreenthumb]

"Benefit? Are you talking about personal gain from advocating for the community on this issue? Not at all. I am in a position where I have the time, energy, knowledge and contacts to make positive change for my community. It's solely about the youth addicted to drugs, and the family stress and turmoil around that issue. I am adovcating for dads who have taken leave from their jobs to retreive their daughters without police assistance from drug houses where they are running drugs and prosituting. Also for parents, especially single parents, who are watching their children self-destruct on illicit drugs, and there's nothing they can legally do to help them. Drug testing in schools is an issue that is part of the whole picture. Some schools already do this, but as a negative option. "-CA

I do not believe that you or someone close to you does not benefit financially from prohibition. You are taking this issue way too personally for there to be no personal stake in it. The only other explanation is that maybe your own kids have a drug problem despite your obvious authoritarian leanings. Wouldn't surprise me, when people feel opressed is usually when they are most likely to act out rebelliously.

There is nothing more dangerous about growing pot than any other other houseplant so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make by bringing gro-ops into this discussion. The large scale gro ops would cease to exist overnight if the average potsmoker could feel safe growing 5-10 plants for their own personal use. If pot were legal it would be grown in greenhouses, and outdoors rather than hidden inside residential properties anyway. When was the last time you heard cops or newspapers warn about the dangers of growing orchids in your basement.

For people who are used to the effects of pot there is no impairment of the abilities to carry out their normal daily activities, including driving. Watch the speedvision program on toking and driving, in fact pretty much any study ever done on toking and driving shows that tokers are not at an increased accident risk. They in fact drive more slowly and carefully. You do not use cannabis yourself and really are not in a position to judge its effects. The effect on a regular user is far different than the effect on a novice. Someone who is a novice user would certainly not get the urge to drive a car while feeling "high". The paranoia described by some inexperienced users normally prevents them from engaging in anything dangerous while under the influence. The effects are entirely the opposite of alcohol, so you cannot use your experience with alcohol to think you have any knowledge of pot's effects.

Being open and honest with your kids and keeping the lines of communication open will do a lot more to help them avoid harmful drug use and other bad behavior than drug testing them and treating them like criminals from the get go. My kids don't get involved in any kind of trouble because they love me and don't want to disapoint/hurt me. Maybe if you treated yours with some respect you would get some in return.

My two teenage girls and my 5 year old played rockband on xbox360 with me for 4 hours last night, they like to spend time with me because i don't treat them in a condescending manner. They tell me everything that goes on in their lives. Even my 16 year old has agreed not to have any exclusive boyfriends till she is finished high school. At first she wasn't really hapopy about the idea, but on further mature discussion agreed that it wasn't realistic to date someone longer than a year before becoming sexually involved. She agreed that should be saved for her husband, and as she does not want marriage/children till she has completed university she should refrain from becoming romantically involved this early in life.

Try treating your kids with respect if you want them to respect you back.

[Community Advocate]

We need to to be honest here. Every single person on this board , and every single person in this country over the age of 5 has used drugs.

You are speaking of physician supervised pharmeceuticals?

Teens are , have and always will be drama queens. Lets be honest about this. I am not saying they are lying , but whatever name they came up with is not in any way indicative of the addictive properties of drugs.

In my conversations with these kids, they straight out said the reason they call pot 'chron' is because it is a chronic addiction for them. Drama? Perhaps. But it's the way they express it themselves.

I have never read a credible third party report that indicated Pot was addictive physically.

I won't re-post but in the poll about legislation in provincial politics forum, there are links you can look at. Here's one just for you striaight from the 'addict's blog:

http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/answers2/front...21121607AAjHWAV

Crack, coke and meth are a whole 'nother ballgame. We know the repurcussions from those drugs, from addictive properties to mind wasting and unhealthy attributes.I have no interest in those being legalized , and in fact no interest in those being tested for in school. None.

I'll read back to see if you have stated why. This is what I am looking for in these opinions and responses - the reasoning behind the opinions.

I am unsure what you meant by "it would if it were legal, right?" would it cause more harm?But I will try. No I dont think so. I dont think more harm will come should we legalize it. I look to the anti tobacco lobby and see that the numbers of smokers is dropping all the time . I think it is because smoking cigs is very uncool now, and younger kids dont take it up

.

Perhaps the youth smoking rates are finally becoming lower. But, stores still sell smokes to underaged kids, and some stores actually promote these flavoured cigarellos to get the kids started. The integrety of the vendors is always in question. Some are willing to risk their business license to make money off the kids buying smokes. Some vendors also have drug paraphernalia for sale right on the front counter as well. There is no law against that, but some cities are making bylaws to address that issue. I think what I meant was that "it would be more readily available to kids if it were legal, (just like cigarettes and alcohol) and it would be more accessible in homes if parents are less discreet due to it being legal.

As for causing harm to people now that is a bit of a misnomer. It is not, for the most part, the inhalation of the drug that is doing harm, but the illegality of it that is. That is the difference.

The kids in my community tell me the reason they smoke it from a water bong is that they are quite aware of the harm caused by smoking the paper of the joint. Other harms caused for kids on dope is lack of motivation, loss of education, difficulty waking up in the morning for work or school, and depression. Let me know if you would like links to that information.

The gateway angle you mean? I dont buy it for a second. If that were true, then alcohol is the absolute worst gateway we have , but no one advocates it being criminalized. Legal or not, kids will venture down the path to drugs and booze no matter. The same way some kids will venture down the path of petty crime, much like most of have at one time or another, only to figure it is not worth it to keep on that same track. The same applies both ways.

Interesting. Alcohol is often considered the gateway drug. Others consider smoking the gateway drug. The latest mantra is that "any drug that you try first is your gateway drug". Could be coffee. Could be cigarettes, Could be crystal meth, like a 17 yo girl in our community who claims that CM was her gateway drug. She never smoked, or drank alcohol. She was 13 when she became addicted. [/color]

As for the parents, I concur. But the message we send our kids each and everyday is one of hypocrisy. Got a cold, headache, backache, migraine,limp penis, PMS, take a drug. High cholesterol from eating crappy food, take a drug, and on and on. We answer to our kids , got a prob, take a drug, each and every day. Now that is confusing.

If they don't get this message at home, they certainly get it in the public schools and through the media.

Of course it gets turned around. No one is advocating harder drugs being legal. All the "bad" drugs you mentioned are small potatoes compared to the social cost of booze. One would be foolish to include hard drugs in an effort to get mj legalized. They are not the same as mj, entirely different properties and entirely different body and mental effects.

I agree. (And yes, if you have a closer look you will find posts that advocate for making all drugs legal) So while I work on legislation for parents to get their kids legally assessed for drug addiction, detox and treatment, you guys can lobby for legislation to make alcohol illegal. Good luck with that one!

People do not do well on drugs period. Adults do not do well on alcohol either. But that is different than saying some people enjoy a drink, a mj doobie or hash , or their own time. Why the double standard.

Absolutely. I have no disagreement with that. I am not discussing the legalizing or criminalization of drugs. I am looking for discussion about drug testing in schools, but we've sidetracked that issue to defend the use of 'soft drugs', and the perils of the 'legal drugs'.

Yes we are talking about drug testing in schools.

And I am dead set against it for anyones kids. School admins will use the info for corrupt reasons. I have no doubt about that.

Thanks for your reply, which answers the question. To further understand your point, can you share some of the ideas you have where school admin could use the information from a student's positive drug test for corrupt reasons? What would those reasons be?

Finally figured out the quote boxes. You're welcome

[Community Advocate]

More propaganda for those interested:

http://www.preventionsource.org/pdf/marijuana.pdf

Safety: Marijuana’s short-term effects on physical coordination include difficulty judging

distances and delayed reaction to sights and sounds. It can impair a person’s ability to

drive, operate machinery or fly a plane. Impairment can also link with other risky

behaviours such as having unprotected sex. When used together with other drugs like

alcohol, greater impairment occurs and the risk of accidents is greatly increased.

Apparently, your daughters are not so safe under the influence of marijuana as far as having unprotected sex.

It makes you relax, right? Perhaps she knows what she's doing, but it feels good, even better than when drunk!

[Community Advocate]

OK, since there is no outright disrespect and distain for me in this post, I will answer you. I have absolutely no need to explain anything to you whatsoever, for my own benefit, as I am a "shitty excuse for a human", which leaves me a little bewildered on why you are still replying to me. Now that I've spent the time to learn how to use the quotes, I need alittle practice.

I do not believe that you or someone close to you does not benefit financially from prohibition. You are taking this issue way too personally for there to be no personal stake in it. The only other explanation is that maybe your own kids have a drug problem despite your obvious authoritarian leanings. Wouldn't surprise me, when people feel opressed is usually when they are most likely to act out rebelliously.

Personally I don't care whatsoever what you believe about me. You don't know me at all, so you are not in a position to make any judgements about me here. But, carry on if you wish, it's a free world, and I don't have to read your posts.

Your explanation of maybe is false. There are no drug problems in my immediate family. I have a nephew on crack cocaine, and an adult brother who has gone through rehab three times to get off crack. They are both adults, and would be completely unaffected by this legislation, as well as any drug testing in schools. My children are both adults, and doing fine, thanks.

I am basically a democratic parent, vs. an authoritarian parent. I have taught those courses as well. I am a responsible parent, vs a 'good' parent. I am not oppresed, neither am I acting out rebelliously. I am not a religious fanatic. I do not attend church. Now you know a little more about me.

I have absolutely no idea how I could possibly be making money from this rebellious acting out, but if you know, perhaps you could share with us here - I could use at least some coverage for my gas and mileage to meetings. But, as it is, I'm willing to pay that bill myself, as well as all other expenses involved. Not a problem for me, which is another reason I am in a good position to be 'acting out rebelliously'. I'm little like Rosa Parks in that when I see a problem with a law, or a community situation, I make efforts to change it. I am more of a 'doer' than a 'talker'.

There is nothing more dangerous about growing pot than any other other houseplant so I'm not sure what point you are trying to make by bringing gro-ops into this discussion. The large scale gro ops would cease to exist overnight if the average potsmoker could feel safe growing 5-10 plants for their own personal use. If pot were legal it would be grown in greenhouses, and outdoors rather than hidden inside residential properties anyway. When was the last time you heard cops or newspapers warn about the dangers of growing orchids in your basement.

Ok, again your ignorance is showing. Do you not watch the news? Of course you do, but you receive it from a different paradigm.

"Those cops wouldn't be dead if they just made the damn stuff legal!" as opposed to "Those cops wouldn't be dead if those guys didn't break the laws and set up a grow up on their property." The story can be completely different, depending on your own paradigm. Your paradigm will not be changing and neither will mine, so we will always see things differently. Now, when you throw a little respect into the mix of conversation, we can learn from each other. But, when you throw out disrespect and distain, it is more difficult to get your point across to those you disrespect.

From your paradigm, large grow ops would cease and decist if it were legal to grow it because everyone would grow their own. Well (surprise surprise), I do know what is involved in growing pot. I know people who grow it. From my paradigm, knowing what is involved to grow the good stuff, the attention required, and the timing is crucial, not everyone will be growing their own. I see it more as everyone will be growing it, and no one will buy the stuff the government is providing due to the taxes associated with the sales. Therefore, I think if it were to become legal, the best we could do would be legal possession, as opposed to a legal home grow up. The danger in growing pot over other houseplants is mainly the lighting required to get a good indoor crop. Now that it is legal to report hydro theft and overuse, more grow ops are being discovered. If it were legal, and grown outdoors only, the growing season in BC would be very very short! lolI'm afraid from my paradigm, the large grow ops would expand if it became legal to grow it. Cops don't warn about the dangers of growing orchids in your basement? That must be because there is not the danger presented on the same level a the grow ops.

For people who are used to the effects of pot there is no impairment of the abilities to carry out their normal daily activities, including driving.

Yep I've heard it all before, in fact that is what my partner thought, until we wound up going the wrong way down a two lane highway. He was lovin' the music, though.

Watch the speedvision program on toking and driving, in fact pretty much any study ever done on toking and driving shows that tokers are not at an increased accident risk. They in fact drive more slowly and carefully.

That in itself can cause problems for other drivers on the road. Can also cause accidents, driving that carefully!

You do not use cannabis yourself and really are not in a position to judge its effects

.

Now, how on earth would you know that about me? More assumptions.

The effect on a regular user is far different than the effect on a novice.

I concur with that. As a novice, I felt no effect at all.

Someone who is a novice user would certainly not get the urge to drive a car while feeling "high". The paranoia described by some inexperienced users normally prevents them from engaging in anything dangerous while under the influence. The effects are entirely the opposite of alcohol, so you cannot use your experience with alcohol to think you have any knowledge of pot's effects.

Trust me, or don't. I know full well the effects of both from personal experience. It's not about the 'urge' to drive the car, it's more about where you have to be by when, and thinking your ok to drive there. So, the lack of paranoia with experienced users is of much more concern on the highways than those paranoid inexperienced users.

Being open and honest with your kids and keeping the lines of communication open will do a lot more to help them avoid harmful drug use and other bad behavior than drug testing them and treating them like criminals from the get go.

Absolutely agree. You're talking about two separate issues here though, drug education, and drug addiction. There are no guarantees when raising your kids; that I know for sure.

My kids don't get involved in any kind of trouble because they love me and don't want to disapoint/hurt me. Maybe if you treated yours with some respect you would get some in return.

Hmm, perhaps you may be more of an authoritarian parent than you think I am. My kids are generally very good respectful kids. They don't want to dissappoint me or hurt me, but at times they do. They are of the humanoid type. One in particular has been in lots of trouble as a young teen. If you ask my kids, they would say they have always been treated with the utmost respect. Now, if I did have a teen who went off the rails on illicit drugs, I would have enough respect for them to step in and intervene, even against their drug induced will, if they were in my care. Trouble is, there is no legal avenue to do this, and that is what I'm working towards.

So, just so we are clear - my post about drug testing in schools was to initiate some discussion about the pros and cons of that issue. And, for perfect clarity, adults using drugs have no place in this discussion - it is about kids addicted to harmful drugs. All other comments made by me here were to address those of op's.

My two teenage girls and my 5 year old played rockband on xbox360 with me for 4 hours last night, they like to spend time with me because i don't treat them in a condescending manner. They tell me everything that goes on in their lives. Even my 16 year old has agreed not to have any exclusive boyfriends till she is finished high school. At first she wasn't really hapopy about the idea, but on further mature discussion agreed that it wasn't realistic to date someone longer than a year before becoming sexually involved. She agreed that should be saved for her husband, and as she does not want marriage/children till she has completed university she should refrain from becoming romantically involved this early in life.

This sounds very much like our house, and the people in it. Right down to the decisions your dd has made. She's a smart gal, much like my son.

You will likely, like we are, remain an important mentor in your kids life, even after they leave the nest. It's good to have a good relationship with your kids, because if you don't, you don't have any influence at all.

Try treating your kids with respect if you want them to respect you back.

We not only try, we make a point of it in this house. We all have a lot of respect for each other.

Consider this: Say, against all odds, your 5 year old reaches the age of 14. She goes to a party, and someone convinces her to take some illicit drug. She knows better, and feels uncomfortable, but her best friend is at the party, convincing your dd to just try this - it feels so good. She doesn't return home, you go looking for your sweet, intelligent, 14 yo daughter, and get police to help you find her. It takes four days to locate your daughter. She is found in a house full of adult men, who are using her for drug running. The police notify you that they have found her, and that they believe she is prostituting to pay for her drugs. They tell you that there is nothing they can do and their hands are tied - she is 14 and she can make the choice to stay there with these men. (Not something she would ever normally do, but now, she is under the influence of some nasty hard drugs - you don't even know what drugs at this point, so when you talk to her, you are not talking to the daughter who left the house, you are talking to the drugs. All you know is that police tell you she doesn't want to return home. She has quit attending school of course, and she has 'chosen' this lifestyle, according to the police.

What does the father in you do now?

I would love to know how you would handle such a situation, without telling us that your dd is too smart for that to happen, or loves you too much, or doesn't want to dissapoint you. Consider that for some reason, she has turned rebellious, and is acting out in this way. Say she tells you that pot is just lame, she wants the hard stuff. Waddaya do now, Dad?

[Drea]

Some kids will do this no matter what kind of family (tea tottlers or boozers or potheads or...). So your post is moot.

Now, we (we = society) are lying to our children by telling them that meth and pot are both equally dangerous.

Kid tries pot, realizes it's not dangerous and he was told so therefore believes he was lied to about meth too.

Good intentions do not sense make!

And the story about the girl who smoked weed and got laid... unlikely. Pot decreases libido. Alcohol increases it. You MUST know this. Gin ain't called "panty remover" for nothing you know. On pot, a person never will get so wasted she cannot control herself. And the pot "high" is not like any other "high" at all. Please realize this. People have been trying to tell you... but you just refuse to listen.

If and when my son is ready to try a mind altering substance (I expect within the next year or so) I will gladly roll him up a nice one... and share it with him.

[Drea]

More propaganda for those interested:

http://www.preventionsource.org/pdf/marijuana.pdf

Safety: Marijuana’s short-term effects on physical coordination include difficulty judging distances and delayed reaction to sights and sounds. It can impair a person’s ability to drive, operate machinery or fly a plane.

Agreed. For me at least this is true. I would never fly when high... kidding! I don't drive when high that is why I don't smoke any till the very end of the day when everything is all done and all I want to do is relllaaax.

Impairment can also link with other risky behaviours such as having unprotected sex.

Nope. Wrong. See my above post.

When used together with other drugs like alcohol, greater impairment occurs and the risk of accidents is greatly increased.

Agreed. Mixing pot and alcohol gives one the "dizzies". I never mix the two.

Of course after a night out at the pub, we will come home and smoke one and I am off to nighty night pretty much immediately. Not for wild crazy sex but for blissful sleeeeeeep.

Apparently, your daughters are not so safe under the influence of marijuana as far as having unprotected sex.

It makes you relax, right? Perhaps she knows what she's doing, but it feels good, even better than when drunk!

Pot does not increase libido. Alcohol does increase libido. Repeat repeat repeat. LOL

[Community Advocate]

name='Drea' date='Jan 24 2008, 01:13 PM' post='288549'

Some kids will do this no matter what kind of family (tea tottlers or boozers or potheads or...). So your post is moot.

The point is not moot, in fact, this is the very point. There are no guarantees, like you say, whether you drink tea, booze, or smoke pot. However, the more opposed to any certain substance a parent is, the less likely the child will use it. (Generality by small study). Makes sense though. But it isn't a moot point, it's the very point worth consideration - regardless of what kind of parent you are, your kids are subjected to peer pressure, and depending on their own level of self-esteem, emotional intelligence, and resillience, they will make good and bad decisions.

Now, we (we = society) are lying to our children by telling them that meth and pot are both equally dangerous.

Kid tries pot, realizes it's not dangerous and he was told so therefore believes he was lied to about meth too.

Who is we? None of that is in our drug education material at all. We are clear to begin with letting kids and parents know the reasons why people take drugs, educate them on the kids of drugs (including Rx) and they are warned about the harmfull effects of all drugs to the degree that the research has shown.

We have changed in the past 10 or so years from telling kids that all drugs are bad, to explaining the benefits and drawbacks of all drugs. The hard drugs like crack cocaine and crystal meth provide many more dangers than benefits, which is the message we send. No one here has said that pot and cm are equally dangerous, and I've never heard that from anyone anywhere in any discussions on drugs. Society is always evolving through lessons learned in life. Your last statement there is the exact reason that the drug education programs have changed to recognise the fact that people often take drugs because it 'makes them feel good'. We balance that information by providing information about the harms they also present.

Good intentions do not sense make!

And the story about the girl who smoked weed and got laid... unlikely.

Story, what story? I presented information, not a story. The source of that information was:

Canadian Centre on

Substance Abuse, Centre for

Addiction and Mental Health,

Canadian Profile, 1999.

McCreary Centre Society,

Healthy Connections:

Listening to BC Youth, 1999.

Alberta Alcohol and Drug

Abuse Commission, Quick

Facts About Alcohol, Other

Drugs, and Gambling, 1999.

National Institute on Drug

Abuse, Infofax: Marijuana,

2001.

Pacula, R.L. et al, Marijuana

and Youth, 2000.

Pot decreases libido

.

Again, that would depend on the person's state prior to smoking, and the affects on that person. Works the opposite here. It increases libido for some people. Years back, some of my girlfriends got quite 'horny' (their words) when the smoked pot. So, while that may be the case for you, it's like saying pot is not addictive to someone who is addicted to pot.

Alcohol increases it. You MUST know this. Gin ain't called "panty remover" for nothing you know.

Not the case here. Alcohol makes me sleepy, and a little Gin may work towards removing the panties, but if you have too much, your're just puking over the edge of the bed all over your nice new sexy negligee!

On pot, a person never will get so wasted she cannot control herself.

Again, I must disagree, as would my friend who almost seriously died laughing while stoned. (just kidding)

Granted, your mind remains alitte more clear on pot if you don't mix it with alcohol, but they both lower the inhibitions of most of the smokers I know. Much more likely they would 'lose it' with alchohol than on pot, for sure. But again that is not the purpose for discussion here to compare the perils of alcohol and marijuana. It is about drug testing in schools, the pros and cons and people's opinions and views about that issue. Somehow, we keep getting siderailed into discussions like this.

And the pot "high" is not like any other "high" at all. Please realize this. People have been trying to tell you... but you just refuse to listen.

Would you please then realize that the purpose of this thread is to discuss drug testing in schools?

And that it is not about adult use of illicit drugs or alcohol, it is about addicted children and children using dangerous drugs.

And please realize that I do have my own personal experience with smoking pot, so I do know of it's affects on myself, and the others around me. I am not ignorant about these things, and I have my own personal experiences to make my own opinions. I am a grown adult responsible for and accountable to my own actions. But, as a parent, I am also responsible for my minor children in my care.

So, I don't really need people to tell me what a pot high is like. I know that from personal experience. Now, if you wish to enlighten me on what the high is like for you on crack cocaine or crystal meth, I'd be more than willing to listen to your experience with that, along with what your experience with pot has been. But this isn't the place for that information imo.

If and when my son is ready to try a mind altering substance (I expect within the next year or so) I will gladly roll him up a nice one... and share it with him.

And that is the difference between a 'good' parent and a 'responsible' parent. How old will your son be when you finally roll one up a nice one smoke his first 'fatty' with him?

[Community Advocate]

Pot does not increase libido. Alcohol does increase libido. Repeat repeat repeat. LOL

In your world, I believe this to be true. I do not believe it is true for everyone. In fact, I know it isn't! (See my post above)

Edited January 24, 2008 by Community Advocate

[Drea]

If a student is suspected of being on cocaine, meth, ecstacy or any other harmful substance, then yes, I believe he/she should be tested for such.

Random testing of the student population? No. It would be an infringement on their freedoms -- just like adults, they have the right to be free from being poked, prodded or peeing in a cup for no reason.

And that's how I feel about drug testing in schools.

... your "puking ove the edge of the bed" was excellent! Haaa hee hee ha.. ho. I laughed so hard! And I'm strait! Holy shamoly LOL

added: most parents would rather that their children be with them when they first try alcohol... I want my son with me when (and if) he first tries pot... I hope he shuns both; but if he chooses to I will be there with him. I would not abandon my child under such circumstances. Nor will I admonish him for it.

...he thinks I am the straightest, squarest mom ever! I think I will try to keep up the illusion for a year or two more... because I can.

Edited January 24, 2008 by Drea

[guyser]

If a student is suspected of being on cocaine, meth, ecstacy or any other harmful substance, then yes, I believe he/she should be tested for such.

Not on your life.

The double standard that will be set by the admins will be ridiculous.

[Community Advocate]

Not on your life.

The double standard that will be set by the admins will be ridiculous.

Our school gives the student the option. If you're not high, suck on this swab and proove it. I you're not willing, we think you're high, so bye bye.

The student has the choice to leave, or proove his innocence.

BTW, this doesn't happen with every student on the administrator's whim. They first notice that the student is high, and see through it. They have trained addiction counsellors. So, if a student is offered to proove his sobriety with a swab, he is already suspected of being high due to his behaviours at school. Most of the time, in fact, I believe in almost all cases, they are known drug users. Same vein as the thread on drug testing employees, the kids know that drugs are not allowed at the school and students must arrive without being stoned. They agree to this in signature upon registration at the school.

[guyser]

Our school gives the student the option. If you're not high, suck on this swab and proove it. I you're not willing, we think you're high, so bye bye.

In other words, give us the evidence to sink you?

How many of the teachers suck on a swab?

The student has the choice to leave, or proove his innocence.

Guilty until proven innocent. Great.

BTW, this doesn't happen with every student on the administrator's whim. They first notice that the student is high, and see through it. They have trained addiction counsellors. They agree to this in signature upon registration at the school.

Probably doesnt happen too often. Probably happens more than anyone will admit , since the A students, or the gifted athlete gets a break since he or she brings pride to the community .

Ahh...but the C student , the kid that loathes sports since he is not coordinated gets the book thrown at him.

I would not trust school admins to be fair. Not now, not when I was in school and not in the future.