Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (652896)	4/26/2012 4:21:13 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1579028

>> The judge's ruling only applied to state workers, but it can easily set a precedent for banning drug testing done by employers in the private sector. I think it is a good point. I've used the similar argument as it relates to Medicare Part D. The program was operating quite well, but the Ds came along with ACA and wrecked it. So, does that mean we can never pass new legislation because we know the Ds will wreck it? I think not. >> I haven't been made "miserable" by the prohibition of pot. I know you have, but those are the consequences of messing with that s--t. Prohibition doesn't affect me in any way personally. I haven't used pot in 35 years, and if they legalize it tomorrow I still won't for the next 35 if I made it that long. The misery I was referring to is the destruction of lives, the murders of innocent people, and the violations of basic constitutional rights (which leads to further deterioration of rights over time) that have resulted from prohibition. There are THOUSANDS of people -- from infants to adults -- who are now dead or whose lives have been destroyed and who would have been just fine today had this harmless substance not been prohibited. Anyway, you've heard the argument and you remain dug-in to your view, so I don't think you are open to different thinking on this subject.