Quote:
Originally Posted by greg3564
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfhobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by greg3564
Quote:
Originally Posted by protrucker8
I had a pos for weed a couple years ago and told my company. I didn't miss a day's work. But then I've never had a duii or moving violation. You might need to find a company thats more interested in hiring a great driver. One problem here is that trucking is over-reacting to the bad rep from the last generation of drivers (pre-1995), a lot of whom drank, ate speed, drove 24 hours straight and caused accidents. Also, the industry is, culturally, a Southern one. Even outside the South, a lot of the trucking industry still has Red State conservative values and ideas, and that's maybe why in this forum you are not getting a lot of helpful answers.
:shock: :withstupid: :roll:
Same kind of guy who says he can drive better on pot. Or a couple of beers doesn't affect his driving. Good drivers are clean and sober drivers.
But, not ALL "clean and sober" drivers are GOOD drivers. Which would you rather share the road with? A guy who takes a few tokes when home on the weekend, getting a buzz for a few hours, and then shows up for work sober and rested, with good driving skills..... or one who never smokes a joint, but can't drive an 80k pound missile worth a damn?
I don't care WHAT you do on your "hometime," as long as you can drive safely. No one here, or on any other thread, has suggested that he/she should be allowed to DRIVE while "high."
Some of you guys should take a "chill pill!" Oh no! Wait..... that might affect your DRIVING 2 days later! :roll:
It all boils down to trust. Can the company trust you to be on the road after failing a drug test? They don't know if you failed your drug test because you smoked two days or two hours ago. The only way to have a more scientific way to determine the amount of pot in your system is to do a blood draw.
Now, would you as a non-drug using driver want to get poked with a needle every time you have a pre-hire or random test done? All so someone who smokes pot can drive? No thanks.
I can see your point, Greg. But, I just don't agree with the situation as it is. We can put a man on the moon but we CAN'T come up with a better test?
Can you "trust" a driver who inhaled an 8ball 3 days ago, but is clean now? How about the guy who drinks like a fish while at home? You either trust that they don't do it on the road, or you don't. Pot stays in your system for 30 days. If you smoked a joint 3 weeks ago, was OFF DUTY for those 3 weeks, and showed up clean and sober, you can't be TRUSTED to stay clean on the road?
As for getting poked with a needle.... if you don't job hop too much, and if a random only occurs once or twice a year.... I wouldn't cry over getting poked with a needle. That's a whole lot easier than having to pee on command! :lol:
Would I do this so someone who SHOULD BE within his 9th Ammendment rights can smoke a little pot on his off duty time? Sure would!
Don't think that ALL drivers out there on the road are clean and sober JUST because they can no longer smoke pot when off duty. Many take pills to keep them going. Many are hungover. Some are actually under the influence of alcohol. Of course, I don't condone ANY of that!
I'm only maintaining that the focus should be on what condition you are in WHEN you get under the wheel. If you cannot prove that smoking a joint 3 days or 30 days PRIOR to driving affects my abilities when I get under the wheel, then I don't believe you should be able to REGULATE my offduty time.
I don't question that driving a CMV should be considered somewhat more dangerous than driving a POV, but who actually causes most accidents? And is there any requirement for a POV operator to submit to a UA before he gets under the wheel? NO. When he causes an accident, he is tested to determine his condition AT THAT TIME.
If we grounded every trucker because we couldn't "TRUST" him to be running legal logs, or getting the required sleep.... where would we be then? I don't think TRUST is the issue. I believe the issue should be "condition." An officer can prove you were "driving while impaired" EVEN if you don't fail a roadside breathilyzer... based on a coordination test. Therefore, it seems to me that the deciding factor is "condition." However, I don't believe ANYONE has ever been convicted of DWI (even concerning a controlled substance) based solely on the appearnace of THC in his blood system. Sounds like a double standard to me.
I'm not a Pothead! I just believe it should be somewhat "decriminalized." If a trucker is allowed to drink while off duty, I just don't see how smoking pot is so different. And yes, there are tests that will show elevated alcohol use over the last 30 days. Why isn't THIS a "TRUST" issue?