Things are beginning to turn around..... for good

[A.J. Holst]

The follicle test catches about 4 months of bad habits; tobacco, mj and other drugs. My guess is the employer is looking for other drugs. As TMF alluded to pills, coke and the like flush out in 4 days since they are water soluable. mj is stored in fat cells and it takes good old metabolism to eventually filter it out.

[Guest ab28]

Yeah, makes me wonder how jobs deal in states where weed is legal.

[Wyldk2]

I was told if you fail the drug test it may be because of a prescription you are on. Dosent mean you are out of a job. If whatever you are taking has approval by your doctor it shouldn't matter.

 

That saying, I don't do drugs, rarely drink alcohol and don't smoke anything. So I should be in the clear.

[Hershmeister]

Never eat a poppyseed muffin or bagel the day of a pee test. It will hit for opiods

[Dane]

[quote name="ab28" post="1176693" timestamp="1407448592"]Yeah, makes me wonder how jobs deal in states where weed is legal.[/quote] Works the same way. Companies can dictate what drugs (legal or not) that they don't want. If I'm not mistaken VW doesn't hire tobacco smokers. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[TMF]

[quote name="ab28" post="1176686" timestamp="1407447719"]I think weed is only active in urine for up to a month. I don't smoke anymore, but I'm thin and athletic, and drink tons of water. I can pass one in a week. I have long hair now though. Not sure I agree with a drug test for a job. If someone wants to smoke on their day off, not the companies business. All the smokers I know are responsible and don't smoke on the job. [/quote] THC can stay in your fat cells for quite a while, especially for overweight people who smoke a lot. That said, a company can and should be allowed to hire or not based on a person's recreational use of drugs. It's their company. Folks who take issue with that don't have to work there. The onus isn't on a private business to be accommodating to the employee. The employee can look elsewhere for work just like the employer can look elsewhere for workers. Edited August 8, 2014 by TMF

[Randall53]

Wasn't crapping on the choice of job. It's actually pretty decent, I would have stayed longer if I hadn't started having health problems. I just couldn't imagine working there for 30 years like some of the guys I met there. If you are on the line, you will get hand and wrist problems using the screwguns. Was just stating factory jobs in general are boring and suck. That probably isn't news to anyone, though. The pay is good, and you get plenty of overtime, so if you are into that, it's a good job. I just personally have to have a job I enjoy, even if I make a lot less.

 

As far as being "dismissive" of other's choices in knives or guns, it is because I have found better options for cheaper, or other reasons, and have found in life early on that material possessions won't make you happy. Having almost nothing, being light and mobile, and not having to spend your time maintaining possessions is a huge freedom enabler.

 

If you had found one of the keys to happiness, wouldn't you want to share it with others? Wouldn't you want to let people know that the massive consumerism and materialism brainwashing we have had since birth is a lie? Wouldn't you want to let people know that their time is more valuable than the latest shiny toy? It takes a lot of self discipline to be a minimalist, but the outcome is more than worth it.

 

Here are a few links to get you started if you are interested in more freedom:

 

http://www.becomingminimalist.com/

 

http://mnmlist.com/minimalist-faqs/

 

http://lifehacker.com/5991832/declutter-in-your-life-and-embrace-minimalism-this-weekend

 

Read over those, it's really an eye opener. Living against the grain and deciding you don't want to own anything is very freeing.

 

 

Dude. I've gotta say that I respectfully consider you insane.  You will be old one day and I can tell you from experience that all an old man has is what a young man saves, and many don't save anything. Another sad part of life is that an old man must live with the decisions he made when he was young, dumb and gullible; like the people that buy into those crazy articles you posted.

 

 

OOps...forgot to say, congrats on the new job!!  I've heard it's a good job with advancement opportunities to boot.

Edited August 8, 2014 by Randall53

[Guest ab28]

Dude. I've gotta say that I respectfully consider you insane.  You will be old one day and I can tell you from experience that all an old man has is what a young man saves, and many don't save anything. Another sad part of life is that an old man must live with the decisions he made when he was young, dumb and gullible; like the people that buy into those crazy articles you posted.

 

 

OOps...forgot to say, congrats on the new job!!  I've heard it's a good job with advancement opportunities to boot.

Actually the crazy ones are the people that buy tons of crap. I do save money, don't spend much. I would say minimalism is exactly the opposite of dumb. I wish a lot more people would buy into those "crazy articles", the world would be a lot better place.

[Oh Shoot]

Works the same way. Companies can dictate what drugs (legal or not) that they don't want. If I'm not mistaken VW doesn't hire tobacco smokers.

 

Just wait for the legal battles over DNA testing once it becomes cheap.

 

- OS

[Guest ab28]

THC can stay in your fat cells for quite a while, especially for overweight people who smoke a lot. That said, a company can and should be allowed to hire or not based on a person's recreational use of drugs. It's their company. Folks who take issue with that don't have to work there. The onus isn't on a private business to be accommodating to the employee. The employee can look elsewhere for work just like the employer can look elsewhere for workers.

They shouldn't be able to. All a company should be able to do is dictate your performance on the job. Show up on time and do a good job, nothing else should matter. Their company or not, they don't and shouldn't have control over your private life. People are letting businesses and private property rights stuff have too much control in their lives.

 

It's like carrying. I've gone to people's houses for study groups and knowing they hated guns. I carried anyways, because I don't have to follow irrational beliefs just because I am on someone's property. My personal safety trumps their property rights.

[jcj]

[quote name="Dane" post="1176717" timestamp="1407454578"]Works the same way. Companies can dictate what drugs (legal or not) that they don't want. If I'm not mistaken VW doesn't hire tobacco smokers.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD[/quote] This. My employer has an office in Colorado. Even though weed is legal there now it is still against company policy. The penalties for a positive drug test are unchanged. The only difference is there are no legal consequences. Despite multiple reminders about this fact, I've heard that CO office has lost a number of employees.

[Luke E.]

[quote name="ab28" post="1176938" timestamp="1407502289"]

"private property rights stuff have too much control in their lives."
Private property rights stuff? So maybe we should all just turn over all of our possessions so that we can end this "madness" right now! Sound about right ab28?

"It's like carrying. I've gone to people's houses for study groups and knowing they hated guns. I carried anyways, because I don't have to follow irrational beliefs just because I am on someone's property. My personal safety trumps their property rights"

Where did you learn this ^? Where have you been the whole time the state of TN has been debating whether or not folks could carry on the way to work and leave the weapon in the car on premises? I mean damn! We should have just taken you before the judge so you could educate him on private property rights and how little they're worth. Edited August 8, 2014 by Luke E.

[Guest ab28]

[quote name="ab28" post="1176938" timestamp="1407502289"]

"private property rights stuff have too much control in their lives."
Private property rights stuff? So maybe we should all just turn over all of our possessions so that we can end this "madness" right now! Sound about right ab28?

"It's like carrying. I've gone to people's houses for study groups and knowing they hated guns. I carried anyways, because I don't have to follow irrational beliefs just because I am on someone's property. My personal safety trumps their property rights"

Where did you learn this ^? Where have you been the whole time the state of TN has been debating whether or not folks could carry on the way to work and leave the weapon in the car on premises? I mean damn! We should have just taken you before the judge so you could educate him on private property rights and how little they're worth.

It's common sense. My life is worth more than someone's house or whatever. If someone is a brainwashed liberal, and hates guns, I have no obligation to honor their beliefs. My rights don't change based on the property I am currently standing on. 

 

I carried at my last job, even though corporate policy forbid firearms. It was a gas station, so it was obvious that I should carry.

 

I don't see property rights as absolute, is what I am trying to say. Use your brain, think for yourself in the interpretation of the matter. I walk through a neighboring apartment complex because it cuts 10 minutes off my walk to wherever I'm going, and avoids a dangerous blind spot along their apartment exit. Since they won't cut down the bushes so cars and pedestrians can see oncoming traffic, I have no obligation to walk the more dangerous route.

[maroonandwhite]

They shouldn't be able to. All a company should be able to do is dictate your performance on the job. Show up on time and do a good job, nothing else should matter. Their company or not, they don't and shouldn't have control over your private life. People are letting businesses and private property rights stuff have too much control in their lives.

 

It's like carrying. I've gone to people's houses for study groups and knowing they hated guns. I carried anyways, because I don't have to follow irrational beliefs just because I am on someone's property. My personal safety trumps their property rights.

 If one of these employee's run's someone over with a forklift or has another accident and kills someone even though they are not high right then guess what comes next....drug test. How does it look for the employer? You can bet a civil suit from the family will be headed their way. These companies are out to make money and look out for there best interest. Sure there may be "responsible" pot smokers or alcohol drinkers, etc. but if they make it OK their will be some idiot that will light one up in the parking lot and kill someone.

 

And for the property rights thing...... I'm not sure how to respond to that. We have very different views of freedom though.

[Luke E.]

It's like carrying. I've gone to people's houses for study groups and knowing they hated guns. I carried anyways, because I don't have to follow irrational beliefs just because I am on someone's property. My personal safety trumps their property rights.

By your reasoning, your study group partner should be able to take a crap in the middle of your dining room table. His need to do so must trump the property owners irrational fear of it being unhealthy.... Right ab?

[maroonandwhite]

By your reasoning, your study group partner should be able to take a crap in the middle of your dining room table. His need to do so must trump the property owners irrational fear of it being unhealthy.... Right ab?

That ain't right. :rofl:

[Guest ab28]

By your reasoning, your study group partner should be able to take a crap in the middle of your dining room table. His need to do so must trump the property owners irrational fear of it being unhealthy.... Right ab?

That is an illogical response and not related to the question. My carrying a weapon didn't bother anyone because they didn't know. 

 

We know it is actually unhealthy to take a crap, whereas the gun fear isn't based on any evidence. Same with creationism and evolution. There is no evidence for anything the bible says, yet for evolution there is evidence in every major discipline(biochemistry, chemistry, geology, physics, ect) yet people still hang on to irrational beliefs.

 

As for the getting high on the job thing, yeah, that's bad. A very sophisticated drug test that would be able to tell how many hours ago someone smoked would be useful in that instance. Not sure if that's technically possible yet, even if not, it isn't hard to tell if someone is really high. 

 

Why are we arguing the gun carry thing on a gun forum? It's our right to carry a weapon to defend ourselves.

Edited August 8, 2014 by ab28

[Luke E.]

It's common sense. My life is worth more than someone's house or whatever. If someone is a brainwashed liberal, and hates guns, I have no obligation to honor their beliefs. My rights don't change based on the property I am currently standing on.

I carried at my last job, even though corporate policy forbid firearms. It was a gas station, so it was obvious that I should carry.

I don't see property rights as absolute, is what I am trying to say. Use your brain, think for yourself in the interpretation of the matter. I walk through a neighboring apartment complex because it cuts 10 minutes off my walk to wherever I'm going, and avoids a dangerous blind spot along their apartment exit. Since they won't cut down the bushes so cars and pedestrians can see oncoming traffic, I have no obligation to walk the more dangerous route.

I take it you've not spent much time studying the constitution. What you do have the right to do is to stay off of property owned by someone that imposes rules that you don't agree with. If you come on my property acting in any manner other than I choose, you become unwelcome and I will ask/force you to leave.

[Guest ab28]

I take it you've not spent much time studying the constitution. What you do have the right to do is to stay off of property owned by someone that imposes rules that you don't agree with. If you come on my property acting in any manner other than I choose, you become unwelcome and I will ask/force you to leave.

Unless those rules are irrational, or it is obvious that I am disobeying it. I think the homeowners would have noticed if I had walked into the study group with a loaded shotgun and would have said something. I had a concealed handgun, so no one was the wiser. I had to weigh the options, me with a gun, combat experience, and multiple training courses vs some liberals with none and no guns, so I picked myself. 

 

I could see asking someone to leave who was acting in a dangerous manner, obviously. But as for self defense, since it's my life, I have to choose to follow the best option for myself, and it is irrelevant what a business owner thinks in that regard. Just because someone is rich and owns the company I work for, doesn't give them the right to tell me every single manner in relation to everything. They can dictate rules on how the job is done, that's it. Otherwise people are in danger of losing freedom and becoming slaves to the employer.

 

Anyways, guess we will just have to disagree on this. Yeah, if someone comes on your property that is a danger to you or your family, in an obvious manner, yeah, you gotta take care of that. If someone asks me to leave, I will, for whatever reason. That part doesn't bother me. I just have an issue with private property owners having absolute rights, that is like feudalism in the middle ages, and something the constitution was against.

Edited August 8, 2014 by ab28

[TMF]

[quote name="ab28" post="1176984" timestamp="1407506432"]Unless those rules are irrational, or it is obvious that I am disobeying it. I think the homeowners would have noticed if I had walked into the study group with a loaded shotgun and would have said something. I had a concealed handgun, so no one was the wiser. I had to weigh the options, me with a gun, combat experience, and multiple training courses vs some liberals with none and no guns, so I picked myself. I could see asking someone to leave who was acting in a dangerous manner, obviously. But as for self defense, since it's my life, I have to choose to follow the best option for myself, and it is irrelevant what a business owner thinks in that regard. Just because someone is rich and owns the company I work for, doesn't give them the right to tell me every single manner in relation to everything. They can dictate rules on how the job is done, that's it. Otherwise people are in danger of losing freedom and becoming slaves to the employer. Anyways, guess we will just have to disagree on this. Yeah, if someone comes on your property that is a danger to you or your family, in an obvious manner, yeah, you gotta take care of that. If someone asks me to leave, I will, for whatever reason. That part doesn't bother me. I just have an issue with private property owners having absolute rights, that is like feudalism in the middle ages, and something the constitution was against.[/quote] This all makes sense if you're a communist that doesn't believe in personal liberty. I strongly believe in personal liberty, so long as the liberty you take is not infringing on someone else's.

[Luke E.]

That is an illogical response and not related to the question. My carrying a weapon didn't bother anyone because they didn't know.

We know it is actually unhealthy to take a crap, whereas the gun fear isn't based on any evidence. Same with creationism and evolution. There is no evidence for anything the bible says, yet for evolution there is evidence in every major discipline(biochemistry, chemistry, geology, physics, ect) yet people still hang on to irrational beliefs.

As for the getting high on the job thing, yeah, that's bad. A very sophisticated drug test that would be able to tell how many hours ago someone smoked would be useful in that instance. Not sure if that's technically possible yet, even if not, it isn't hard to tell if someone is really high.

Why are we arguing the gun carry thing on a gun forum? It's our right to carry a weapon to defend ourselves.

It was not meant to be rational. It was meant to illustrate the lunacy of your idea that you can do whatever you want whether you own the property or not.
I'm not arguing against gun rights but am arguing against your apparent ignorance of another of our very important rights, private property ownership rights. I have and do sometimes carry where I'm prohibited but I have got the good sense to know that their rights still trump mine while on their property. You can't just pick and choose which rights are legit.

[Luke E.]

This all makes sense if you're a communist that doesn't believe in personal liberty. I strongly believe in personal liberty, so long as the liberty you take is not infringing on someone else's.

Exactly

[Guest ab28]

It was not meant to be rational. It was meant to illustrate the lunacy of your idea that you can do whatever you want whether you own the property or not.
I'm not arguing against gun rights but am arguing against your apparent ignorance of another of our very important rights, private property ownership rights. I have and do sometimes carry where I'm prohibited but I have got the good sense to know that their rights still trump mine while on their property. You can't just pick and choose which rights are legit.

Well, I don't think their rights trump mine, just because I am on someone's property, sorry. I've never felt that way. I always have final say in a matter, no matter where I am standing. That isn't lunacy, that's common sense. 

 

Not everyone owns property. They shouldn't have less rights based on that. 

 

I strongly believe in personal liberty, which is why I feel the way I do about this. My rights don't change depending on whose property I am on. 

Edited August 8, 2014 by ab28

[Luke E.]

Unless those rules are irrational, or it is obvious that I am disobeying it. I think the homeowners would have noticed if I had walked into the study group with a loaded shotgun and would have said something. I had a concealed handgun, so no one was the wiser. I had to weigh the options, me with a gun, combat experience, and multiple training courses vs some liberals with none and no guns, so I picked myself.

I could see asking someone to leave who was acting in a dangerous manner, obviously. But as for self defense, since it's my life, I have to choose to follow the best option for myself, and it is irrelevant what a business owner thinks in that regard. Just because someone is rich and owns the company I work for, doesn't give them the right to tell me every single manner in relation to everything. They can dictate rules on how the job is done, that's it. Otherwise people are in danger of losing freedom and becoming slaves to the employer.

Anyways, guess we will just have to disagree on this. Yeah, if someone comes on your property that is a danger to you or your family, in an obvious manner, yeah, you gotta take care of that. If someone asks me to leave, I will, for whatever reason. That part doesn't bother me. I just have an issue with private property owners having absolute rights, that is like feudalism in the middle ages, and something the constitution was against.

So basically your rights are the only ones that matter. I get it now.

Sorry about the thread crapping OP. I got into this and completely forgot that this wasn't its own thread.

[Luke E.]

Well, I don't think their rights trump mine, just because I am on someone's property, sorry. I've never felt that way. I always have final say in a matter, no matter where I am standing. That isn't lunacy, that's common sense.

Not everyone owns property. They shouldn't have less rights based on that.

I strongly believe in personal liberty, which is why I feel the way I do about this. My rights don't change depending on whose property I am on.

You DO NOT believe in personal liberty! You believe in your own personal liberty even when it trashes someone else's.