If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Enterprise News)   Police union lawyer criticizes department's "offensive" policy of prohibiting officers from smoking pot   (enterprisenews.com) divider line 54
    More: Stupid, Abington, Cannabis smoking  
•       •       •

3638 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Jan 2013 at 3:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-19 12:20:49 PM
why havent we banned all police and fire unions?
seriously!!

why did gov scott ban all other public sector unions but not those unions?

Police and fire unions are probably the worst, most corrupt public sector unions in america.
They are a clear and present danger to all americans. Serve and Protect? not so much.
cover up and abuse power? mhmm

/yes, we know, where you live in mayberry, all the cops are super. I am talking about all those other places.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-19 12:26:50 PM
Well, is it legal or not?
 
2013-01-19 12:34:55 PM

vpb: Well, is it legal or not?


LOL
the first time I smoked pot was with a chicago cop and his brother in law.
The idea that some cops havent always smoked pot, snorted coke, etc, is silly.
The hypocrisy is that these cops continued to arrest anyone else for anything related to drugs.
 
2013-01-19 01:07:47 PM
Subby apparently read a different article than the one he linked to. That one says the unions disagree with the policy that says cops have to report medical marijuana use by any family members that live with them. Here, I'll copy and paste the quote from the article and even embolden the relevant part:

"This policy infringes on the privacy rights of officers and I do not believe the police department has any business in prying into the private medical-related issues of family members of police officers who may live with them," said Bryan Decker, an attorney from the Boston-based firm Sandulli Grace that represents more than 100 police unions across the state.
 
2013-01-19 01:51:46 PM

CruiserTwelve: Subby apparently read a different article than the one he linked to. That one says the unions disagree with the policy that says cops have to report medical marijuana use by any family members that live with them. Here, I'll copy and paste the quote from the article and even embolden the relevant part:

"This policy infringes on the privacy rights of officers and I do not believe the police department has any business in prying into the private medical-related issues of family members of police officers who may live with them," said Bryan Decker, an attorney from the Boston-based firm Sandulli Grace that represents more than 100 police unions across the state.


hahahahah
I dont believe the police have any business poking into the private business of anyone.
drugs, prostitution, gambling
but those assholes do it anyways
so FARKEM
 
2013-01-19 02:19:27 PM

namatad: I dont believe the police have any business poking into the private business of anyone.
drugs, prostitution, gambling
but those assholes do it anyways
so FARKEM


And the cops put so much effort into enforcing those laws that those activities don't exist, right?
 
2013-01-19 03:36:44 PM
If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.
 
2013-01-19 03:38:28 PM
No problem - if you are going to enforce the drug laws, you have to be familiar with the drugs. And Continuing Education.
 
2013-01-19 03:40:03 PM
I would like to see how far the legal challenges go in the state system of courts. Controversial laws do not become clear until challenged in state supreme court.
 
2013-01-19 03:42:32 PM

Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.


Agreed. As someone who has worked with law enforcement before, and will likely continue to in the future, it's been many officers' experience that pot is much less of a problem than alcohol. Both in and out of the force. A cop would much rather deal with some random pothead than a random drunk guy; The pothead, more often than not will be slightly upset but compliant. The drunk will fight and fight and fight every step of the process. Likewise, alcoholism is a huge problem in the law enforcement community; the strong physical addiction from alcohol is a much bigger problem than the mild psychological "addiction" of pot. A pot smoking cop can just put the pipe down the day before his shift and he'll be fine; the alcoholic cop can put his bottle down the day before and his shift will have him agitated and uncoordinated.
 
2013-01-19 03:42:49 PM

Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.


It's still a federal crime, even if the state legalizes or decriminalizes it's possession. That's the problem with it. The way the department views it, how can someone be expected to uphold the law when they're breaking one off duty.

It'll be this way until legalization is federal-level.
 
2013-01-19 03:45:57 PM

BronyMedic: Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.

It's still a federal crime, even if the state legalizes or decriminalizes it's possession. That's the problem with it. The way the department views it, how can someone be expected to uphold the law when they're breaking one off duty.

It'll be this way until legalization is federal-level.


They are not federal agents
 
2013-01-19 03:47:19 PM

namatad: why havent we banned all police and fire unions?
seriously!!

why did gov scott ban all other public sector unions but not those unions?

Police and fire unions are probably the worst, most corrupt public sector unions in america.
They are a clear and present danger to all americans. Serve and Protect? not so much.
cover up and abuse power? mhmm

/yes, we know, where you live in mayberry, all the cops are super. I am talking about all those other places.


yes but the police have the guns.
 
2013-01-19 03:52:33 PM

spentshells: They are not federal agents


Which doesn't matter in the least. The DOJ can pull funding from their department on the Federal level because they are complacent in illicit trade of drugs, and bring federal charges against their officers. That's all they care about.
 
2013-01-19 03:54:50 PM
The policy, issued Jan. 1 and obtained by The Enterprise, says officers are banned from using marijuana for medicinal purposes or from becoming caregivers, those legally allowed to assist a qualified patient's use.
The officer has to provide Chief David Majenski with the name, address and relation of anyone who falls under this requirement.


HIPAA? anyone? HIPAA?
 
2013-01-19 03:54:58 PM
And having a positive drug test for using cocaine is all about that 1 time the junkie perp rubbed up against you and you got a contact high and thats why you went out and found a hooker, raped her and then beat the biatch up.

/There was a Vancouver BC cop who was robbing dealers(give me your drugs and no charges ok) and then reselling the stuff to people on the street and sometimes doing it while in uniform.
//Only publicized by the force to prove to the public that they do lawfully deal with crooked motherfarker officers sometimes.
///Join the forces that prohibit testing of officers for hard drugs, for safety of the public or something.
/Roids are the real drug of abuse in the force and some guys are very obviously using and Youtube is full of videos of it.
 
2013-01-19 03:57:10 PM
I blame Jack Webb.
 
2013-01-19 04:01:09 PM
I always heard that cops have the best dope.
 
2013-01-19 04:01:11 PM

CruiserTwelve: Subby apparently read a different article than the one he linked to. That one says the unions disagree with the policy that says cops have to report medical marijuana use by any family members that live with them.


Civilians with permission for medical marijuana end up on a state registry.  But God forbid the government should know about an Officer's relatives.

One law for you, and a different one for us.
 
2013-01-19 04:07:16 PM

sheep snorter: /There was a Vancouver BC cop who was robbing dealers(give me your drugs and no charges ok) and then reselling the stuff to people on the street and sometimes doing it while in uniform.


His name wouldn't happen to be Omar would it?
 
2013-01-19 04:08:15 PM
i116.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-19 04:08:26 PM
I find people who tell other people what to do offensive.

So stop it!!!
 
2013-01-19 04:09:30 PM

adammpower: The policy, issued Jan. 1 and obtained by The Enterprise, says officers are banned from using marijuana for medicinal purposes or from becoming caregivers, those legally allowed to assist a qualified patient's use.
The officer has to provide Chief David Majenski with the name, address and relation of anyone who falls under this requirement.

HIPAA? anyone? HIPAA?


Thats the part I found offensive. I wonder how HIPAA may apply in a case where you would have to notify your department of your relatives medical conditions.
 
2013-01-19 04:21:32 PM

ColdFusion: Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.

Agreed. As someone who has worked with law enforcement before, and will likely continue to in the future, it's been many officers' experience that pot is much less of a problem than alcohol. Both in and out of the force. A cop would much rather deal with some random pothead than a random drunk guy; The pothead, more often than not will be slightly upset but compliant. The drunk will fight and fight and fight every step of the process. Likewise, alcoholism is a huge problem in the law enforcement community; the strong physical addiction from alcohol is a much bigger problem than the mild psychological "addiction" of pot. A pot smoking cop can just put the pipe down the day before his shift and he'll be fine; the alcoholic cop can put his bottle down the day before and his shift will have him agitated and uncoordinated.


Oh, I'm not sure I agree with your police work, there, Lou. Sure, a pot smoking cop who put the pipe down the day before his shift may not be "agitated and uncoordinated" however he very well could forget where he put his keys, get lost on the way to work, not pay attention during role call, decide not to chase a bad guy because it was too much work and spend too much time eating donuts. So, I'm thinking it could all even out in the end and a continual pot smoker isnt much better than an alcoholic.
 
2013-01-19 04:24:42 PM

MrHelpful: and spend too much time eating donuts


This is not aberrant behavior. For a cop.
 
2013-01-19 04:46:23 PM

Igor Jakovsky: HIPAA? anyone? HIPAA?

Thats the part I found offensive. I wonder how HIPAA may apply in a case where you would have to notify your department of your relatives medical conditions.


It doesn't apply.

HIPAA only applies if you are providing care to a patient in any capacity, or engaged in the handling of protected health information of that patient for any reason. It does NOT apply to family members in the least, unless that member is employed by an organization providing healthcare to that patient.

HIPAA also does not prevent mandatory PHI disclosures that are required by state and federal law.
 
2013-01-19 04:58:33 PM

namatad: CruiserTwelve: Subby apparently read a different article than the one he linked to. That one says the unions disagree with the policy that says cops have to report medical marijuana use by any family members that live with them. Here, I'll copy and paste the quote from the article and even embolden the relevant part:

"This policy infringes on the privacy rights of officers and I do not believe the police department has any business in prying into the private medical-related issues of family members of police officers who may live with them," said Bryan Decker, an attorney from the Boston-based firm Sandulli Grace that represents more than 100 police unions across the state.

hahahahah
I dont believe the police have any business poking into the private business of anyone.
drugs, prostitution, gambling
but those assholes do it anyways
so FARKEM


So in your blind hatred for all cops who are all bad and evil for enforcing laws that the voters have supported for decades, your solution is to brainlessly biatch about their unions. Unions who are apparently pushing for cops to have the right to do the very activities you hated them for enforcing laws against?

What a mind-numbingly stupid person you are acting like.
 
2013-01-19 05:00:32 PM
I've smoked with cops before. Off the clock of course and that was before it was legal.

/CSB
 
2013-01-19 05:12:14 PM

namatad: why havent we banned all police and fire unions?
seriously!!



Perhaps because this is America, and in America we don't tell people who they can and cannot associate with.
 
2013-01-19 05:22:20 PM

fnordfocus: Civilians with permission for medical marijuana end up on a state registry.  But God forbid the government should know about an Officer's relatives.

One law for you, and a different one for us.


Yes, the rules are different. You can get a medical marijuana certificate and smoke marijuana as much as you'd like. I cannot.
 
2013-01-19 05:25:32 PM

fnordfocus: Civilians with permission for medical marijuana end up on a state registry.  But God forbid the government should know about an Officer's relatives.


Oh, and a cop's relatives also end up on that same registry. So would a cop if he were to get a medical marijuana certificate. As noted in the article, however, he'd lose his job.
 
2013-01-19 05:39:28 PM

namatad: why did gov scott ban all other public sector unions but not those unions?



He allowed those two unions to continue because the safety of Wisconsinites is too important to risk. Yeah, that's why.

Link

Or maybe you don't believe his BS and realize those were the only two unions to support him. Hmmm......
 
2013-01-19 06:06:31 PM
Certainly looks like it is impossibly hard for some idiots to give up their Devils.
Peeps, the lies about one of the safest pharmaceutical plants on the planet have been outed.
Get up to speed, prosecute and hang the sociopaths stealing your money and locking up your relatives with their phoney War on Drugs..
 
2013-01-19 06:08:54 PM

lizyrd: namatad: why havent we banned all police and fire unions?
seriously!!


Perhaps because this is America, and in America we don't tell people who they can and cannot associate with.


Where does that leave "us" when "we" cannot associate with "our" stormtroops?
I have seen this one before.
Want me to spoil it?
 
2013-01-19 06:10:38 PM

BronyMedic: Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.

It's still a federal crime, even if the state legalizes or decriminalizes it's possession. That's the problem with it. The way the department views it, how can someone be expected to uphold the law when they're breaking one off duty.

It'll be this way until legalization is federal-level.


Wrongo!
This is a "faith based issue" and killing the lies will be a long time comming.
 
2013-01-19 06:19:09 PM

snocone: Wrongo!
This is a "faith based issue"


Are you trolling, or do you care to expand on this bit of logic? That's a pretty novel legal argument to state that the government pulling federal grant monies from a local department because they do nothing about their officer's drug use - illegal by federal law and, more than likely at a professional level, state standards - is an infringement on their religious rights. Not to mention the fact that is they DO bring federal drug charges against a department or an officer, any case that officer has worked is now tainted and questionable.

As long as departments risk getting that grant money blocked, or risk getting a federal investigation, "no marijuana use" is going to be a part of their contract and job description.

snocone: and killing the lies will be a long time comming.


What lies? Everyone knows, even Law Enforcement, that marijuana is pretty safe stuff - the same if not more so than alcohol or tobacco. Do you actually think that street cops believe that DARE Crap? They don't have a choice in the matter but to enforce local and state law, and at times federal law if they want to keep getting money from the State and Federal Government. Budget penalties are a major motivator - it's how, for example, the Feds got everyone on board with the 0.08 BAC limit nationwide. No DOT funds for you if you don't enforce at that or below.
 
2013-01-19 06:27:52 PM

CruiserTwelve: fnordfocus: Civilians with permission for medical marijuana end up on a state registry.  But God forbid the government should know about an Officer's relatives.

Oh, and a cop's relatives also end up on that same registry. So would a cop if he were to get a medical marijuana certificate. As noted in the article, however, he'd lose his job.


That's some bullshiat man. You should be able to. Fight the power.
 
2013-01-19 06:44:04 PM

CruiserTwelve: fnordfocus: Civilians with permission for medical marijuana end up on a state registry.  But God forbid the government should know about an Officer's relatives.

Oh, and a cop's relatives also end up on that same registry. So would a cop if he were to get a medical marijuana certificate. As noted in the article, however, he'd lose his job.


Then how is it any different if your Officers have to report it, or if the brass just look it up anyway?
 
2013-01-19 07:27:17 PM
You know what? Fark it. Go ahead and piss off the folks enforcing the laws. In fact, institute weekly drug screens for anyone whose employer recieves federal funds. Automatic federal prison for them and sanctions on the company or entity for any positives on any drug. And enforce the same drug screens on the household members too.

Now we'll be employing 10% of the population to guard the other 90%, we'll all have free medical care and no one will ever be eligible for student loans again (since any drug conviction makes you ineligible for life).

All of society's problems solved.
 
2013-01-19 10:08:31 PM
It should be as legal as cigarettes, and anyone who thinks it's a hazard on the road hasn't been making taco bell runs for years upon years without a single incident. Let's just do away with the ignorance and stigma of corporate interest drug-war propaganda. It's time.
 
2013-01-19 11:50:35 PM
I support the consumption of cannabis by emergency workers.
 
2013-01-20 12:03:40 AM

BronyMedic: snocone: Wrongo!
This is a "faith based issue"

Are you trolling, or do you care to expand on this bit of logic? That's a pretty novel legal argument to state that the government pulling federal grant monies from a local department because they do nothing about their officer's drug use - illegal by federal law and, more than likely at a professional level, state standards - is an infringement on their religious rights. Not to mention the fact that is they DO bring federal drug charges against a department or an officer, any case that officer has worked is now tainted and questionable.

As long as departments risk getting that grant money blocked, or risk getting a federal investigation, "no marijuana use" is going to be a part of their contract and job description.

snocone: and killing the lies will be a long time comming.

What lies? Everyone knows, even Law Enforcement, that marijuana is pretty safe stuff - the same if not more so than alcohol or tobacco. Do you actually think that street cops believe that DARE Crap? They don't have a choice in the matter but to enforce local and state law, and at times federal law if they want to keep getting money from the State and Federal Government. Budget penalties are a major motivator - it's how, for example, the Feds got everyone on board with the 0.08 BAC limit nationwide. No DOT funds for you if you don't enforce at that or below.


When you believe in something you don't understand
Then you suffer.

Taking anything on "faith" whether it be religion, propaganda or lies for greed is one and the same.
Actively demanding another person accept and act on your faith beliefs is a special crazy.
Refusing to give it up when confronted by evidence should be a warning flag, but seems invisible to the violator.
One's paradigms always need questioning and examination, just like any "authority".
 
2013-01-20 12:33:55 AM
Tell me again why it is OK to have a Federal law that requires every last person with a Commercial Driver License to be randomly drug tested by their employer yet there is no such law for cops?
Who is more dangerous, someone driving a delivery truck or someone that carries a gun all day and has arrest powers?
 
2013-01-20 12:56:45 AM

snocone: BronyMedic:


Were you drunk when you wrote your profile? Or just trolling?
 
2013-01-20 01:25:56 AM

crabsno termites: snocone: BronyMedic:

Were you drunk when you wrote your profile? Or just trolling?


Holy Crap. Timecube guy has a FARK user name.
 
2013-01-20 01:35:04 AM

BronyMedic: crabsno termites: snocone: BronyMedic:

Were you drunk when you wrote your profile? Or just trolling?

Holy Crap. Timecube guy has a FARK user name.


What the hell is a time cube guy?

/Lurker since 90's, joined @ 2 yrs ago.
 
2013-01-20 02:00:14 AM

crabsno termites: BronyMedic: crabsno termites: snocone: BronyMedic:

Were you drunk when you wrote your profile? Or just trolling?

Holy Crap. Timecube guy has a FARK user name.

What the hell is a time cube guy?

/Lurker since 90's, joined @ 2 yrs ago.


SRSLY? Oh, let me show you this batshiat insanity!

NATURES HARMONIC 4 DAY TIME CUBE IS TRUTH!! (EncyclopediaDramatica, NSFW)
Uncyclopedia Entry

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-01-20 02:26:12 AM

MrHelpful: ColdFusion: Mort_Q: If it's legal, and they're using off-duty, then it is offensive.

Agreed. As someone who has worked with law enforcement before, and will likely continue to in the future, it's been many officers' experience that pot is much less of a problem than alcohol. Both in and out of the force. A cop would much rather deal with some random pothead than a random drunk guy; The pothead, more often than not will be slightly upset but compliant. The drunk will fight and fight and fight every step of the process. Likewise, alcoholism is a huge problem in the law enforcement community; the strong physical addiction from alcohol is a much bigger problem than the mild psychological "addiction" of pot. A pot smoking cop can just put the pipe down the day before his shift and he'll be fine; the alcoholic cop can put his bottle down the day before and his shift will have him agitated and uncoordinated.

Oh, I'm not sure I agree with your police work, there, Lou. Sure, a pot smoking cop who put the pipe down the day before his shift may not be "agitated and uncoordinated" however he very well could forget where he put his keys, get lost on the way to work, not pay attention during role call, decide not to chase a bad guy because it was too much work and spend too much time eating donuts. So, I'm thinking it could all even out in the end and a continual pot smoker isnt much better than an alcoholic.


What kind of weed are you buying that has such strong effects 24 hours later? And where can I get it?
 
2013-01-20 02:55:01 AM

UseLessHuman: It should be as legal as cigarettes, and anyone who thinks it's a hazard on the road hasn't been making taco bell runs for years upon years without a single incident. Let's just do away with the ignorance and stigma of corporate interest drug-war propaganda. It's time.


Lower reaction time is bad. Smoking and driving is nowhere near drunk driving but it isn't a plus.

Fyi my cousin drives between buzzed and drunk quite regularly without incident too. He went out for a pizza and passed out before finishing a slice last week. Impressive skill/luck there I guess.
 
2013-01-20 03:02:15 AM

BronyMedic: crabsno termites: BronyMedic: crabsno termites: snocone: BronyMedic:

Were you drunk when you wrote your profile? Or just trolling?

Holy Crap. Timecube guy has a FARK user name.

What the hell is a time cube guy?

/Lurker since 90's, joined @ 2 yrs ago.

SRSLY? Oh, let me show you this batshiat insanity!

NATURES HARMONIC 4 DAY TIME CUBE IS TRUTH!! (EncyclopediaDramatica, NSFW)
Uncyclopedia Entry

[images2.wikia.nocookie.net image 500x330]


I see - farking drunk.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report