From chinese takeout/delivery. I placed a 25 dollar order, est time is 45 min and it has always been that way. If not sooner honestly. So this guy shows up higher than shit, red eyes, glossy, reaks to all hell. My daughter is behind me, jumping up and down waiting so eagerly for her crab ragoon.

I smell it and see it, my daughter smells it and comments he smells funny. I call the business up and demand to talk to the manager, I speak with him. He says the guy is gonna be fired and he had problems with him before.

I think he is bs me at first, until he shows up in person at my house and wants the low down and I tell him what happened. I mean, I smoked before in the day, even then I never went to work high.

Manager again tells me the dude is gone, he is getting fired tonight.

TLDR White delivery driver shows up 30 min late stoned out of his mind, daughter smells it, I complain. Driver gets fired.

Hope that filled you with some sort of sick satisfaction

weed gets people addicted and this is proof if you can't wait after work to smoke you're addicted .....

Would have done the same. It's illegal and dangerous as fuck to drive while you're high.

Going to work high is unprofessional

At 7/12/14 07:33 PM, Teddiikun wrote: Hope that filled you with some sort of sick satisfaction

I gave up smoking pot because I do not want my daughter exposed to it. She is free to make her own choice when she is older, I will rest assured deal with that when and if the time comes.

But hell if it is a disgrace to your business if you cant even hold a delivery job because you to fucking stoned. Do that shit on your down time in your own house. Do not bring it to mine.

And what does him being white have anything to do with it? Would you have still told on him if he was black? Chinese?

Sounds racist honestly because I agree with everything except singling out that he happened to be white. Like that should make any difference.

Why not just say you got the stoned guy fired and leave it at that? Why even bring race into it?

Hear hear, Strap. You're being a good daddy.

I gave up smokin' a few months back, because every time I get high I felt like a useless idiot. There's a time and a place for everything, and blazing on the job ain't the time or place.

At 7/12/14 07:58 PM, NeonSpider wrote: Why even bring race into it?

Probably because race is controversial and we love controversy.

Also there's a white-bashing bandwagon, so that's something.

At 7/12/14 07:27 PM, StrapOnFetus wrote:

I smell it and see it, my daughter smells it and comments he smells funny. I call the business up and demand to talk to the manager, I speak with him. He says the guy is gonna be fired and he had problems with him before.

Doesn't Chinese food always smell funny?

Poor white boy, can't get ahead for nothin.

At 7/12/14 08:47 PM, Addict wrote: "Got this white boy fired"

Shouldn't it be "Got this stoner fired"? But good call; shouldn't be stoned on the job. You can get people killed that way.

Well he did show up 30 minutes late. Why show up to work if you're just gonna do a shitty job at it?

Kill whi... Wait a minute, what the hell?

Good on ya

At 7/12/14 07:58 PM, NeonSpider wrote: Why not just say you got the stoned guy fired and leave it at that? Why even bring race into it?

Wow, I can taste the white-male tears from here in NJ. Nothing wrong with being detailed about the situation. Man, you are a sensitive guy.

Right, just like you should not drink and drive, well ideally you should not smoke and drive either. Your bag of weed is not going anywhere.

If anything happens where the driver to crash and hurt somebody, and he is busted with drugs in the car. That would be a huge lawsuit for the company.

If your a owner of a big chain, that is something you do not want.

At 7/12/14 10:52 PM, yurgenburgen wrote: I've had several experiences of coworkers being stoned/intoxicated at work. Pisses me off.

Quit counting your feminine side as a coworker yurgen

At 7/12/14 10:43 PM, FattyWhale wrote:

At 7/12/14 07:58 PM, NeonSpider wrote: Why not just say you got the stoned guy fired and leave it at that? Why even bring race into it?

Wow, I can taste the white-male tears from here in NJ. Nothing wrong with being detailed about the situation. Man, you are a sensitive guy.

Or it has nothing to do with race and bringing up race at all was unnecessary and likely shows racist thinking on the part of the OP. For example if OP intentionally has it out for "white guys" and thus only brings up race if it's a "white guy" or makes "white guys" look bad. And it doesn't even matter if OP is white because there's such a thing as a self-hating racist. There were black KKK supporters. And so forth.

I would have remarked exactly the same were the thread about a "black boy", "Mexican boy", etc...

If race is relevant then it is appropriate to bring it up. Otherwise it just makes people look racist (whether they are or not) and that's the truth.

God forbid your poor child had to smell weed.

Call in the fucking cavalry while you're at it.

At 7/12/14 07:27 PM, StrapOnFetus wrote: From chinese takeout/delivery. I placed a 25 dollar order, est time is 45 min and it has always been that way.
shows up 30 min late

that's more than an hour of a wait, if i am not mistaken. if that was so, i too would have a problem and the delivery man showing up high would surely had been the last straw for me.

He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

At 7/13/14 12:13 AM, 1916 wrote: He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

Potheads are not junkies

At 7/13/14 12:22 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:13 AM, 1916 wrote: He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

Potheads are not junkies

Of course they are. Pothead is surely the more accurate term, but I do not feel it adequately expresses how disgusting drug users are. As such I use junkie.

At 7/13/14 01:08 AM, 1916 wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:22 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:13 AM, 1916 wrote: He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

Potheads are not junkies

Of course they are. Pothead is surely the more accurate term, but I do not feel it adequately expresses how disgusting drug users are. As such I use junkie.

The word junkie was originated to be a person who is addicted to narcotics which the street term for is junk.

At 7/13/14 01:39 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 01:08 AM, 1916 wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:22 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:13 AM, 1916 wrote: He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

Potheads are not junkies

Of course they are. Pothead is surely the more accurate term, but I do not feel it adequately expresses how disgusting drug users are. As such I use junkie.

The word junkie was originated to be a person who is addicted to narcotics which the street term for is junk.

I'm honestly not trying to start an argument. There are just certain names for different drug users. Tweakers, Stoners, Junkies, etc.

At 7/13/14 01:39 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 01:08 AM, 1916 wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:22 AM, bumblefish wrote:

At 7/13/14 12:13 AM, 1916 wrote: He was a worthless junkie, he doesn't deserve employment.

Potheads are not junkies

Of course they are. Pothead is surely the more accurate term, but I do not feel it adequately expresses how disgusting drug users are. As such I use junkie.

The word junkie was originated to be a person who is addicted to narcotics which the street term for is junk.

And I use "junkie" with an expanded definition to make a point that alternative words do not adequately convey.

At 7/13/14 01:50 AM, 24901miles wrote:

At 7/13/14 01:44 AM, 1916 wrote: And I use "junkie" with an expanded definition to make a point that alternative words do not adequately convey.

Are there any substances which a person can use and not earn the label "junkie" by your standards? Is there a level of substance use or abuse which delineates between being a person deserving or undeserving of employment?

Caffeine is fine, drugs prescribed for legitimate medical issues are good.

Any level of drug use or abuse is sufficient to reveal a person is a moron who is undeserving of the things upstanding humans enjoy.

At 7/13/14 02:43 AM, 24901miles wrote: What are your thoughts on individuals who have been prescribed marijuana by their doctors? Or any other unconventional medication?

If the treatment has been conclusively shown to work and is prescribed in an instance of legitimate medical need it's fine.

If a worker needs to use amphetamines, cannabinoids, eugeroics, hormones, opiods, steroids, or etcetera to be better at what they do—whatever it is that they do—then why should anyone infer they are a moron? Would you also infer that a person is a moron for putting sugar in their morning tea? Or for taking a multivitamin?

No one needs to abuse drugs. I infer junkies are morons from their choice to needlessly abuse drugs and harm themselves unnecessarily.

Comparing sugar and multivitamins to drugs, I love false equivalencies.

At 7/13/14 03:07 AM, 24901miles wrote: You have a problem with people who work as test subjects for new treatments that haven't been shown conclusively to work? People don't typically sign up for human trials because they have a legitimate medical need. Mostly, they do it because they're low on cash and hope to be part of the control group.

It's unfortunate, but it's a necessary aspect of the development of new drugs. I make general statements because I don't want to bother bringing up every instance where drug use is justified. Life is too complex to possibly rule on generally and maintain perfect accuracy. Don't be dense.

Not all drug use is abuse, ergo, not all recreational or self-medicating drug users are junkies. Wall Street stock brokers have been using eugeroics and stimulants to improve their performance for decades. Some will tell you that it's impossible to compete in today's market without having some sort of PED.

Not all, but all recreational and "self-medicating" use is certainly abuse. One who uses drugs in such an instance needlessly does damage to themselves, abusing themselves and society as a whole.

And dont get me started on professional sports circuits. Drugs are absolutely mandatory for anyone who wants to compete as a bodybuilder or cyclist.

It's a good thing you don't have to be a bodybuilder or cyclist. There's natural bodybuilding competitions too, though.

Why is that a false equivalence? Sugar is an addictive substance which alters the behavior and thought processes of users. Sugar has been shown to accelerate the corrosion of tooth enamel, damaging the oral health and thus the digestive health of sugar junkies. Cannabis extract doesn't do that. Oral amphetamines don't do that.

And to be quite clear, the psychoactive effects of many controlled substances (labeled drugs) are more subtle than sugar.

Because you are equating things which are different with each other. Sugar is in food, it is energy. We humans need food to live, we do not need oral amphetamines or cannabis extract to live. Certainly one could harm themselves by ingesting too much sugar but it still has a legitimate purpose drugs lack.