A quite simple yes or no would have sufficed. You should be in politics with the other fuckheads.Originally Posted by Bikemad
Ever heard of the word "ethics"?
Que?
A quite simple yes or no would have sufficed. You should be in politics with the other fuckheads.
Ever heard of the word "ethics"?
Hardcore Biker
ok then i'm gonna go with yes......if you are operating heavy machinery on a public road............which is what this whole debate is about isn't it
we need to get scummy or rastus here to sort this out
***** POLITICIANS *****
People Of Little Integrity Thieving Innocent Citizens Incomes And Need Shooting
*******KASPA*******
Knavery Artificial Spurious Pretentious Arseholes
Que?
You might need a Popo to sort yourself out but please don't speak for me.
If the answer is indeed yes, then why do transport operators not call the Popo in when a driver tests positive? One would think (if you are correct and I believe you're not) that the transport operators would want the driver prosecuted if in fact the mere presence of cannabinoids in ones system was in itself illegal, assuming of course they do have an interest in safety.
If it were illegal for one to merely have cannabinoids present in ones system then why don't the Popo simply randomly screen at the roadside? I think you'll find that a set of tests designed to detect actual impairment is conducted roadside first and if failed, clinical drug tests are then performed from fluid samples collected. All quite draconian and inaccurate, but at least the Popo firstly look for actual impairment, rather than persecute based on lifestyle choices.
Anyhoo fuck off, it's spot time.
Hardcore Biker
Pal, if you had even a nodding acquaintance with ethics you would not have mentioned a companies name in your childish petulant & totally baseless spiteful smear of a companies reputation in post 133 #
Your post told us nothing about the company, unfortunately it told us far more about you than anyone could ever possibly ever wish to know.
If you find the contempt in which I hold you hurtful I suggest you seek solace in the knowledge that at least in your case the contempt is well earned.
Grubber & I could not be bothered posting again given with the BS in this thread, but then you spout on about ethics.Give me a break.
Good luck to the OP in finding a job in the transport industry.
111000101000100010011110
I answered it before. Poor memory eh?
It is a shit question because you are asking people to remember when they forget; which is kind of contrary to the meaning of the 'forget' part; in addition to the ambiguously interpreted terminology of 'short term memory'.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
111000101000100010011110
To what levels? 3hr joints beforehand/5days before margin of error like that other stuff?
Also, if you think keeping up with the play means reading facebooks, perhaps you should submit yourself for impairment testing immediately; who knows what toher bullshit you may have swallowed whole.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Forum whore
It comes from the cviu connection mate. Its their page. Cant get much better than that. But you can go on disbelieving everything if you want.
Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk
Trumpydom!
Que?
You're right. Testing for impairment, unlike you cunts.
I wonder how Bryce Cook feels about you dragging not only his name, but his image also into this discussion. Hmmm...
BTW, I'm not your mate.
111000101000100010011110
Sounds like you missed telling the whole story again... That's why I don't use the farcebook to keep up with the play. Perhaps they have a media or press release page?
Jeez this is just like twin brake lines all over again
Oh look, mindless insults, your daughter would be so proud
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Que?
But does he know the context within which his image and comments have been posted?
More importantly, does Paul Butler know you're arguing over the internets on his time? Might be time for some disciplinary action at KPH?
Forum whore
Do you have his permission to place his name or the company name???
Certainly not that i know of, and yes he does know and yes he is aware you have posted the Company name also. If i was you i wouldn't ruffle his feathers too much fella, he doesn't take kindly to that sort of shit. Currently has a litigation going against another company.
We discuss all these things cock.
The only reason you know where we are is that you came into our yard once and now you have done the stalking thing to find the rest, so you aint that special buddy.Not sure why you would need to go to that trouble to be honest, bit weird if you ask me!
The big thing you have done wrong is through it all over here.
I haven't once mentioned who i work for so your not that clever really.
Trumpydom!
111000101000100010011110
Also interesting reading, the chemistry behind the 'highs' of dope and alcohol, and the chemicals measured. Specifically the bit showing causation between testing and impairment. Since alcohol's impairing effects are derived through alcohol content in the blood, the test amount is indicative of the impairment amount. However this is not the case with dope, the chemicals tested for show only a very weak causative correlation with how impaired an individual is. It is a pity we cannot test this in such an indicative way as for alcohol; but it is important when discussing the topic we are mindful of this point.
It is also good the justice system showed the same initiative in the accident you posted about early, where despite having the dope chemicals in his system they couldn't prove it was causative to the accident, or even prove when he had last smoked a joint.
"A shark on whiskey is mighty risky, but a shark on beer is a beer engineer" - Tad Ghostal
Hardcore Biker
Just to give slightly different angle to the whole testing thing.
Early this year one of the Ozzie mining unions won a final case against one of the mining companies resulting in urine testing being banned as a method of drug testing as it can only indicate ingestion not impairment levels.
It is possible to do a urine style test for alcohol but it seems to be generally recommended against as it does not measure impairment levels which are already set in legislation.
I suspect the fact that pot is decriminalised in some states in Oz means that it can be viewed similarly to alcohol from a legal point of view hence the court case.
Life is a lesson-if I bother to listen
Kruger-Dunning Parts n Service
Excuse me for interrupting this handbags at dawn session but there's other industries where that's the same as well.
Further to that the big question is why don't the police automatically do a search warrant on the house of anyone caught smoking/possession dope. I and why aren't the drug sniffer dogs outside paknsave or the bottle stores instead of wasting time at prison gates. And those P detector boxes that landlords can rent, why don't the cops have someone wandering around the neighbourhood house by house and doing quick test at front door.
You only have to watch one episode of police ten 7 to see dope charges are not treated seriously and used as a bargaining tool to get other info from people.
Once gain not into that stuff but if it is a problem why don't the authorities treat it as such...
The answer is they want society to keep taking drugs, abusing alcohol cause their too happy to vote or bitch about the govt that way...
Rant over, back to your handbags
Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket - Eric Hoffer
Don't forget to bring a towel
Is that really the best you've got?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks