As i said in my first post my problem with testing is that depending on the implementation it has potential of labeling millions of youths as 'Drug Users', and this stigma will end up doing more harm than good in the long run.
I believe it is very important to consider the cons of the strategy because in my opinion the negative impact of smoking weed is hugely overstated. In my highschool and in college pretty much everybody i knew had tried smoking a joint, even the honor students. Some just at parties, some were full blown pot heads. But even some of the potheads were honour students. They just smoked instead of drinking.
I'm sure this is the case pretty much everywhere and has been so for the past 3 decades. However, do we see the majority of the population dropping out and leading unproductive lives as potheads on welfare?
No. Most people who smoke weed go on to lead very productive lives. Many don't even continue smoking after college. Those that do move on to other drugs or criminal activity, or just pothead on welfare with no self esteem, are usually people with weak self-control that would probably have become alchoholics anyway.
so, I think if you want to see testing it should be clearly laid out excactly what the strategy hopes to achieve, and whether this end result will be a drastic improvement on the current situation that actually warrants the cost of testing in the first place.
|
