Recent comments in /f/RhodeIsland

strugglebus984 t1_je2kaeq wrote

Reply to comment by RealKing17 in Man wtfffff by [deleted]

I feel the same. I don’t think driving or traffic are bad here at all. The streets that my RI neighbors complain as having huge amounts of traffic are just typical of all primary roads in my prior states.

2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_je2h4be wrote

I'd be a little wary on the project right now until the financing seems to be in order. At the very least, 2024 seems ambitious.

On a more long-term note, the more I've dug into the USL, the less confident I am in the long-term viability. A league that's been around a decade and has more former teams than active ones just strikes me as not a model for long-term success.

8

PigpenMcKernan t1_je2fdze wrote

I understood his question and you are correct. It does not matter if you have a prescription for marijuana in the same way that a prescription for stimulants or painkillers would negate the positive test result. As long as marijuana is federally schedule 1 (or more likely as long as it’s scheduled at all) it won’t matter if you are using recreational or medically when it comes to employment.

3

magentablue t1_je2esr7 wrote

I work in onboarding for a staffing agency and in my experience MMJ is not handled like prescription medications are, even if a medical card is presented. The notes will say a card was verified but the test will show as being flagged positive.

That being said, we work with a bunch of federal clients and some accept a positive MMJ test if you have a medical card.

5

barsoapguy t1_je2eaz1 wrote

I have to wonder what kind of situation the police would be using that kind of discretion to arrest …if merely filming an interaction would require it than the initial situation must be quite severe to a lay person.

If cameras mean that they have to arrest every time then we should be promoting them and removing officer discretion to make the arrests.

People are given to mo many chances when it comes to driving these large metal boxes that can kill others.

−2

T-RevFromDaHood t1_je29sa3 wrote

I want to agree with you, but I can't. I have police in my closest circles of life. Cops say "you get rid of my discretion to assess the situation and respond accordingly, and now I HAVE to arrest you" when you record the interactions, but I see this as an unwillingness to address the very real concerns people have over interactions with the police.

Shit, RI has that Instagram judge going viral every other week for traffic court interactions. Nobody lambastes the justice system or police or even the judge for "letting someone go". There isn't backlash for recording a police interaction when it ends in a ticket, except for from law enforcement.

But now you're upset that people are learning about their constitutional rights? Make it make sense.

4

Forward-Contract9315 t1_je27vwo wrote

I saw that thread too. Try saying it to them a different way, isolated from an informational article, like, "is it problematic that there are gangs of children in ATVs menacing the citizens of PVD?"

and you will find a fat % of them denying it's the case, or saying WELL I heard about that stuff but I've never seen it, another fat % telling you your comment has unwholesomely racial overtones regardless of its content, a substantial % asking you whether you just need PVD to be more similar to the suburbs, and then yeah maybe a small group who do perceive the behavior as a problem requiring a solution. None of them realizing for an instant that the victim blaming and "well I haven't experienced it so it must not exist" attitudes are exactly what progressive liberalism has been intending to combat for the last couple of decades. Then you might ask if the cops and simple enforcement are an appropriate solution and see how that goes--and I say this as an ACAB guy.

I can absolutely guarantee you, having posted in that forum on this exact topic before, albeit with a different account, that the bulk of the users there are more concerned with how you've identified this as a problem and how that might make YOU problematic, than with it being a problem in the first place.

3

wenestvedt t1_je272sm wrote

My guess is because the DMV is only charged with managing vehicles for use on roads.

Tractors, for example, are only subject to their requirements when they are moving from field to field -- and even then they kind of get a pass, running with their flashers on.

Again, that's my understanding from growing up in an ag state.

1

Theo_dore229 t1_je265bb wrote

I think people are kind of misunderstanding what OP was trying to ask. There are 100% instances where people test positive for drugs and it’s removed from any report given to the employer. Painkillers, stimulants like adderall, and certain anti-anxiety medications will all show up on drug tests. If you provide a prescription for those medications when you fill out your paperwork prior to the drug test, they cannot reveal to the potential employer that you were taking those medications. It’s a HIPPA violation. On the flip side If someone has no prescriptions for those medications, then it will show that they tested positive for it.

This is what I believe OP is asking. If he has a medical marijuana card, will a positive marijuana result be treated like someone who is prescribed adderall and tests positive for amphetamine, or someone prescribed Vicodin, testing positive for opiates, etc. Unfortunately, I don’t know the answer. But I believe it likely varies quite a bit between employers, as there is no federal law like there is with HIPPA.

5

TheMadQuahogger t1_je25fp1 wrote

Last week, I think it was Wednesday, I arrived at 7:41 and the lot was full. About 6 cars including myself had to circle the lot and exit and head north to attleboro which was only possible because the train was 15 mins late that day. Mondays and Fridays are probably fine but the early bird gets the space midweek! I think i read that they have the capacity to expand another 200 spaces. They might need to do that sooner than they thought.

1