Title is misleading – there’s nothing in the article indicating she was fired for refusing to sample the store’s product. PA is an “employment at will” state and she could have been fired for any reason. It seems HIGHLY unlikely that an employer would fire someone for not smoking marijuana, even in a dispensary, especially smoking it was prohibited in her other job. Now if she really was fired for not smoking, shame on the business.
A little researching found the company’s rationale for the firing due to “unwillingness and inability to complete the most basic pharmacist tasks” and “The reality is, our company cut ties with (Kopiak) on account of her personal instability and her erratic behavior on the job,” the complaint quotes the company as writing. “Her unsettling presence in our workplace was apparent almost immediately … suffice it to say that if you interact with her at any length, you will understand the problem for yourself.”
I don’t think the company would write to the court that “if you interact with her at any length, you will understand the problem for yourself” if they didn’t truly believe they could prove this argument in front of a judge.
LOL at the IJ staff troll for suggesting the termination was ‘at will’….. without discovery for the trial.
Currently, it is a ‘she said, they said’ situation.
I’ll bite; what is the reason for a court ruling on the cause of their (pharmacy) ‘will’ to terminate her before discovery occurs? Legal minds, and open-minded thinkers, want to know.
1) Stop with the unprovoked name calling. You are better than that.
2) Re-read my comment. I did not suggest the termination was at will – just that PA is an employment at will state. Saying she could have been fired for “any reason” indicates I do not know the real reason she was fired.
3) Who said the court was ruling BEFORE discovery? I certainly did not.
“A little researching….”.
Correct. More researching is warranted… but don’t use Goo-gul.
“Court ruling”: the case could be dismissed before it begins if there is a plea to dismiss. It would be dismissed based on your claim of termination for incompetence (paraphrased). Discovery is required before defendants can plead for dismissal.
The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.
4) You are OBVIOUSLY are not listening to me if you think I’m saying “It would be dismissed based on [my] claim of termination for incompetence (paraphrased).”
I never said that was MY claim. I simply presented the other side of the case as this article only spoke about the employee’s claims on what happened, not the business’ contentions.
You said “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.”
5) And …. what’s your point? Are you saying we can’t discuss ANY case that has not yet been ruled upon?
Please remember I am not taking the side of the employee OR the business here. At the same time, I already said that if the employee’s arguments are true then what the business did was wrong/illegal.
PS – thank you for not making a 2nd unwarranted personal attack in your last reply.
You’re saying it, but you’re not saying it. Right.
February 19, 2020 at 8:35 am
Emails on Weddings and Yoga Bear says:
Like or Dislike:
2
9
Discuss whatever pleases you, but remain consistent on what you say, or IMPLY by posting ‘at will state’ in an article on a employment practices lawsuit that alleges retaliatory termination for NOT putting a drug into ones body.
February 19, 2020 at 11:07 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
“but remain consistent on what you say”
I always do
February 18, 2020 at 2:31 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
3
I did not say it – I cited the company’s argument verbatim. Does this mean from now on if I cite someone and put their words in quotes you’re going to try to argue that I’m the one actually saying the quote?
Now back to the article — You said “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.”
5) And …. what’s your point? Are you saying we can’t discuss ANY case that has not yet been ruled upon?
Rosenblatt, you are one argumentative word parser.
February 18, 2020 at 3:39 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
5
Why are you refusing to answer me? What was the intent of your “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.” comment?
February 18, 2020 at 3:40 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
7
2
Sorry Polar – I did not read the poster’s name before my last reply and assumed it was you. I see now it was Agent who wrote that and not you.
I hope you’re able to post an explanation as to the intent of that comment you made. I’d love to know why you felt the need to say that and how you think it applies to this (and possibly future) discussion(s).
February 18, 2020 at 5:21 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
5
5
Rosenblatt: your FIRST comment was that the ‘title is misleading’.
No, it is not. She did allege she was fired for that reason.
Just admit you used a false pretense of a misleading headline to then attack the article.
February 18, 2020 at 5:34 pm
flawedlogic says:
Like or Dislike:
5
6
Craig apologize to Rosen for saying the pedo comment or stop holding others to a higher standard then yourself. You are too old for these antics.
Yes Craig, I came here just like you for an off topic comment.
February 19, 2020 at 8:20 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
6
4
Hey Craig – remember when you kept attacking IJ for not posting articles that weren’t in favor of marijuana then Andrew had to post the below MULTIPLE times?
If you’re not going to apologize for blatantly and falsely attacking IJ (to say nothing of your disgusting insult to me that flawedlogic keeps bringing up) – why do you demand I do something you’ve never done yourself?
Andrew G. Simpson says:
We have done this before. How is it you keeping missing these articles, Craig?
Audit of Oregon’s Marijuana Program Shows Regulators Fail to Meet Basic Standards
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Site Ordered Closed After State Inspection
National Safety Board Calls for Standards for Drugged Driving Tests
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Drugged Driving Increases While Drunk Driving Decreases
Michigan Recalls Some Medical Marijuana Products
First States to Legalize Marijuana See Rise in Car Insurance Claims, Research Shows
Covering Cannabis in California
N.Y. Court: Doc May Owe 3rd Party for Not Warning Patient About Driving on Meds
Mass. SJC Says Police Can Make Drugged Driving Arrest Based on Observations
Oklahoma Ruling Could Set Precedent for Marijuana Use in Work Comp Cases
Expert Sees a ‘Strong Need’ for Insurance for Cannabis Industry
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Prosecutor Says Colorado Marijuana Laws Too Loose, Jeopardize Safety
Medical Marijuana Patients Admit Driving While Under Influence
Rural Nevada Areas Not as High on Recreational Marijuana
Cherokee Nation Official: Medical Marijuana Illegal on Tribe Property
Marijuana Use Suspected in Fatal Colorado Crash
Troubled Opioid Seller Insys Looks to Cannabis to Save Itself
Only a Fraction of Patients Benefit from Medical Cannabis under Texas Law
Numerous California Marijuana Products Failing Safety Tests
Federal Prosecutor Threatens Law-Breaking Pot Businesses in Colorado
Big Insurers Still Taking a Pass on Marijuana Profits
Cannabis: Striking a Balance Between Federal and State Laws
California Considers Rule Changes as Legal Pot Market Struggles
Some Recreational Cannabis Products to Remain Banned Under New Canada Law
With Pot Shops Opening Soon, Massachusetts Warns About Driving High
Conservative States Like Oklahoma Balk at Voter-Approved Medical Marijuana
Alaska Cannabis Festival Under Investigation for Allowing Pot Consumption
Maine Employers Are Not Required to Reimburse Employees for Medical Marijuana Use
Florida Court Puts Hold On Smokable Medical Marijuana
Oregon Marijuana Growers Turning to Hemp as CBD Extract Explodes
More Employers Adopting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy for Marijuana Use
Marijuana, Opioids Found in High Percentage of Drivers Killed in Car Crashes
Medical Marijuana Users May be More at Risk for Non-Medical Drug Use: Study
Data Show Rise in Fatal Car Crashes on 4/20 Marijuana ‘Holiday’
Closing Quote: Legalized Marijuana Looks Like Bad News for Highway Safety
Internet Advertising by Unlicensed Marijuana Businesses Upset California Market
Study Suggests Pedestrian Fatalities May be Linked to Smartphone, Marijuana Use
Lawyers Handling Marijuana Business Operate in Hazy Legal Zone
New Hampshire House Committee Rejects Marijuana Legalization Bill
Stoned Driving Epidemic In Colorado, Washington Puts Wrinkle In Pot Debate
Maine Supreme Court Weighs Issue of Medical Marijuana and Workers’ Comp
Defendants in Oregon Pot Processing Explosion Suit Try to Turn Tables on Worker
California Pulls Stoned Driving Ad Critics Argued Promoted Pot Use
February 19, 2020 at 12:43 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
4
9
Poor, poor Rosenblatt. Always playing the victim.
Never getting the facts straight. Is that on purpose? Or an inability to read?
Insurance Journal publishes articles on pot and driving, but almost never on the other dangers. You twisted my criticism. But that is what you always do. Twistenblatt.
February 19, 2020 at 1:08 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
8
3
I’m sorry Craig – I did not mean to twist your criticism. Let me rephrase….
Hey Craig – remember when you kept attacking IJ for “almost never [posting articles about] the other dangers [of marijuana]” then Andrew had to post the below MULTIPLE times?
If you’re not going to apologize for blatantly and falsely attacking IJ (to say nothing of your disgusting insult to me that flawedlogic keeps bringing up) – why do you demand I do something you’ve never done yourself?
Andrew G. Simpson says:
We have done this before. How is it you keeping missing these articles, Craig?
Audit of Oregon’s Marijuana Program Shows Regulators Fail to Meet Basic Standards
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Site Ordered Closed After State Inspection
National Safety Board Calls for Standards for Drugged Driving Tests
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Drugged Driving Increases While Drunk Driving Decreases
Michigan Recalls Some Medical Marijuana Products
First States to Legalize Marijuana See Rise in Car Insurance Claims, Research Shows
Covering Cannabis in California
N.Y. Court: Doc May Owe 3rd Party for Not Warning Patient About Driving on Meds
Mass. SJC Says Police Can Make Drugged Driving Arrest Based on Observations
Oklahoma Ruling Could Set Precedent for Marijuana Use in Work Comp Cases
Expert Sees a ‘Strong Need’ for Insurance for Cannabis Industry
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Prosecutor Says Colorado Marijuana Laws Too Loose, Jeopardize Safety
Medical Marijuana Patients Admit Driving While Under Influence
Rural Nevada Areas Not as High on Recreational Marijuana
Cherokee Nation Official: Medical Marijuana Illegal on Tribe Property
Marijuana Use Suspected in Fatal Colorado Crash
Troubled Opioid Seller Insys Looks to Cannabis to Save Itself
Only a Fraction of Patients Benefit from Medical Cannabis under Texas Law
Numerous California Marijuana Products Failing Safety Tests
Federal Prosecutor Threatens Law-Breaking Pot Businesses in Colorado
Big Insurers Still Taking a Pass on Marijuana Profits
Cannabis: Striking a Balance Between Federal and State Laws
California Considers Rule Changes as Legal Pot Market Struggles
Some Recreational Cannabis Products to Remain Banned Under New Canada Law
With Pot Shops Opening Soon, Massachusetts Warns About Driving High
Conservative States Like Oklahoma Balk at Voter-Approved Medical Marijuana
Alaska Cannabis Festival Under Investigation for Allowing Pot Consumption
Maine Employers Are Not Required to Reimburse Employees for Medical Marijuana Use
Florida Court Puts Hold On Smokable Medical Marijuana
Oregon Marijuana Growers Turning to Hemp as CBD Extract Explodes
More Employers Adopting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy for Marijuana Use
Marijuana, Opioids Found in High Percentage of Drivers Killed in Car Crashes
Medical Marijuana Users May be More at Risk for Non-Medical Drug Use: Study
Data Show Rise in Fatal Car Crashes on 4/20 Marijuana ‘Holiday’
Closing Quote: Legalized Marijuana Looks Like Bad News for Highway Safety
Internet Advertising by Unlicensed Marijuana Businesses Upset California Market
Study Suggests Pedestrian Fatalities May be Linked to Smartphone, Marijuana Use
Lawyers Handling Marijuana Business Operate in Hazy Legal Zone
New Hampshire House Committee Rejects Marijuana Legalization Bill
Stoned Driving Epidemic In Colorado, Washington Puts Wrinkle In Pot Debate
Maine Supreme Court Weighs Issue of Medical Marijuana and Workers’ Comp
Defendants in Oregon Pot Processing Explosion Suit Try to Turn Tables on Worker
California Pulls Stoned Driving Ad Critics Argued Promoted Pot Use
Is that better???
February 19, 2020 at 6:43 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
3
7
And again, like a clown, you list every article ever published without admitting they are nearly all about driving issues or other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving.
But honesty? Rosenblatt? Oxymoron.
February 19, 2020 at 7:28 pm
Andrew G. Simpson says:
Like or Dislike:
7
1
Craig, you mean IJ “almost never” publishes articles on other marijuana risks such as product, health, workplace, marketing, regulatory, legal, vaping, etc? Did you mean “almost always”?
Federal Officials Issue Health Warning on Marijuana Use by Teens, Pregnant Women
The Politics Behind the Push for a Federal Marijuana Business Banking Law
Canadian Firm Sues Oklahoma Marijuana Dispensary for Copyright Infringement
Court Rules Florida Medical Marijuana Regulations Are Unconstitutional
Doctors in Missouri Reluctant to Certify Patients for Medical Marijuana
Study Debunks Theory That Legalized Marijuana Helps Prevent Opioid Deaths
New York City May Ban Pre-Hire Marijuana Tests for Many Job Applicants
Insurers Remain Cautious About Marijuana Insurance Market
Michigan Medical Marijuana Patient Loses Appeal over Rescinded Job Offer
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Insurance Most Needed by Cannabis Businesses
Privacy Firm Finds Cannabis Patient Info Left Unsecured by Washington Firm
California Clears Way for Those with Cannabis Convictions to Get Insurance Licenses
2020 Predictions from Cannabis Industry Experts: More Insurance Business
Report Calls Out Dangers of Cannabis Branding Practices
Vape Crisis Prompts Calls for Greater Clarity in Cannabis Regulation
California Cannabis Group Asking for Tighter Vaping-Safety Rules
Top Risks Facing Cannabis Industry in 2020 Not What You Think
‘Problematic’ Cannabis Use Has Risen for Adults, Teens Since Legalization: Research
EPIC Launches Site Pollution Liability Insurance Program for Cannabis Risks
Covering Cannabis Risks on a BOP
Occupational Medical Group Warns Congress Legalized Cannabis Is Workplace Risk
Does the Cloud of Vaping-Related Injuries Portend a Storm of Litigation?
Cannabis Industry: More Regs Will Help Address Vaping Crisis
Cannabis Risk Management Group Wants to Impact Claims Via Best Practices
Vaping Lung Illness May Be Linked to Cannabis Product, Say Health Officials
Washington Considers Overhaul of Cannabis Regulation 5 Years In
Expert: Sophisticated Cannabis Operations Want Higher Limits, Customizations
Early Cannabis Insurance Claims Experience Differs from Expectations
Some Claims of Medical Cannabis Lack Scientific Evidence
Workers’ Comp Claims in Colorado’s Cannabis Industry Not as High as You Think
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Study Shows Need for Drug Programs for Construction Workers at Risk
Texas Firms Say Too Many Low-Skill Workers Are Failing Drug Tests
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Juul Sued by New York State Over Marketing Vape Products to Kids
Medical Association Calls for Immediate Ban on All E-Cigarettes, Vaping Devices
Smokers Who Switch from Tobacco to Vaping Rapidly Boost Heart Health: Study
Vaping Safety Debate Between Researchers, Activists Intensifies with Mystery Illness
Vaping Lung Illness May Be Linked to Cannabis Product, Say Health Officials
Why Companies Are Relaxing Employee Drug Testing
Shame on you, Andrew. I stated what I objected to and you twisted what I said.
More than once, I objected to the number of marijuana stories you publish and how few of your stories list the dangers other than driving dangers. Schizophrenia, damaged IQs, rising addiction rates, rising usage by young people in states that legalized, damage to the unborn, a massive black market in California that grew since legalization began, which will complicate future litigation against legal dispensaries, etc etc etc.
In and INSURANCE journal, litigation over all of these issues is likely in the future, which should be a cause of concern for everyone in the industry.
And then you list EVERY story you ever published as if THAT addresses my issue. Check out your list; it CONFIRMS my point. I believe you are more than smart enough to know that is a deflection.
Andrew brings it like OH SNAP and totally wins the internet! Down goes Craiger! Down goes Craiger! And in true form, when facts don’t fit the narrative, just move the goalposts, right Craig? Andrew just gave a perfect highlight of you being completely in the wrong. Own it.
Rosenblatt: Why would I when you kept attacking IJ and never apologized when you claimed there were no articles about the dangers of marijuana? Here’s Andrew’s post with all those articles
Craig: you’re a clown and twisted my argument. i said IJ didn’t post articles about other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving.
Andrew: here are the articles you claim don’t exist
So Craig … do you have any intention of apologizing to IJ for falsely claiming they don’t post articles about the non-driving dangers of marijuana?
Craig said: “… without admitting they are nearly all about driving issues or other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving. ”
Note the word ‘nearly’.
Now, you may continue your droll trolling on this issue by word parsing ‘nearly’ to mean what you want it to mean; e.g. ‘climate change’ means ‘man-caused climate change’. I assume you will take that tack rather than respond to the criticism about your OP in this comment page… i.e. how someone ACTUALLY alleging something is ‘misleading’?
The guy who keeps demanding apologies is the guy who lied that he apologized about his Uber comments when he never did apologize to me. Mr. Righteous. And then he keeps twisting what I said about pot and IJ. Right, Rosenblatt.
I did not lie. I apologized twice. Flawedlogic confirmed this. The thread has been deleted so I can’t copy/paste it here, but I think you should stop calling me a liar simply because you (likely) didn’t see it and can’t remember that myself and others have told you it happened.
Did you see flawedlogic’s response to you saying I did apologize, or did you miss that one as well?
February 20, 2020 at 5:11 pm
flawedlogic says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
CRAIG HOW MANY ARTICLES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT YOUR ASSERTION IS WRONG. Rosen DID apologize as well as I did on the thread for uber. We apologized as you proved your point that a driver was against the measure. Rosen apologized, I apologized, you have never apologized for your false and misleading statements. I still disagree with your statement as it was generalized, but I concede one driver was against it, but the article was not easily find-able as multiple search engines had the one link that proved your point between pages 8-12
Your statement that IJ is not posting about other dangers besides driving enough is also incorrect. There is multiple commercial liability, advertisement, and discussion on the personal side affects for teens and pregnant people. The issue is the comment section get shut down before for Jon and your discussion that often got out of hand.
Stop holding others to a higher standard then yourself.
February 21, 2020 at 8:12 am
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
5
0
So what would it take for you to believe me that I apologized, if not for me constantly saying I did and someone else backing me up?
February 21, 2020 at 9:35 am
flawedlogic says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
Craig,
1. hello I am a man
2. I have not been caught lying, but I have been incorrect before, and I am can admit it that I was wrong and I apologized.
3. This is an ad hominem attack as I argued against your argument and not you yourself.
4. You are constantly lying stop it or get off this site.
5. Practice what you preach, not tell others what to do and then do the exact opposite.
Grow up already kid, this is tiresome.
February 21, 2020 at 9:37 am
flawedlogic says:
Like or Dislike:
5
1
This is why I know you shouldn’t be taken seriously, or you are just ignorant as I have corrected you multiple times on my gender. I was born and continue to be a man.
Your statement was false, and I have told you that multiple times. Just because we disagree, doesn’t mean we can debate uncivily. You debate that way, but I have had great conversations with others here who I disagree with and I just had one the other day with Jax.
Again, learn how to use the words you are attempting to spout off like Ad Hominem because you are not using it correctly. I am arguing against your statements and not you yourself. It cannot be helped if you are being deceitful daily.
Title is misleading – there’s nothing in the article indicating she was fired for refusing to sample the store’s product. PA is an “employment at will” state and she could have been fired for any reason. It seems HIGHLY unlikely that an employer would fire someone for not smoking marijuana, even in a dispensary, especially smoking it was prohibited in her other job. Now if she really was fired for not smoking, shame on the business.
A little researching found the company’s rationale for the firing due to “unwillingness and inability to complete the most basic pharmacist tasks” and “The reality is, our company cut ties with (Kopiak) on account of her personal instability and her erratic behavior on the job,” the complaint quotes the company as writing. “Her unsettling presence in our workplace was apparent almost immediately … suffice it to say that if you interact with her at any length, you will understand the problem for yourself.”
I don’t think the company would write to the court that “if you interact with her at any length, you will understand the problem for yourself” if they didn’t truly believe they could prove this argument in front of a judge.
Here’s an article supporting your points.
https://www.citizensvoice.com/news/dispensary-incompetent-pharmacist-trying-shakedown-1.2594833
I’ll be your huckleberry…
LOL at the IJ staff troll for suggesting the termination was ‘at will’….. without discovery for the trial.
Currently, it is a ‘she said, they said’ situation.
I’ll bite; what is the reason for a court ruling on the cause of their (pharmacy) ‘will’ to terminate her before discovery occurs? Legal minds, and open-minded thinkers, want to know.
1) Stop with the unprovoked name calling. You are better than that.
2) Re-read my comment. I did not suggest the termination was at will – just that PA is an employment at will state. Saying she could have been fired for “any reason” indicates I do not know the real reason she was fired.
3) Who said the court was ruling BEFORE discovery? I certainly did not.
“A little researching….”.
Correct. More researching is warranted… but don’t use Goo-gul.
“Court ruling”: the case could be dismissed before it begins if there is a plea to dismiss. It would be dismissed based on your claim of termination for incompetence (paraphrased). Discovery is required before defendants can plead for dismissal.
The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.
4) You are OBVIOUSLY are not listening to me if you think I’m saying “It would be dismissed based on [my] claim of termination for incompetence (paraphrased).”
I never said that was MY claim. I simply presented the other side of the case as this article only spoke about the employee’s claims on what happened, not the business’ contentions.
You said “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.”
5) And …. what’s your point? Are you saying we can’t discuss ANY case that has not yet been ruled upon?
Please remember I am not taking the side of the employee OR the business here. At the same time, I already said that if the employee’s arguments are true then what the business did was wrong/illegal.
PS – thank you for not making a 2nd unwarranted personal attack in your last reply.
You’re saying it, but you’re not saying it. Right.
Discuss whatever pleases you, but remain consistent on what you say, or IMPLY by posting ‘at will state’ in an article on a employment practices lawsuit that alleges retaliatory termination for NOT putting a drug into ones body.
“but remain consistent on what you say”
I always do
I did not say it – I cited the company’s argument verbatim. Does this mean from now on if I cite someone and put their words in quotes you’re going to try to argue that I’m the one actually saying the quote?
Now back to the article — You said “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.”
5) And …. what’s your point? Are you saying we can’t discuss ANY case that has not yet been ruled upon?
Rosenblatt, you are one argumentative word parser.
Why are you refusing to answer me? What was the intent of your “The plaintiff may have no case, but no one (commenting on IJ) outside the two parties knows for certain without legal discovery.” comment?
Sorry Polar – I did not read the poster’s name before my last reply and assumed it was you. I see now it was Agent who wrote that and not you.
I hope you’re able to post an explanation as to the intent of that comment you made. I’d love to know why you felt the need to say that and how you think it applies to this (and possibly future) discussion(s).
Rosenblatt: your FIRST comment was that the ‘title is misleading’.
No, it is not. She did allege she was fired for that reason.
Just admit you used a false pretense of a misleading headline to then attack the article.
Craig apologize to Rosen for saying the pedo comment or stop holding others to a higher standard then yourself. You are too old for these antics.
Yes Craig, I came here just like you for an off topic comment.
Hey Craig – remember when you kept attacking IJ for not posting articles that weren’t in favor of marijuana then Andrew had to post the below MULTIPLE times?
If you’re not going to apologize for blatantly and falsely attacking IJ (to say nothing of your disgusting insult to me that flawedlogic keeps bringing up) – why do you demand I do something you’ve never done yourself?
Andrew G. Simpson says:
We have done this before. How is it you keeping missing these articles, Craig?
Audit of Oregon’s Marijuana Program Shows Regulators Fail to Meet Basic Standards
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Site Ordered Closed After State Inspection
National Safety Board Calls for Standards for Drugged Driving Tests
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Drugged Driving Increases While Drunk Driving Decreases
Michigan Recalls Some Medical Marijuana Products
First States to Legalize Marijuana See Rise in Car Insurance Claims, Research Shows
Covering Cannabis in California
N.Y. Court: Doc May Owe 3rd Party for Not Warning Patient About Driving on Meds
Mass. SJC Says Police Can Make Drugged Driving Arrest Based on Observations
Oklahoma Ruling Could Set Precedent for Marijuana Use in Work Comp Cases
Expert Sees a ‘Strong Need’ for Insurance for Cannabis Industry
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Prosecutor Says Colorado Marijuana Laws Too Loose, Jeopardize Safety
Medical Marijuana Patients Admit Driving While Under Influence
Rural Nevada Areas Not as High on Recreational Marijuana
Cherokee Nation Official: Medical Marijuana Illegal on Tribe Property
Marijuana Use Suspected in Fatal Colorado Crash
Troubled Opioid Seller Insys Looks to Cannabis to Save Itself
Only a Fraction of Patients Benefit from Medical Cannabis under Texas Law
Numerous California Marijuana Products Failing Safety Tests
Federal Prosecutor Threatens Law-Breaking Pot Businesses in Colorado
Big Insurers Still Taking a Pass on Marijuana Profits
Cannabis: Striking a Balance Between Federal and State Laws
California Considers Rule Changes as Legal Pot Market Struggles
Some Recreational Cannabis Products to Remain Banned Under New Canada Law
With Pot Shops Opening Soon, Massachusetts Warns About Driving High
Conservative States Like Oklahoma Balk at Voter-Approved Medical Marijuana
Alaska Cannabis Festival Under Investigation for Allowing Pot Consumption
Maine Employers Are Not Required to Reimburse Employees for Medical Marijuana Use
Florida Court Puts Hold On Smokable Medical Marijuana
Oregon Marijuana Growers Turning to Hemp as CBD Extract Explodes
More Employers Adopting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy for Marijuana Use
Marijuana, Opioids Found in High Percentage of Drivers Killed in Car Crashes
Medical Marijuana Users May be More at Risk for Non-Medical Drug Use: Study
Data Show Rise in Fatal Car Crashes on 4/20 Marijuana ‘Holiday’
Closing Quote: Legalized Marijuana Looks Like Bad News for Highway Safety
Internet Advertising by Unlicensed Marijuana Businesses Upset California Market
Study Suggests Pedestrian Fatalities May be Linked to Smartphone, Marijuana Use
Lawyers Handling Marijuana Business Operate in Hazy Legal Zone
New Hampshire House Committee Rejects Marijuana Legalization Bill
Stoned Driving Epidemic In Colorado, Washington Puts Wrinkle In Pot Debate
Maine Supreme Court Weighs Issue of Medical Marijuana and Workers’ Comp
Defendants in Oregon Pot Processing Explosion Suit Try to Turn Tables on Worker
California Pulls Stoned Driving Ad Critics Argued Promoted Pot Use
Poor, poor Rosenblatt. Always playing the victim.
Never getting the facts straight. Is that on purpose? Or an inability to read?
Insurance Journal publishes articles on pot and driving, but almost never on the other dangers. You twisted my criticism. But that is what you always do. Twistenblatt.
I’m sorry Craig – I did not mean to twist your criticism. Let me rephrase….
Hey Craig – remember when you kept attacking IJ for “almost never [posting articles about] the other dangers [of marijuana]” then Andrew had to post the below MULTIPLE times?
If you’re not going to apologize for blatantly and falsely attacking IJ (to say nothing of your disgusting insult to me that flawedlogic keeps bringing up) – why do you demand I do something you’ve never done yourself?
Andrew G. Simpson says:
We have done this before. How is it you keeping missing these articles, Craig?
Audit of Oregon’s Marijuana Program Shows Regulators Fail to Meet Basic Standards
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Site Ordered Closed After State Inspection
National Safety Board Calls for Standards for Drugged Driving Tests
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Drugged Driving Increases While Drunk Driving Decreases
Michigan Recalls Some Medical Marijuana Products
First States to Legalize Marijuana See Rise in Car Insurance Claims, Research Shows
Covering Cannabis in California
N.Y. Court: Doc May Owe 3rd Party for Not Warning Patient About Driving on Meds
Mass. SJC Says Police Can Make Drugged Driving Arrest Based on Observations
Oklahoma Ruling Could Set Precedent for Marijuana Use in Work Comp Cases
Expert Sees a ‘Strong Need’ for Insurance for Cannabis Industry
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Prosecutor Says Colorado Marijuana Laws Too Loose, Jeopardize Safety
Medical Marijuana Patients Admit Driving While Under Influence
Rural Nevada Areas Not as High on Recreational Marijuana
Cherokee Nation Official: Medical Marijuana Illegal on Tribe Property
Marijuana Use Suspected in Fatal Colorado Crash
Troubled Opioid Seller Insys Looks to Cannabis to Save Itself
Only a Fraction of Patients Benefit from Medical Cannabis under Texas Law
Numerous California Marijuana Products Failing Safety Tests
Federal Prosecutor Threatens Law-Breaking Pot Businesses in Colorado
Big Insurers Still Taking a Pass on Marijuana Profits
Cannabis: Striking a Balance Between Federal and State Laws
California Considers Rule Changes as Legal Pot Market Struggles
Some Recreational Cannabis Products to Remain Banned Under New Canada Law
With Pot Shops Opening Soon, Massachusetts Warns About Driving High
Conservative States Like Oklahoma Balk at Voter-Approved Medical Marijuana
Alaska Cannabis Festival Under Investigation for Allowing Pot Consumption
Maine Employers Are Not Required to Reimburse Employees for Medical Marijuana Use
Florida Court Puts Hold On Smokable Medical Marijuana
Oregon Marijuana Growers Turning to Hemp as CBD Extract Explodes
More Employers Adopting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy for Marijuana Use
Marijuana, Opioids Found in High Percentage of Drivers Killed in Car Crashes
Medical Marijuana Users May be More at Risk for Non-Medical Drug Use: Study
Data Show Rise in Fatal Car Crashes on 4/20 Marijuana ‘Holiday’
Closing Quote: Legalized Marijuana Looks Like Bad News for Highway Safety
Internet Advertising by Unlicensed Marijuana Businesses Upset California Market
Study Suggests Pedestrian Fatalities May be Linked to Smartphone, Marijuana Use
Lawyers Handling Marijuana Business Operate in Hazy Legal Zone
New Hampshire House Committee Rejects Marijuana Legalization Bill
Stoned Driving Epidemic In Colorado, Washington Puts Wrinkle In Pot Debate
Maine Supreme Court Weighs Issue of Medical Marijuana and Workers’ Comp
Defendants in Oregon Pot Processing Explosion Suit Try to Turn Tables on Worker
California Pulls Stoned Driving Ad Critics Argued Promoted Pot Use
Is that better???
And again, like a clown, you list every article ever published without admitting they are nearly all about driving issues or other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving.
But honesty? Rosenblatt? Oxymoron.
Craig, you mean IJ “almost never” publishes articles on other marijuana risks such as product, health, workplace, marketing, regulatory, legal, vaping, etc? Did you mean “almost always”?
Federal Officials Issue Health Warning on Marijuana Use by Teens, Pregnant Women
The Politics Behind the Push for a Federal Marijuana Business Banking Law
Canadian Firm Sues Oklahoma Marijuana Dispensary for Copyright Infringement
Court Rules Florida Medical Marijuana Regulations Are Unconstitutional
Doctors in Missouri Reluctant to Certify Patients for Medical Marijuana
Study Debunks Theory That Legalized Marijuana Helps Prevent Opioid Deaths
New York City May Ban Pre-Hire Marijuana Tests for Many Job Applicants
Insurers Remain Cautious About Marijuana Insurance Market
Michigan Medical Marijuana Patient Loses Appeal over Rescinded Job Offer
Research Suggests Marijuana Users More Likely to Be Fired or Laid Off
Insurance Most Needed by Cannabis Businesses
Privacy Firm Finds Cannabis Patient Info Left Unsecured by Washington Firm
California Clears Way for Those with Cannabis Convictions to Get Insurance Licenses
2020 Predictions from Cannabis Industry Experts: More Insurance Business
Report Calls Out Dangers of Cannabis Branding Practices
Vape Crisis Prompts Calls for Greater Clarity in Cannabis Regulation
California Cannabis Group Asking for Tighter Vaping-Safety Rules
Top Risks Facing Cannabis Industry in 2020 Not What You Think
‘Problematic’ Cannabis Use Has Risen for Adults, Teens Since Legalization: Research
EPIC Launches Site Pollution Liability Insurance Program for Cannabis Risks
Covering Cannabis Risks on a BOP
Occupational Medical Group Warns Congress Legalized Cannabis Is Workplace Risk
Does the Cloud of Vaping-Related Injuries Portend a Storm of Litigation?
Cannabis Industry: More Regs Will Help Address Vaping Crisis
Cannabis Risk Management Group Wants to Impact Claims Via Best Practices
Vaping Lung Illness May Be Linked to Cannabis Product, Say Health Officials
Washington Considers Overhaul of Cannabis Regulation 5 Years In
Expert: Sophisticated Cannabis Operations Want Higher Limits, Customizations
Early Cannabis Insurance Claims Experience Differs from Expectations
Some Claims of Medical Cannabis Lack Scientific Evidence
Workers’ Comp Claims in Colorado’s Cannabis Industry Not as High as You Think
Agents Warned About E&O Risks in Claiming Cyber, Cannabis Expertise
Study Shows Need for Drug Programs for Construction Workers at Risk
Texas Firms Say Too Many Low-Skill Workers Are Failing Drug Tests
Mass. Pot Shops May Be Open, but Workers Can Still Be Fired Over Weed
Juul Sued by New York State Over Marketing Vape Products to Kids
Medical Association Calls for Immediate Ban on All E-Cigarettes, Vaping Devices
Smokers Who Switch from Tobacco to Vaping Rapidly Boost Heart Health: Study
Vaping Safety Debate Between Researchers, Activists Intensifies with Mystery Illness
Vaping Lung Illness May Be Linked to Cannabis Product, Say Health Officials
Why Companies Are Relaxing Employee Drug Testing
I wish I could post the Michael Scott “thank you” gif right now :)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Andrew brings it like OH SNAP and totally wins the internet! Down goes Craiger! Down goes Craiger! And in true form, when facts don’t fit the narrative, just move the goalposts, right Craig? Andrew just gave a perfect highlight of you being completely in the wrong. Own it.
Calm down third grader. List the articles that dispute my premise. Read what I wrote and then dispute it. You can’t.
Craig: admit you attacked the article
Rosenblatt: Why would I when you kept attacking IJ and never apologized when you claimed there were no articles about the dangers of marijuana? Here’s Andrew’s post with all those articles
Craig: you’re a clown and twisted my argument. i said IJ didn’t post articles about other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving.
Andrew: here are the articles you claim don’t exist
So Craig … do you have any intention of apologizing to IJ for falsely claiming they don’t post articles about the non-driving dangers of marijuana?
Craig said: “… without admitting they are nearly all about driving issues or other issues and NOT about the dangers besides driving. ”
Note the word ‘nearly’.
Now, you may continue your droll trolling on this issue by word parsing ‘nearly’ to mean what you want it to mean; e.g. ‘climate change’ means ‘man-caused climate change’. I assume you will take that tack rather than respond to the criticism about your OP in this comment page… i.e. how someone ACTUALLY alleging something is ‘misleading’?
Honesty? Rosenblatt? Oxymoron.
The guy who keeps demanding apologies is the guy who lied that he apologized about his Uber comments when he never did apologize to me. Mr. Righteous. And then he keeps twisting what I said about pot and IJ. Right, Rosenblatt.
I did not lie. I apologized twice. Flawedlogic confirmed this. The thread has been deleted so I can’t copy/paste it here, but I think you should stop calling me a liar simply because you (likely) didn’t see it and can’t remember that myself and others have told you it happened.
If you apologized to me, I would have seen it. You are so obvious. Now you say it’s TWICE! Right. I missed them both . . . sure I did.
Did you see flawedlogic’s response to you saying I did apologize, or did you miss that one as well?
CRAIG HOW MANY ARTICLES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT YOUR ASSERTION IS WRONG. Rosen DID apologize as well as I did on the thread for uber. We apologized as you proved your point that a driver was against the measure. Rosen apologized, I apologized, you have never apologized for your false and misleading statements. I still disagree with your statement as it was generalized, but I concede one driver was against it, but the article was not easily find-able as multiple search engines had the one link that proved your point between pages 8-12
Your statement that IJ is not posting about other dangers besides driving enough is also incorrect. There is multiple commercial liability, advertisement, and discussion on the personal side affects for teens and pregnant people. The issue is the comment section get shut down before for Jon and your discussion that often got out of hand.
Stop holding others to a higher standard then yourself.
So what would it take for you to believe me that I apologized, if not for me constantly saying I did and someone else backing me up?
Craig,
1. hello I am a man
2. I have not been caught lying, but I have been incorrect before, and I am can admit it that I was wrong and I apologized.
3. This is an ad hominem attack as I argued against your argument and not you yourself.
4. You are constantly lying stop it or get off this site.
5. Practice what you preach, not tell others what to do and then do the exact opposite.
Grow up already kid, this is tiresome.
This is why I know you shouldn’t be taken seriously, or you are just ignorant as I have corrected you multiple times on my gender. I was born and continue to be a man.
Your statement was false, and I have told you that multiple times. Just because we disagree, doesn’t mean we can debate uncivily. You debate that way, but I have had great conversations with others here who I disagree with and I just had one the other day with Jax.
Again, learn how to use the words you are attempting to spout off like Ad Hominem because you are not using it correctly. I am arguing against your statements and not you yourself. It cannot be helped if you are being deceitful daily.