It should also be noted that if you have or desire to have a gun for self protection or for anything else for that matter your use of the ganja makes you a felon. The form that the BATFE requires you to complete before your electronic background check will soon have new language calling your attention to the fact that one cannot possess a medical marijuana card AND legally own a handgun at the same time.
Steve, are you sure about this ? Do you mean they can’t “own” a handgun, or have a “CCP” ? I find it a bit hard to believe that they wouldn’t allow you to own a firearm due to a medical marij card.
Just curious as to how certain you are.
Thanks,
Jax, if an employer orders a drug test on a prospective employee and finds they are users, I don’t blame them one bit for no hiring them. These recreational types cannot function and are undependable workers. The ones who are in denial about the election will spur sales of Marijuana because they need to escape the new reality that their side lost.
MULTIPLE studies show a large discrepancy in worker productivity and scholastic achievements between users and non-users of ‘dope’. I wonder how it got THAT street name? Actually, I don’t.
December 17, 2016 at 12:45 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
5
From the Oxford Dictionary:
Home > The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
Dope has lived a diverse slang life over the span of two centuries, only coming to its hip-hop adjectival sense of ‘good or excellent’ in the last 35 years.
Fools and thick liquids
Dope as a stupid person was early American slang, first recorded in 1851, according to current Oxford English Dictionary (OED) evidence. Usage in this sense continued through the 20th and 21st centuries. When Disney named the seven dwarfs in the Show White tale in 1937, Dopey was the slow, benevolently foolish one. When the US Army needed a stereotypical foolish soldier for World War II posters, they came up with Joe Dope.
Dope had an earlier slang sense, starting with sauce of gravy (1807), a sweet and sticky syrup (1904), and then a cola-flavored sweet, carbonated drink (1914). The etymology for dope designating foodstuffs like these is apparently from the Dutch doopen, meaning ‘to dip’. Various other viscous entities were also named dope, from a varnish for airplane parts to a substance added to petrol to increase its efficiency. Dope was something of a cover-all for this sort of thick liquid.
Drugs and inside information
Turning to dope in its specific drug sense: in 1886 (according to Green’s Dictionary of Slang), we first heard of a dope fiend – a drug user. A few years later, we find dope referring to opium or a morphine derivative. The link between the syrup and the drug may not be immediately obvious, but it relates to the ‘the thick treacle-like preparation used in opium-smoking’; as early as 1872, dope had referred to ‘a preparation, mixture, or drug which is not specifically named’. In 1933 we encounter dope addict. Dope eventually stood on its own, coming to mean any drug (1900) or medicine (1902). Dope came to refer specifically to marijuana only in 1950 (according to the Historical Dictionary of American Slang); to the extent that dope is used today to refer to a drug, it most commonly means heroin or another opiate. In this general vein, dope has long been used as a verb, first meaning to poison (1862 in HDAS) and then slightly later to administer a stimulant or sedative to a racehorse. The meaning has broadened in recent years to include the use of any banned athletic performance-enhancing drugs by athletic competitors, human or not.
A fourth sense is more than a hundred years old. We find dope sheet meaning a listing of inside information, usually on a horse race, in 1900 (HDAS). In 1901, dope is recorded as simply meaning inside information, a sense which persists today.
Probably not what you were expecting, huh Yogi?
December 17, 2016 at 1:02 pm
DePolarBearables says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Nope! I know there are MANY meanings of dope!
December 17, 2016 at 1:03 pm
DePolarBearables says:
Like or Dislike:
1
5
Only a marijuana user needs to rely on the internet to learn the various meanings of ‘dope’.
December 17, 2016 at 1:33 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
Or, maybe Yogi, you were just too lazy.
December 17, 2016 at 1:36 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
If you knew, Yogi, you wouldn’t have made the statement you did. I was just trying to help you, give you some facts and educate you or anyone else who wanted to know its true origin. I am word nerd, what can I say?
December 20, 2016 at 1:43 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
censorship
From the Oxford Dictionary:
Home > The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
Dope has lived a diverse slang life over the span of two centuries, only coming to its hip-hop adjectival sense of ‘good or excellent’ in the last 35 years.
Fools and thick liquids
Dope as a stupid person was early American slang, first recorded in 1851, according to current Oxford English Dictionary (OED) evidence. Usage in this sense continued through the 20th and 21st centuries. When Disney named the seven dwarfs in the Show White tale in 1937, Dopey was the slow, benevolently foolish one. When the US Army needed a stereotypical foolish soldier for World War II posters, they came up with Joe Dope.
Dope had an earlier slang sense, starting with sauce of gravy (1807), a sweet and sticky syrup (1904), and then a cola-flavored sweet, carbonated drink (1914). The etymology for dope designating foodstuffs like these is apparently from the Dutch doopen, meaning ‘to dip’. Various other viscous entities were also named dope, from a varnish for airplane parts to a substance added to petrol to increase its efficiency. Dope was something of a cover-all for this sort of thick liquid.
Drugs and inside information
Turning to dope in its specific drug sense: in 1886 (according to Green’s Dictionary of Slang), we first heard of a dope fiend – a drug user. A few years later, we find dope referring to opium or a morphine derivative. The link between the syrup and the drug may not be immediately obvious, but it relates to the ‘the thick treacle-like preparation used in opium-smoking’; as early as 1872, dope had referred to ‘a preparation, mixture, or drug which is not specifically named’. In 1933 we encounter dope addict. Dope eventually stood on its own, coming to mean any drug (1900) or medicine (1902). Dope came to refer specifically to marijuana only in 1950 (according to the Historical Dictionary of American Slang); to the extent that dope is used today to refer to a drug, it most commonly means heroin or another opiate. In this general vein, dope has long been used as a verb, first meaning to poison (1862 in HDAS) and then slightly later to administer a stimulant or sedative to a racehorse. The meaning has broadened in recent years to include the use of any banned athletic performance-enhancing drugs by athletic competitors, human or not.
A fourth sense is more than a hundred years old. We find dope sheet meaning a listing of inside information, usually on a horse race, in 1900 (HDAS). In 1901, dope is recorded as simply meaning inside information, a sense which persists today.
Probably not what you were expecting, huh Yogi?
December 20, 2016 at 4:23 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Censorship blah blah blah,
RACISM, BIGOTRY, SEXISM, ISM ISM ISM ISM ISM!!
What do you think your goal is when you say those things? It isn’t censorship?
December 15, 2016 at 4:20 pm
Jax Agent says:
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
13
2
Agent, in most states, an employer still has the legal right to not hire a prospective employee for no other reason than testing positive for marijuana. The same holds true for firing an existing employee. Having said that, my question would be, ‘How smart is that ?’, based on just a positive weed test ?
Recreational weed users, as a whole, are neither dependable nor undependable; neither ambitious or unambitious; neither trustworthy nor untrustworthy. Smoking marijuana doesn’t make anyone any of these things…..just hungry. Frankly, I’m positive that today’s work force is in considerably more peril from workers who drink alcohol than those who smoke marijuana. There needs to be a test created that can discern the difference between someone who has used marijuana in the past 8 hours vs the past 4 weeks – that would allow for more accurate and useful test results.
Until then, let the smoker beware…..but the employer too. It would be a terrible mistake to fire (or fail to hire) an otherwise good and productive employee because they smoked a joint over the weekend.
Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas
December 17, 2016 at 1:04 pm
DePolarBearables says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Which of them CONTINUE to use dope?
December 19, 2016 at 10:55 am
DePolarBearables says:
Like or Dislike:
6
1
Is Bill Clinton ineligible for your list because he didn’t inhale?
December 19, 2016 at 5:36 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Yogi,
We know for sure Steve Jobs doesn’t smoke up anymore. Clinton and Palin were both left off of this list on purpose. Clinton said he didn’t inhale, Palin said she did. But, they are both not worthy of being listed with these other folks for obvious reasons.
December 20, 2016 at 1:43 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
censorship
Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas
December 20, 2016 at 4:12 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
“Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas”
Do you know what is in common with them that likely caused the pot use?
Risk taking. Risk takers try a lot of things.
Do you know what is in common with the list you just said?
How many use it on a regular basis, as they became the best? How many of them did pot make successful?
You’re an idiot.
I used pot, used, past tense. Pretty much everyone who is a businessman or risk taker has, well, my terminology for that is over exaggerating but you get the point.
Consistent pot users will have problems.
December 20, 2016 at 4:13 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
And some people may go outside that, but the majority will have problems.
December 20, 2016 at 4:14 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
For example:
If you listed for a drug which had a side affect of death, that it cured cancer for 30 people, but it killed 1,000, would you then just post the 30 people it cured?
No. This is selective choosing, and attempting to say pot is good, which clearly as a whole it is not.
December 21, 2016 at 12:57 pm
Bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
Also, I couldn’t help but notice you omitted the people you thought Pot didn’t make smart. So all the examples that don’t prove your point, you’re willing to omit.
By your own admission…
I have never seen such sheer stupidity.
December 22, 2016 at 9:32 am
Mr. Solvent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
There was just a court case regarding this very subject. You cannot purchase a gun with a Federal background check and have a pot card. So much for the 2nd Amendment.
I work with some “spaced out” young people and don’t think they’re currently using drugs. Would hate to have them high on top of not being too smart and not caring about the job they do.
Maybe “spaced out” was the wrong term. They are inattentive, do not ask questions, can’t make decisions, and don’t seem to give a damn about their jobs. Some are simply lazy.
As one might expect on an insurance propaganda newsletter the story is slanted towards allowing your boss to help you make personal choices. As an engineering manager for the past 25 years I can tell you my experience of drug testing is not very favorable.
I have had to let good young engineers go for failing a drug test, when they were otherwise bright hardworking young people.
I have also fired folks for alcohol abuse, but by far and away I have fired more people for being totally incoherent from prescription drugs which people take for “pain”. No preemploymnet screen for those though.
Since the insurance and medical industries are linked at the hip then they don’t seem overly concerned about legal prescription abuse.
As someone who has travelled the world building things, the good ole land of the free is the only place in the entire world I have been asked to pee in a bottle while my employer watches. I must say that steps on my sense of personal privacy. What happened to the days when your boss had the power to determine who was a good employee, and who wasn’t as opposed to an insurance company or lab?
Hey Engineer guy, it doesn’t take an engineer to figure out that recreational user’s are “dopey”. How are you going to figure out whether someone is “impaired” and make a mistake that could lead to an accident? Could it cost your engineering firm big time?
Agent, do you really not understand that claiming all recreational marijuana users are “dopey” is equivalent to claiming all alcohol users are no different from the town drunk? Users exist on a spectrum, and most are people you would never know were using unless you actually saw them using or drug tested, because in every other way they are indistinguishable from a non-user.
As for the concern over someone showing up to work impaired, I’m assuming you’re equally worried about them showing up to work drunk right? So if your employer finds out you’ve ever consumed alcohol they should have so much cause for concern that they should fire/deny hiring you right?
I know it’s easy to look at how marijuana is portrayed in pop culture and assume everyone that uses it is the lazy pot head character, but as with most things in life, movies don’t do nuance very well.
Hey Some, I don’t want drunks or dope heads working for me. Usually, when one of these drunks get a DUI, they are ineligible for driving privileges for any employer. I treat the “dopey’s” the same way. They are both impaired to do a job.
Perhaps you didn’t see the story of the Denver businessman who had these weed head employees who wouldn’t show up for work or when they did, they were pretty much useless. Finally, he had enough and moved his business to South Carolina.
Agent, I’m not sure if you missed the point, or you’re purposefully avoiding it.
There are 4 broad groups:
1. Weed users that abuse the drug and don’t show up to work/show up impaired.
2. Alcohol users that abuse the drug and don’t show up to work/show up impaired.
3. Weed users that show up to work on time and not impaired.
4. Alcohol users that show up to work on time and not impaired.
Under the current system, at least for many employers:
Those who abuse alcohol and become problem employees as a result are let go, and those who have a DUI (aka history of alcohol abuse) are denied employment, while those who use but do NOT abuse alcohol can work without issue.
Those who use but do NOT abuse weed are treated the same as those who abuse weed and not offered employment.
You seem to be advocating that society should lump weed users and weed abusers together even though society makes a distinction between alcohol users and abusers already.
If I have that correct (let me know if I don’t), then would you also advocate for denying employment to anyone who has ever had a drink, because that’s the equivalent argument you seem to be making for weed.
December 20, 2016 at 11:25 am
Some Guy says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
For the record, my position is to treat them the same, people who abuse alcohol or weed should be treated the same, and people who use but do not abuse alcohol or weed should be treated the same.
It’s the only position that makes sense to me.
December 20, 2016 at 1:48 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Some Guy,
I’m not sure how long you have been out here in the IJ world, but Agent believes in “Reefer Madness” and all of the stereotypes presented throughout. He also believes that marijuana will eventually lead to cocaine, meth, and heroin (though, he usually spells it heroine and I’m not sure what female protagonists have to do with the whole conversation). Agent would serve himself well by not commenting on this subject. His insight is laughable at best.
It doesn’t require abuse when you use pot long term. Are you aware why pot makes you feel good? Like any mind altering drug it is bad, especially long term.
Dopamine production. I have hit on this before with regards to why porn is bad, and with regards to dating and sexual relationships that are not well thought out are bad.
Much like a bad break up can harm dopamine production considerably, and several of them can damage your dopamine production for life, (ergo bad sexual decisions can ruin your motivation for life) prolonged pot usage can ruin motivation and dopamine production, in the name of short term high feelings.
Acting like an idiot, and relying on pot itself is a character flaw. I don’t care what anyone says on the matter, it is the same reason I don’t like alcohol.
And if I had a worker who smoked pot, and I knew it, I would not hire them or would fire them if they didn’t recognize it as a problem and character flaw.
I would work with them if they did. However, mind altering drugs being a necessity to live, is itself a character flaw regardless of what I’m talking about regarding dopamine, dependency on such a drug shows extreme weakness.
December 20, 2016 at 4:02 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
This is much the same as why taking steroids is bad.
It conditions the body to need the steroid. Have you heard Ronny Coleman? Listen to his voice.
This is roughly the same thing. He relied on a drug for a part of his being. And then his being didn’t regulate what he needed on it’s own.
Relying on a drug for happiness, or to feel good, logically will have consequences. Even recreation-ally, which really means, you rely on it for fun. You would not by default find smoking a joint to help you, unless you already relied on it to do so.
You know a good way to feel better?
Monitor your diet. See if any fatty foods or junk foods are making you feel depressed.
Get sleep.
Stay hydrated.
If anything is out of whack, see a doctor.
Workout to increase your endorphin production.
Associate with people with similar goals.
Make goals, complete goals, reward yourself for this.
Find a hobby. One that is more than lighting a joint.
Eat foods that make your body even happier post workout.
Work on your personal relationships, or take the flaws in them less personally.
These are the primary areas that lacking in will require some sort of a drug like pot to feel good in. Also, someone who has all these things has no time for pot, and no desire for it.
Ergo, why leaders don’t want to have someone who smokes pot as a solution to any of these issues in their team.
I like motivated people who know how to fix themselves, have structure, and move forward and grow through process. Not through lighting up to take the edge off.
December 20, 2016 at 4:08 pm
bob says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
And this is coming from someone that has tried pot.
You know what my high is? Getting home and seeing my kids.
You know how I motivate myself the next day? I don’t light up to make myself better and relax. I find something to do with my kids. If you need the pot to feel better, or need to feel high, something is wrong.
Every second of your day should be focused on being better, relaxing in ways that don’t require a mind altering drug, and people that aren’t like that…Well, won’t understand what I’m saying, as you probably don’t.
December 20, 2016 at 5:11 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
Bob, you made three really good posts and I couldn’t have said it better. Occasional users become regular users and then their brain turns to mush and they then try other things to attempt to feel good. That is why Mexico keeps sending all that dope into the US because Americans like Some Guy and Planetarium will continue to buy. Many like Nate Newton tried to profit by it, got caught with a trunk full and got sent away for a stint in prison. Mind altering drugs are a scourge on our society. Build that wall and keep it out.
My history became my strength. Knowing oneself is the source of all knowledge.
Unlike others who say they made mistakes and grew from them, I learned some serious lessons, and the above walks the walk on that.
This is why I’ve said many times:
I’m a conservative for the right reasons. I learned all of this through experience and fixing my own personal issues.
It’s also why even though I’m strict on it, if someone realizes they have a problem I do everything I can to go to bat for them. And the people in my life know it.
I’m a real motivator to those around me, if it isn’t evident, and I make a point of figuring out more of these dynamics to help people. That’s because to me, the individual matters. Just like I say the homosexual matters and I use logic rooted in helping them and what is best, I believe the pot smoker matters, I believe the one who sleeps around and makes bad sexual and relationship choices matters, and they need help and to understand the dynamics of their situation by someone who has been through it.
I recently mentioned the shemale, and how can I hate gay folks. Something I haven’t gone into depth in, is there is a time I was not attracted to women, ergo, the shemale. I found vaginal sex to be disgusting.
I’m well aware of lustful tendencies, and I know how damaging they can be. I would say my damage from an ex and other things are what caused it over time, and I didn’t realize it. I’m still messed up in that area, but I’m glad that I had kids. I’m glad that through my messing up I had my kids. I couldn’t have learned any better how thinking you know better could be totally wrong.
I may have issues still but I see me and my wife in my kids, and I see abnormally strong children, being taught and raised beautifully, as we all further each others progress. And I want for that life, for people to pick themselves up, and realize they deserve better than that day to day fly by the seat of their pants lifestyle. That there is better.
I want them to know that I understand, and I get it.
YESSSS, I love it again. All the pot comes from Mexico and those brown people, huh Agent? Build the wall. Once again, you prove just how precious you are. This isn’t the 40’s and 50’s, man. Most of it is home-grown. And no, occasional users do not necessarily become regular users. You couldn’t be more wrong on a subject than this one. Well, wait…
A: It has nothing to do with people being Brown.
B: We have literally hundreds of thousands of people in jail for crossing the border, and a huge chunk of that is related to drug sales, whether or not the bulk of pot is home grown or not, there is a huge border drug problem. I have already given government numbers for state, local, and federal jails.
C: This means you are ignoring numbers to see racism, which is insane and should not be your go to reply. It is however not surprising considering your leaders.
D: Then you are admitting that regular pot users have issues then? Make up your mind, don’t argue whatever gives you a point over agent. You just said that occasional users don’t necessarily become regular users…Which implies being a regular user is worse than occasional.
E: You LOOOOVEEE being able to call people racist, and yourself better than them. We’ve known this for some time.
Finally, F:
Usage of pot triggers dopamine. This is likely the primary reason people use it. This could easily make it very addictive to feel happy early on. I have never seen an “occasional” pot smoker, and given the sentiments of a pot smoker, that uses it occasionally, which would be to use it to feel good when they don’t, it would stand to reason they would not ever be an occasional user. They would use it long term, just fewer times per week, and would still rely on it to feel “happy” or ease their stress.
Relying on a drug for dopamine production is rather ignorant.
It would be no less ignorant than relying on aterol.
Bob, the NFL suspends players for testing positive for pot. First violation, 4 games, second violation 10 games. Third may just be getting cut and not having a career at all. I wonder why they take this problem seriously.
December 22, 2016 at 8:42 pm
TK says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Essentially employers are protected by at-will employment. You can ban nicotine if you want to and test for and fire for it as well. What’s going to happen is either A) voters are going to start curbing employer power as this behavior is increasingly seen as abusive and against changing societal norms or B) some industries, as this article mentioned with skiing in Colorado, are going to be forced to give in due to pressures emerging from the labor pool. Or the status quo could remain. We’ll see, but I think the key is the changing societal norms are going to cause increased friction. Businesses like profits, not unnecessary friction.
It should also be noted that if you have or desire to have a gun for self protection or for anything else for that matter your use of the ganja makes you a felon. The form that the BATFE requires you to complete before your electronic background check will soon have new language calling your attention to the fact that one cannot possess a medical marijuana card AND legally own a handgun at the same time.
Steve, are you sure about this ? Do you mean they can’t “own” a handgun, or have a “CCP” ? I find it a bit hard to believe that they wouldn’t allow you to own a firearm due to a medical marij card.
Just curious as to how certain you are.
Thanks,
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Spoken like a man with some experience. Either that, or no flipping clue whatsoever.
Wrong, CapTroll PlaneTroll!
MULTIPLE studies show a large discrepancy in worker productivity and scholastic achievements between users and non-users of ‘dope’. I wonder how it got THAT street name? Actually, I don’t.
From the Oxford Dictionary:
Home > The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
Dope has lived a diverse slang life over the span of two centuries, only coming to its hip-hop adjectival sense of ‘good or excellent’ in the last 35 years.
Fools and thick liquids
Dope as a stupid person was early American slang, first recorded in 1851, according to current Oxford English Dictionary (OED) evidence. Usage in this sense continued through the 20th and 21st centuries. When Disney named the seven dwarfs in the Show White tale in 1937, Dopey was the slow, benevolently foolish one. When the US Army needed a stereotypical foolish soldier for World War II posters, they came up with Joe Dope.
Dope had an earlier slang sense, starting with sauce of gravy (1807), a sweet and sticky syrup (1904), and then a cola-flavored sweet, carbonated drink (1914). The etymology for dope designating foodstuffs like these is apparently from the Dutch doopen, meaning ‘to dip’. Various other viscous entities were also named dope, from a varnish for airplane parts to a substance added to petrol to increase its efficiency. Dope was something of a cover-all for this sort of thick liquid.
Drugs and inside information
Turning to dope in its specific drug sense: in 1886 (according to Green’s Dictionary of Slang), we first heard of a dope fiend – a drug user. A few years later, we find dope referring to opium or a morphine derivative. The link between the syrup and the drug may not be immediately obvious, but it relates to the ‘the thick treacle-like preparation used in opium-smoking’; as early as 1872, dope had referred to ‘a preparation, mixture, or drug which is not specifically named’. In 1933 we encounter dope addict. Dope eventually stood on its own, coming to mean any drug (1900) or medicine (1902). Dope came to refer specifically to marijuana only in 1950 (according to the Historical Dictionary of American Slang); to the extent that dope is used today to refer to a drug, it most commonly means heroin or another opiate. In this general vein, dope has long been used as a verb, first meaning to poison (1862 in HDAS) and then slightly later to administer a stimulant or sedative to a racehorse. The meaning has broadened in recent years to include the use of any banned athletic performance-enhancing drugs by athletic competitors, human or not.
A fourth sense is more than a hundred years old. We find dope sheet meaning a listing of inside information, usually on a horse race, in 1900 (HDAS). In 1901, dope is recorded as simply meaning inside information, a sense which persists today.
Probably not what you were expecting, huh Yogi?
Nope! I know there are MANY meanings of dope!
Only a marijuana user needs to rely on the internet to learn the various meanings of ‘dope’.
Or, maybe Yogi, you were just too lazy.
If you knew, Yogi, you wouldn’t have made the statement you did. I was just trying to help you, give you some facts and educate you or anyone else who wanted to know its true origin. I am word nerd, what can I say?
censorship
From the Oxford Dictionary:
Home > The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
The history of the word ‘dope’ and dope slang
Dope has lived a diverse slang life over the span of two centuries, only coming to its hip-hop adjectival sense of ‘good or excellent’ in the last 35 years.
Fools and thick liquids
Dope as a stupid person was early American slang, first recorded in 1851, according to current Oxford English Dictionary (OED) evidence. Usage in this sense continued through the 20th and 21st centuries. When Disney named the seven dwarfs in the Show White tale in 1937, Dopey was the slow, benevolently foolish one. When the US Army needed a stereotypical foolish soldier for World War II posters, they came up with Joe Dope.
Dope had an earlier slang sense, starting with sauce of gravy (1807), a sweet and sticky syrup (1904), and then a cola-flavored sweet, carbonated drink (1914). The etymology for dope designating foodstuffs like these is apparently from the Dutch doopen, meaning ‘to dip’. Various other viscous entities were also named dope, from a varnish for airplane parts to a substance added to petrol to increase its efficiency. Dope was something of a cover-all for this sort of thick liquid.
Drugs and inside information
Turning to dope in its specific drug sense: in 1886 (according to Green’s Dictionary of Slang), we first heard of a dope fiend – a drug user. A few years later, we find dope referring to opium or a morphine derivative. The link between the syrup and the drug may not be immediately obvious, but it relates to the ‘the thick treacle-like preparation used in opium-smoking’; as early as 1872, dope had referred to ‘a preparation, mixture, or drug which is not specifically named’. In 1933 we encounter dope addict. Dope eventually stood on its own, coming to mean any drug (1900) or medicine (1902). Dope came to refer specifically to marijuana only in 1950 (according to the Historical Dictionary of American Slang); to the extent that dope is used today to refer to a drug, it most commonly means heroin or another opiate. In this general vein, dope has long been used as a verb, first meaning to poison (1862 in HDAS) and then slightly later to administer a stimulant or sedative to a racehorse. The meaning has broadened in recent years to include the use of any banned athletic performance-enhancing drugs by athletic competitors, human or not.
A fourth sense is more than a hundred years old. We find dope sheet meaning a listing of inside information, usually on a horse race, in 1900 (HDAS). In 1901, dope is recorded as simply meaning inside information, a sense which persists today.
Probably not what you were expecting, huh Yogi?
Censorship blah blah blah,
RACISM, BIGOTRY, SEXISM, ISM ISM ISM ISM ISM!!
What do you think your goal is when you say those things? It isn’t censorship?
Agent, in most states, an employer still has the legal right to not hire a prospective employee for no other reason than testing positive for marijuana. The same holds true for firing an existing employee. Having said that, my question would be, ‘How smart is that ?’, based on just a positive weed test ?
Recreational weed users, as a whole, are neither dependable nor undependable; neither ambitious or unambitious; neither trustworthy nor untrustworthy. Smoking marijuana doesn’t make anyone any of these things…..just hungry. Frankly, I’m positive that today’s work force is in considerably more peril from workers who drink alcohol than those who smoke marijuana. There needs to be a test created that can discern the difference between someone who has used marijuana in the past 8 hours vs the past 4 weeks – that would allow for more accurate and useful test results.
Until then, let the smoker beware…..but the employer too. It would be a terrible mistake to fire (or fail to hire) an otherwise good and productive employee because they smoked a joint over the weekend.
I completely concur, Jax. Great insight!
Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas
Which of them CONTINUE to use dope?
Is Bill Clinton ineligible for your list because he didn’t inhale?
Yogi,
We know for sure Steve Jobs doesn’t smoke up anymore. Clinton and Palin were both left off of this list on purpose. Clinton said he didn’t inhale, Palin said she did. But, they are both not worthy of being listed with these other folks for obvious reasons.
censorship
Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas
“Just a quick list of marijuana users, or at least those who were users:
Carl Sagan
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Bill Gates
Steve Jobs
Rick Steves
Phil Jackson
Maya Angelou
Michael Phelps
Tom Brokaw
Ted Turner
Rush Limbaugh
LeBron James
Rand Paul
Clarence Thomas”
Do you know what is in common with them that likely caused the pot use?
Risk taking. Risk takers try a lot of things.
Do you know what is in common with the list you just said?
How many use it on a regular basis, as they became the best? How many of them did pot make successful?
You’re an idiot.
I used pot, used, past tense. Pretty much everyone who is a businessman or risk taker has, well, my terminology for that is over exaggerating but you get the point.
Consistent pot users will have problems.
And some people may go outside that, but the majority will have problems.
For example:
If you listed for a drug which had a side affect of death, that it cured cancer for 30 people, but it killed 1,000, would you then just post the 30 people it cured?
No. This is selective choosing, and attempting to say pot is good, which clearly as a whole it is not.
Also, I couldn’t help but notice you omitted the people you thought Pot didn’t make smart. So all the examples that don’t prove your point, you’re willing to omit.
By your own admission…
I have never seen such sheer stupidity.
There was just a court case regarding this very subject. You cannot purchase a gun with a Federal background check and have a pot card. So much for the 2nd Amendment.
Yeah, it’s real :(
Basically laws that were intended to crack down on gangs for drugs & firearms are starting to hit the good guys too
I get not coming to work drunk or high but if weed is legal you shouldn’t lose your job for using it three weeks earlier.
Then, don’t use and stay clean and you won’t have to worry about getting caught.
I work with some “spaced out” young people and don’t think they’re currently using drugs. Would hate to have them high on top of not being too smart and not caring about the job they do.
Spaced out, but don’t think they’re using drugs?
What, then, is the source of their lack of cognitive abilities?
Maybe “spaced out” was the wrong term. They are inattentive, do not ask questions, can’t make decisions, and don’t seem to give a damn about their jobs. Some are simply lazy.
What?
Does anyone have any munchies? I’m hungry again, and Mr. Hand won’t allow me to order pizza and have it delivered to his class anymore.
Dude…………..
As one might expect on an insurance propaganda newsletter the story is slanted towards allowing your boss to help you make personal choices. As an engineering manager for the past 25 years I can tell you my experience of drug testing is not very favorable.
I have had to let good young engineers go for failing a drug test, when they were otherwise bright hardworking young people.
I have also fired folks for alcohol abuse, but by far and away I have fired more people for being totally incoherent from prescription drugs which people take for “pain”. No preemploymnet screen for those though.
Since the insurance and medical industries are linked at the hip then they don’t seem overly concerned about legal prescription abuse.
As someone who has travelled the world building things, the good ole land of the free is the only place in the entire world I have been asked to pee in a bottle while my employer watches. I must say that steps on my sense of personal privacy. What happened to the days when your boss had the power to determine who was a good employee, and who wasn’t as opposed to an insurance company or lab?
Hey Engineer guy, it doesn’t take an engineer to figure out that recreational user’s are “dopey”. How are you going to figure out whether someone is “impaired” and make a mistake that could lead to an accident? Could it cost your engineering firm big time?
Agent, do you really not understand that claiming all recreational marijuana users are “dopey” is equivalent to claiming all alcohol users are no different from the town drunk? Users exist on a spectrum, and most are people you would never know were using unless you actually saw them using or drug tested, because in every other way they are indistinguishable from a non-user.
As for the concern over someone showing up to work impaired, I’m assuming you’re equally worried about them showing up to work drunk right? So if your employer finds out you’ve ever consumed alcohol they should have so much cause for concern that they should fire/deny hiring you right?
I know it’s easy to look at how marijuana is portrayed in pop culture and assume everyone that uses it is the lazy pot head character, but as with most things in life, movies don’t do nuance very well.
Hey Some, I don’t want drunks or dope heads working for me. Usually, when one of these drunks get a DUI, they are ineligible for driving privileges for any employer. I treat the “dopey’s” the same way. They are both impaired to do a job.
Perhaps you didn’t see the story of the Denver businessman who had these weed head employees who wouldn’t show up for work or when they did, they were pretty much useless. Finally, he had enough and moved his business to South Carolina.
Agent, I’m not sure if you missed the point, or you’re purposefully avoiding it.
There are 4 broad groups:
1. Weed users that abuse the drug and don’t show up to work/show up impaired.
2. Alcohol users that abuse the drug and don’t show up to work/show up impaired.
3. Weed users that show up to work on time and not impaired.
4. Alcohol users that show up to work on time and not impaired.
Under the current system, at least for many employers:
Those who abuse alcohol and become problem employees as a result are let go, and those who have a DUI (aka history of alcohol abuse) are denied employment, while those who use but do NOT abuse alcohol can work without issue.
Those who use but do NOT abuse weed are treated the same as those who abuse weed and not offered employment.
You seem to be advocating that society should lump weed users and weed abusers together even though society makes a distinction between alcohol users and abusers already.
If I have that correct (let me know if I don’t), then would you also advocate for denying employment to anyone who has ever had a drink, because that’s the equivalent argument you seem to be making for weed.
For the record, my position is to treat them the same, people who abuse alcohol or weed should be treated the same, and people who use but do not abuse alcohol or weed should be treated the same.
It’s the only position that makes sense to me.
Some Guy,
I’m not sure how long you have been out here in the IJ world, but Agent believes in “Reefer Madness” and all of the stereotypes presented throughout. He also believes that marijuana will eventually lead to cocaine, meth, and heroin (though, he usually spells it heroine and I’m not sure what female protagonists have to do with the whole conversation). Agent would serve himself well by not commenting on this subject. His insight is laughable at best.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201307/does-long-term-cannabis-use-stifle-motivation
It doesn’t require abuse when you use pot long term. Are you aware why pot makes you feel good? Like any mind altering drug it is bad, especially long term.
Dopamine production. I have hit on this before with regards to why porn is bad, and with regards to dating and sexual relationships that are not well thought out are bad.
Much like a bad break up can harm dopamine production considerably, and several of them can damage your dopamine production for life, (ergo bad sexual decisions can ruin your motivation for life) prolonged pot usage can ruin motivation and dopamine production, in the name of short term high feelings.
Acting like an idiot, and relying on pot itself is a character flaw. I don’t care what anyone says on the matter, it is the same reason I don’t like alcohol.
And if I had a worker who smoked pot, and I knew it, I would not hire them or would fire them if they didn’t recognize it as a problem and character flaw.
I would work with them if they did. However, mind altering drugs being a necessity to live, is itself a character flaw regardless of what I’m talking about regarding dopamine, dependency on such a drug shows extreme weakness.
This is much the same as why taking steroids is bad.
It conditions the body to need the steroid. Have you heard Ronny Coleman? Listen to his voice.
This is roughly the same thing. He relied on a drug for a part of his being. And then his being didn’t regulate what he needed on it’s own.
Relying on a drug for happiness, or to feel good, logically will have consequences. Even recreation-ally, which really means, you rely on it for fun. You would not by default find smoking a joint to help you, unless you already relied on it to do so.
You know a good way to feel better?
Monitor your diet. See if any fatty foods or junk foods are making you feel depressed.
Get sleep.
Stay hydrated.
If anything is out of whack, see a doctor.
Workout to increase your endorphin production.
Associate with people with similar goals.
Make goals, complete goals, reward yourself for this.
Find a hobby. One that is more than lighting a joint.
Eat foods that make your body even happier post workout.
Work on your personal relationships, or take the flaws in them less personally.
These are the primary areas that lacking in will require some sort of a drug like pot to feel good in. Also, someone who has all these things has no time for pot, and no desire for it.
Ergo, why leaders don’t want to have someone who smokes pot as a solution to any of these issues in their team.
I like motivated people who know how to fix themselves, have structure, and move forward and grow through process. Not through lighting up to take the edge off.
And this is coming from someone that has tried pot.
You know what my high is? Getting home and seeing my kids.
You know how I motivate myself the next day? I don’t light up to make myself better and relax. I find something to do with my kids. If you need the pot to feel better, or need to feel high, something is wrong.
Every second of your day should be focused on being better, relaxing in ways that don’t require a mind altering drug, and people that aren’t like that…Well, won’t understand what I’m saying, as you probably don’t.
Bob, you made three really good posts and I couldn’t have said it better. Occasional users become regular users and then their brain turns to mush and they then try other things to attempt to feel good. That is why Mexico keeps sending all that dope into the US because Americans like Some Guy and Planetarium will continue to buy. Many like Nate Newton tried to profit by it, got caught with a trunk full and got sent away for a stint in prison. Mind altering drugs are a scourge on our society. Build that wall and keep it out.
My history became my strength. Knowing oneself is the source of all knowledge.
Unlike others who say they made mistakes and grew from them, I learned some serious lessons, and the above walks the walk on that.
This is why I’ve said many times:
I’m a conservative for the right reasons. I learned all of this through experience and fixing my own personal issues.
It’s also why even though I’m strict on it, if someone realizes they have a problem I do everything I can to go to bat for them. And the people in my life know it.
I’m a real motivator to those around me, if it isn’t evident, and I make a point of figuring out more of these dynamics to help people. That’s because to me, the individual matters. Just like I say the homosexual matters and I use logic rooted in helping them and what is best, I believe the pot smoker matters, I believe the one who sleeps around and makes bad sexual and relationship choices matters, and they need help and to understand the dynamics of their situation by someone who has been through it.
I recently mentioned the shemale, and how can I hate gay folks. Something I haven’t gone into depth in, is there is a time I was not attracted to women, ergo, the shemale. I found vaginal sex to be disgusting.
I’m well aware of lustful tendencies, and I know how damaging they can be. I would say my damage from an ex and other things are what caused it over time, and I didn’t realize it. I’m still messed up in that area, but I’m glad that I had kids. I’m glad that through my messing up I had my kids. I couldn’t have learned any better how thinking you know better could be totally wrong.
I may have issues still but I see me and my wife in my kids, and I see abnormally strong children, being taught and raised beautifully, as we all further each others progress. And I want for that life, for people to pick themselves up, and realize they deserve better than that day to day fly by the seat of their pants lifestyle. That there is better.
I want them to know that I understand, and I get it.
YESSSS, I love it again. All the pot comes from Mexico and those brown people, huh Agent? Build the wall. Once again, you prove just how precious you are. This isn’t the 40’s and 50’s, man. Most of it is home-grown. And no, occasional users do not necessarily become regular users. You couldn’t be more wrong on a subject than this one. Well, wait…
A: It has nothing to do with people being Brown.
B: We have literally hundreds of thousands of people in jail for crossing the border, and a huge chunk of that is related to drug sales, whether or not the bulk of pot is home grown or not, there is a huge border drug problem. I have already given government numbers for state, local, and federal jails.
C: This means you are ignoring numbers to see racism, which is insane and should not be your go to reply. It is however not surprising considering your leaders.
D: Then you are admitting that regular pot users have issues then? Make up your mind, don’t argue whatever gives you a point over agent. You just said that occasional users don’t necessarily become regular users…Which implies being a regular user is worse than occasional.
E: You LOOOOVEEE being able to call people racist, and yourself better than them. We’ve known this for some time.
Finally, F:
Usage of pot triggers dopamine. This is likely the primary reason people use it. This could easily make it very addictive to feel happy early on. I have never seen an “occasional” pot smoker, and given the sentiments of a pot smoker, that uses it occasionally, which would be to use it to feel good when they don’t, it would stand to reason they would not ever be an occasional user. They would use it long term, just fewer times per week, and would still rely on it to feel “happy” or ease their stress.
Relying on a drug for dopamine production is rather ignorant.
It would be no less ignorant than relying on aterol.
And I mean relying on aterol when you do not have ADD.
Bob, the NFL suspends players for testing positive for pot. First violation, 4 games, second violation 10 games. Third may just be getting cut and not having a career at all. I wonder why they take this problem seriously.
Essentially employers are protected by at-will employment. You can ban nicotine if you want to and test for and fire for it as well. What’s going to happen is either A) voters are going to start curbing employer power as this behavior is increasingly seen as abusive and against changing societal norms or B) some industries, as this article mentioned with skiing in Colorado, are going to be forced to give in due to pressures emerging from the labor pool. Or the status quo could remain. We’ll see, but I think the key is the changing societal norms are going to cause increased friction. Businesses like profits, not unnecessary friction.