Most all of my close friends from H.S. on were pot smokers. First multiple times a day, to occasionally over the years. For several years I stopped purchasing as I was growing my own. I gave it up 20 or so years ago. Though I did take a toke or two at hunting camp abt 7 yrs ago. I do not believe it affected any of my friends on a functional level. Their careers were not impacted as I could tell. And none died from drug use unless there was some unknown connection between drug use and the cancers which killed several of my friends.
@Elderberry I will challenge that.
One of my companies was involved in painting... It is very hard to find competent painters, because they tend to be users... We dealt often in high VOC varnishes, lacquers, and epoxies - So getting a buzz at work is very commonplace, and either that flatly attracts a certain kind of employee, or the work itself produces them... It is hard to be buzzed all day, and come off of it after work, so painters tend to like the buzz and stay that way even after work. And in that, I have had a rather unique problem hiring people, as the work actually attracts folks with substance abuse problems.
As a rule of thumb, I would much rather deal with a drunk than a doper. No doubt there are folks who can handle their weed - Some of my most honored mentors, truly gifted and thoughtful people, were habitual tokers. But those folks tend toward an accelerated employment curve, or wind up in their own businesses... And I was not dealing with that cream.
Dopers tend to be inattentive, forgetful, and unworthy of responsibility. They lack the drive toward quality, tend not to be self-starting, and require constant oversight. As a general rule, you need to constantly kick em in the ass to make their lungs work.
That is not to say that working with drunks is any better - They have their problems too... Binging being the worst from an employment perspective... but as a rule, the artists in that craft that can produce tend toward the drunks... the productive ones, the more responsible ones, the ones who I could trust to lead teams and reliably get quality work done unsupervised were largely padded toward the drunks.
Now, I understand the militant pro-weed position - I really can. Because those I know that can handle their weed tend to be the spear-point of that militancy... But there are many, many in my experience that cannot. A less problematic condition than a drunk, a more passive fading of function to be sure... but very problematic all the same.
One of my favorite friends of my youth wound up that way... Straight As in middle school, bright, curious, inventive... An imaginative philosopher, handy with his hands, superb already in electronics...
Sophomore year in high school he started on dope, and the change, within that year was profound.
I literally saw his promise fade to nothing. Dropped out of school his junior year, and I split ways with him shortly after that. He never grew after that... taking only whatever work that would keep him high. He never drifted into heavier drugs to my knowledge, but he was lit, literally all the time.
He wound up living in a small camper, growing his own, and pretty much shiftless. He died in 2011, a life truly 'wasted'.
Why is one condoned and the other not? It makes no sense to me.
I see that the other way around - putting up with alcohol is no reason to open Pandora's box even further...
