5 ms·

> You really think the "law" is something that is deployed equally? I can think of several other notable people with security clearances who shouldn't have them

• r00fus 8y ago
  That is, unless the deviance is actually the norm. It's like enforcing dress codes against specific people when it's clear the dress code itself is questionable. One could argue that pot usage is orthogonal (or perhaps even beneficial) to one's security risk profile.
  • CharlesColeman 8y ago
    > That is, unless the deviance is actually the norm. It's like enforcing dress codes against specific people when it's clear the dress code itself is questionable. I don't think that's the right interpretation here. If you demonstrate an attitude that you feel you don't have to follow regulations you disagree with, what's to stop you from disclosing secret information that you don't think should be secret? Getting a security clearance is all about showing the authorities that you can be trusted to follow their regulations. Willfully violating federal law for recreational purposes casts doubt on that. Security clearance isn't a right. > One could argue that pot usage is ... perhaps even beneficial ... to one's security risk profile. How so?