Drug use/drug testing in the CF (merged)

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Unfortunately, if you even suggest that marijuana use can be compatible with society, some old dinosaurs inevitably just write your off as a pothead. Pot-use not required.

I says pardon??  Listen lad, when I was serving I used to be the guy screaming that alcohol was way worse then pot [and LSD for that matter].............into my 26th year of actually seeing the damage real people have done to themselves has changed my view. 
If you are stupid enough to qualify 'experience' with being a 'dinosaur' then you're just an idiot and I have no time for you.

The problem with the 'No' side, IMO, is comparing FAIRLY the effects long-term when one of the substances is illegal and I'm pretty sure funding for a long term study is not exactly Government-money friendly........

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I must add however that I have also had my share of alcohol-damaged folks but a good percentage of those are from Alcohol-fetal syndrome.
Very, very bad stuff for anyone to have to deal with..............

 

[ballz]

I says pardon??  Listen lad, when I was serving I used to be the guy screaming that alcohol was way worse then pot [and LSD for that matter].............into my 26th year of actually seeing the damage real people have done to themselves has changed my view. 
If you are stupid enough to qualify 'experience' with being a 'dinosaur' then you're just an idiot and I have no time for you.

The problem with the 'No' side, IMO, is comparing FAIRLY the effects long-term when one of the substances is illegal and I'm pretty sure funding for a long term study is not exactly Government-money friendly........

No, I do not equate experience with being a dinosaur. Inevitably, when this conversation comes up, some old crusty dinosaur(s) just dismisses everyone on the anti-prohibition side as a bunch of burnt out potheads, even if they are arguing with someone who has never smoked pot before but agrees it should be legal.

I never read anything of you calling me or RoyalDrew or anyone else burnt out pothead, so relax, 'cause I wasn't referring to you or anybody specifically for that matter.

 

[medicineman]

I do not have a problem with pot use, per se (leaving aside the current status of the substance in the Criminal code).

My concerns about legalizing pot are more practical:

1) can we devise a road side sobriety test (like the breathalyzer) that can reliably detect those who have consumed too much pot to safely operate a motor vehicle?

2) my second concern relates to the first: what do we about people who work in safety sensitive places?  My understanding has always been that unlike alcohol (which is pretty much completely metabolized after 24 hrs), THC is stored in body fat and will flood back out into the blood stream up to 30 days later, particularly under times of stress.  If this is true, as a practical matter, how does the CF approach the use of pot if it becomes a legal substance?  I could still see us administratively banning its use for soldiers, sailors and airmen, just for safety reasons.

Thoughts?

You can still pee positive for THC for many months after regular use, especially if you have high body fat content...it is why the drug loves your brain, the tissue is very fatty.  This is why I don't see it being legalized within the CAF, as the predictability of metabolism and excretion just isn't there.  We have bottle to throttle rules for a reason - metabolism and excretion of ethanol is quite predictable, almost down to the minute.  My opinion for any safety/security sensitive environment is nada...and the CAF is a safety/security sensitive environment.

:2c:

MM

 

[Jungle]

You can still pee positive for THC for many months after regular use, especially if you have high body fat content...it is why the drug loves your brain, the tissue is very fatty.  This is why I don't see it being legalized within the CAF, as the predictability of metabolism and excretion just isn't there.  We have bottle to throttle rules for a reason - metabolism and excretion of ethanol is quite predictable, almost down to the minute.  My opinion for any safety/security sensitive environment is nada...and the CAF is a safety/security sensitive environment.

:2c:

MM

That is the main reason the Dutch Armed Forces never legalized the use of cannabis for it's members, even with the widespread social acceptance of it, and the inevitable tolerance to some harder drugs.

 

[Shamrock]

...and the inevitable tolerance to some harder drugs.

This mean tanker's chocolate is coming back?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

That is the main reason the Dutch Armed Forces never legalized the use of cannabis for it's members, even with the widespread social acceptance of it, and the inevitable tolerance to some harder drugs.

I was actually wondering what the Dutch policy was WRT marijuana, thanks for providing.  If that's the case and given what others in this thread have said, then I can't see a reason to allow its use in the forces. 

 

[Jungle]

This mean tanker's chocolate is coming back?

Well, considering the Dutch Army does not operate tanks anymore... no.

 

[Shamrock]

Well, considering the Dutch Army does not operate tanks anymore... no.

Then I guess I'll have to keep my production on the down-low.  A film crew has been following me around to do a documentary about my efforts.  The show is called Breaking Track.

 

[McG]

That is the main reason the Dutch Armed Forces never legalized the use of cannabis for it's members, even with the widespread social acceptance of it, and the inevitable tolerance to some harder drugs.

I would like to see stiffer penalties and stronger tools in the NDA even if things do not change civi side.  I am tired of the military justice system looking at when a civi would be charged and determining nothing should be done for soldiers who breaking the law.  I would like to see a charge for failing to provide a sample when ordered to do so under the drug control program (much as there is a CCC charge for refusing a road side alcohol test).  I would also like to see an NDA charge for using (which is not illegal under the CCC).  The penalties do not need to be anything that a delegated officer could not handle, just something more than is needed on civi street.

 

[Occam]

I would like to see a charge for failing to provide a sample when ordered to do so under the drug control program (much as there is a CCC charge for refusing a road side alcohol test). 

That would be insubordination, would it not? 

("Every person who disobeys a lawful command of a superior officer is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to imprisonment for life or to less punishment")

 

[McG]

One could probably make that work, but I would like to see a specific charge for the sake of some nuances that I have run into during conversation with CF legal officers.

... It is much like how the CAF would be better with a specific charge for unauthorized firing of a weapon as opposed to using Sect 129 to catch it.

 

[jeremy1995]

.

 

[Flavus101]

Im here to debate, im maybe wrong, but please use real arguments sir.

You should try reading the points that many members have stated as to why allowing soldiers (even when they are off duty) to use marijuana is a bad idea.

 

[JesseWZ]

When you are in the Regular Force (and certain Reserve Force service), you are subject to the Code of Service Discipline regardless of your current location or whether you're on duty. You can be off duty and still be charged with Drunkeness. Spend some time in the service (if you make it) prior to judging the standards by which we hold ourselves and our troops.

 

[George Wallace]

Yeah potential futur officer, i don't know what the life in the CF is. My point is why can't a member of the CF can smoke a joint when he's OUT DUTY, at his HOME, NOT WORKING. That's not the CF, it's your home. How many people some time drink a glass of whisky at home off duty, do we call them alcoolic? Why can't a soldier can smoke a joint during a night when he's out duty with his friends? Im not saying 420 blaze it everyday. I just say than like alcool, it's should be legal so some people can enjoy it with friends when they're OFF DUTY, like alcool.

After, it's funny because a moderator just closed my other threat. He sais would you trust someone who's high to lead you? Hell no. Would you give a gun to someone who's high? Hell no. But would you trust someone to lead when he's drunk and give him a gun? Hell no! Legalizing it and letting soldiers using it during week end some time don't mean they will come to job high.

So yeah, im a potential officer, i don't know what is the life in the CF but there something you don't understand, im not talking about using it while your work, but when you're home, off duty. So look, if you want to debate about it and use arguments, go for it. Also, im not passing jugement on the members of the CF.

Im here to debate, im maybe wrong, but please use real arguments sir.

Just a few things here jeremy1995:

1.  If you really want to be an officer you will have to learn the following:

    a.  Proper use of the English language in the written form;

    b.  Pay attention to detail (ie. THC remains in your blood for a long period of time (weeks), whereas alcohol will dissipate within 24 hours - as pointed out in previous posts.); and
   
    c.  Marijuana is currently illegal, whereas alcohol is not.

2.  If you have short-term or long-term memory loss, you may not pass the CAF enrollment medical.

 

[jeremy1995]

.

 

[Scott]

Nice ninja edits. Stand by what you post (unless you edit before someone replies, of course) or stop posting. Credibility, zero.

To all those replying: best quote the lad.

Staff

 

[KevinB]

  http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/lop/researchpublications/prb0751-e.htm#dcanadian

Under the Criminal Code (“the Code”),(39) someone can be tested to establish whether he or she is impaired by alcohol or drugs while operating a motor vehicle, railway equipment, a vessel or an aircraft.  Section 253 of the Code states:

253. Every one commits an offence who operates a motor vehicle or vessel or operates or assists in the operation of an aircraft or of railway equipment or has the care or control of a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, whether it is in motion or not,

while the person’s ability to operate the vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment is impaired by alcohol or a drug; or
having consumed alcohol in such a quantity that the concentration in the person’s blood exceeds eighty milligrams of alcohol in one hundred millilitres of blood.
Provisions are also made in the Code to allow a peace officer who reasonably suspects that a person has alcohol in his or her body while operating, assisting in the operation of, or having the care and control of a motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, to request that this person undergo a breathalyzer test or provide a blood sample for testing.  It is an offence to refuse to comply with such a demand, without a reasonable excuse.  Peace officers are also authorized to obtain a warrant for the taking of a blood sample where the person is unable to consent “by reason of any physical or mental condition of the person that resulted from the consumption of alcohol or a drug, the accident or any other occurrence related to or resulting from the accident.”

Relevant to the CF.

Pursuant to the National Defence Drug Testing Policy announced in 1990, regulations respecting the Canadian Forces Drug Control Program were approved on 21 May 1992 by the Governor in Council as Chapter 20 of the Queen’s Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces.  Under this program, mandatory drug testing with random elements would be introduced, primarily for all military personnel in safety-sensitive positions.  The program would apply only to uniformed personnel and not to the civilian staff of the Department of National Defence; however, given that all uniformed positions are considered to be safety-sensitive, the military drug-testing policy was considered to be fairly inclusive.  Most military drug testing would be done through the random selection of units comprising 5 to 500 individuals.  Testing would also take place for cause, for those who were undergoing rehabilitation for drug use, for post-accident investigations and for certain “super-sensitive” positions that were not covered by the random testing of military units.  All testing would be conducted by means of urinalysis and any positive drug screen would be subject to a confirmatory analysis.  Failure to comply with a request to submit to a drug test could result in disciplinary action.

You can be charged for failure to provide a sample -

It would be interesting to see if one could push for a CC offence based on Sec.253 for refusal.


This is one of the reasons I love the USA...


 

 

[brihard]

You can be charged for failure to provide a sample -

It would be interesting to see if one could push for a CC offence based on Sec.253 for refusal.

Nope, not a chance. Refusal is S.254(5). That makes it an offence to refuse or fail without reasonable excuse to comply with a demand under any of the subsections of S.254. Those are the 'approved screening device' (roadside breathalyzer),  physical coordination tests, breath samples (at the station), blood samples, or a drug impairment evaluation. We are empowered to make those demands only in the context of impaired driving offences or the reasonable suspicion thereof. The wording of S.254 precludes its application to refusal fo samples requested for any other purpose because of how specifically it references S.253 and/or the combination of alcohol or drugs and the operation of a motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft.

As we're talking specific to the military context,t he NDA is the appropriate legislation if we were to look at instituting a breath demand /drug recognition expert evaluation for the purpose of keeping the military clean.

Frankly I don't think the military's existing powers are lacking. The CF just needs to have more spine about using the safety sensitive testing and enforcing consequences. MAke the troops piss more often, and fire those who fail pour encouragez les autres.