Marijuana in skydiver's system

[PhreeZone 15]

I'm thinking Talkback unless it relates to a specific incident and how to prevent another incident. (Then here)

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[skybytch 259]

Quote

how do we keep the drug culture out of skydiving and keep personal liberties intact?

That would be up to individual DZO's. I know there is at least one DZ out there where having any form of illegal substance will get you tossed off the DZ. The DZO is making it very clear that drugs are not allowed on his DZ. That's fair - his DZ, his rules; don't like 'em, move along.

If every DZ had a rule like that, there would be no "drug culture" on DZ's - instead, it would be located off the premises, just down the road, in Joe Skybum's van. I seriously doubt there's any way to stop some skydivers from recreational drug use; the personality types that are likely to use drugs recreationally are also likely to be bitten hard by the skydiving bug.

[Deuce 1]

Well sir, cause of the Constitution.

"If you don't have anything to hide, can I take a look in your trunk?"

"Uh, sure"

Blammo.

"If you don't have anything in your system to hide, can I take a look"

"No"

"Well, Mr. Kelly, you have an odor of an alcoholic beverage on your breath and person, you have failed the field sobriety test, and I am taking you into custody under suspicion of operating while intoxicated blah blah blah."

You and I both accepted employment with the condition that we would submit to such testing. OK. In California a condition of your driver's license is submitting under the above scenario. If you refuse, you suffer an automatic suspension.

We had to undergo that testing cause some assh*le operated under the influence, and the rest of us forevermore must prove our innocence.

I would just prefer to operate under the presumption that we are responsible, and only restrict the freedom of persons who have committed acts that restrict their freedom to only jump after proving that they're sober.

I respect your undergoing the same scrutiny as your crew. I bet you could guarantee their sobriety without it, though, by being in touch with them, interacting with them enough that you would notice when they were intoxicated. I bet you are that kind of supervisor.

My experience with random testing is that it's a crutch for lazy supervisors. If a supervisor came out into the field every night and talked with his people, he'd know if they were loaded, and could take appropriate action, in person.

I don't think it takes a whole lot of eye contact to know somebody's wasted. Eye contact is right-now, and a urine test for weed is next week.

I have great respect for people who have nothing to hide. I count myself among them. I just don't feel that gives anyone the right to root around in my life proving to THEIR satisfaction that I don't.

Is that another rant?

[freeflir29 0]

Uuummm...I just thought I would throw it out that drug testing isn't effective. Anyone that is literate and has half a brain can beat a drug test. No matter if they just snorted a rail or smoked a monster bowl a half hour before they take the test. Like many other things drug testing has been used for liability purposes. The "public" thinks it works so it has become "normal." I think testing would do VERY little to change anything that goes on at a DZ. Besides, don't DZ waivers already cover "negligence."

[christoofar 0]

Devil's Advocate time.

Say, hypothetically... a diver doing smack decides to go BirdMan out of an Otter. He is high. He opens up his wings right out the door and smacks the stablizer and causes the plane to spiral in. Takes out the pilot and a couple of skydivers who couldn't make it out. AAD saves his sorry ass. Drugs are found in his system upon an investigation, and it appears likely he was high during the skydive.

Assuming this crazy f- lives... who is responsible for the accident? Who gets charged with murder/manslaughter here, or at all? It sounds like this could never happen... but... hey we all know sh-- happens doesn't it.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[happythoughts 0]

"can I take a look in your car?" Before you say "yes", you'd better be absolutely sure that 4 months ago, a buddy didn't accidently leave something in your car. (advice from a district attorney buddy).
Actually, there has already been a lawsuit (Calif I think) where the tandem master went in with a student. The parents sued the dz. Too much attention and it will be mandatory screening.

[Dumpster 0]

Personally, I can not imagine jumping while stoned- There is NO way you'd even find me at the DZ if I'd just burned one- Maybe some time the next day, but no sooner- Same with drinking - I'm won't even jump with a mild hangover. What happened to the self-policing aspect of the sport? We're engaged in a high-risk activity here, why the hell would some one want to jump with less that 100% percent of thier facilites?

Easy Does It

[bbarnhouse 0]

Okay then.......Know who gets called to the carpet when something like this happens? The PILOTS! It is ultimately their responsibility. I think we have had this discussion before. So let me put it out there just as food for thought.......are skydivers or are they not canopy PILOTS? All commercial Pilots are subject to random drug testing.(yes I know, but we are in public)
The other thing here is the....."it will never happen to me" attitude.....well it sure is happening more frequently,to people we know, and yes it can happen to you. (meaning going in under influence) If you choose to use drugs please do so on your time off the DZ. Don't think that the forfieture of property doesnt apply to business owners, and don't believe that you arent hurting anyone, cuz imapired; you might just take somebody out. Is that really a risk worth taking?
That my friends would and has left some scars that just won't heal.
I salute the divine in all of us.
BB

[christoofar 0]

Probably bad time to crack a joke but... remember tune to this song (lyrics changed)?

I climbed abord the plane,
but I was high.
I couldn't see the weather vane
cuz I was high.

Couldn't make the spot,
and I know why...

Because I was high,
Because I was high,
Because I was high.

---

Afroman says a lot.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

"can I take a look in your car?" Before you say "yes", you'd better be absolutely sure that 4 months ago, a buddy didn't accidently leave something in your car. (advice from a district attorney buddy).

No doubt...My first answer to any question like that is...."Got a warrant?" No....then you ain't lookin in shit!!!

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

Probably bad time to crack a joke but..

Yeah it is....but danm that's funny!!!

[PhillyKev 0]

I'll only make one comment on this. If you want my blood, you better have a knife and be ready to use it. I won't work anywhere or participate in anything that requires random drug testing. I believe it is an invasion of privacy, morally and socially wrong to require the random and unprovoked testing for the presence of a substance that may or may not be currently effecting you unless there's a reason to suspect that it may be.

[WFFC 1]

Quote

Actually, there has already been a lawsuit (Calif I think) where the tandem master went in with a student. The parents sued the dz. Too much attention and it will be mandatory screening.

Found this below from here http://www.pdxnorml.org/980521.html:

Drug Tests Urged For Skydiving Instructors ('Sacramento Bee'
Says The Local Federal Aviation Administration Will Recommend
That All Tandem Skydiving Instructors In The United States Be Required
To Undergo Mandatory Urine Tests - The Cause Of The April 16 Accident
Precipitating The FAA Recommendation Is Unknown, But The Instructor
Was Found To Have Alcohol In His Blood And Cannabis Metabolites -
The Parents Of 26-Year-Old Jump Student Stephanie Ann Cotter Have Vowed
To 'Commit The Rest Of Their Lives To Increasing Governmental Oversight
Of Skydiving')

Date: Thu, 21 May 1998 22:21:55 -0700
To: [email protected]
From: [email protected] (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Drug Tests Urged for Skydiving Instructors
Sender: [email protected]
Newshawk: Joel W. Johnson ([email protected])
Source: Sacramento Bee (CA)
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.sacbee.com/
Pubdate: Thu, 21 May 1998
Author: Pamela Martineau Bee Staff Writer

DRUG TESTS URGED FOR SKYDIVING INSTRUCTORS

In the aftermath of the skydiving deaths last month of Sacramento woman and
her tandem jumping instructor, investigators with the local Federal
Aviation Administration are recommending that all tandem skydiving
instructors in the United States be required to undergo mandatory drug
tests.

The recommendation is part of an official FAA report on the deaths April 18
of Stephanie Ann Cotter, 26, and her skydiving instructor Seth Blake, 28.
They died while jumping in tandem from an airplane at 9,000 feet after
their parachute -- for unknown reasons -- failed to open.

Deaths are not extraordinarily rare in skydiving, but the accident last
month at the SkyDance SkyDiving Company in Yolo County has become
controversial since Blake's autopsy report revealed he had traces of
marijuana in his blood and a 0.04 percent blood alcohol level.

FAA regulations -- the only governmental oversight of skydiving -- forbid
alcohol or drug use by skydivers or their instructors. But the FAA does not
require drug testing of the jumpers or their teachers.

At high altitudes, alcohol and drugs can severely hinder reflex responses.

"I feel very strongly that this should be mandatory and regulated," said
Robert Cotter, Stephanie's father who has said he and his wife, Edith, will
commit the rest of their lives to increasing governmental oversight of
skydiving.

"It took my kid's death to do this," Cotter said.

Tim Pile, a spokesman for the FAA's Western region, cautioned that
recommendations in official investigations must travel through many
channels before being adopted -- and many don't make it.

"Something like this would be controversial. There would be opposition,"
said Pile.

If officials in Washington chose to pursue the change, he said, they must
solicit comment across the country. Managers at SkyDance SkyDiving
adamantly maintained that Blake was neither intoxicated nor high the
morning of his fatal jump.

"We have a very clear rule that we don't tolerate that here," said Ray
Ferrell, co-director of Sky- Dance SkyDiving. "Seth had been on duty since
8 o'clock that morning and there was no alcohol apparent."

Owners of the skydiving company speculated that Blake's allergy medication
could have triggered a positive reading for alcohol, a contention that
officials at the Yolo County Coroner's Office have declined to comment on.

Cotter filed suit earlier this month against SkyDance SkyDiving and its
parent company Prestar, charging that the owners and managers of the
company were negligent in allowing his daughter to jump with an instructor
who was under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

The FAA investigative report on the deaths of Cotter and Blake has not yet
been made public, but investigators within the Sacramento office of the FAA
said Wednesday that the final report will include the mandatory drug
testing recommendation. Cotter said he hopes the proposed rule will be
adopted sooner, rather than later.

"Clerks at the hardware store where my wife and I shop have to be drug
tested before being hired," he said. Ferrell said SkyDance SkyDiving is
looking into adopting a company policy of drug testing employees.

Copyright 1998 The Sacramento Bee

[happythoughts 0]

If you do not smoke, answer this question: Have you ever gave someone a ride that you know on a very casual basis ? Gone to a bar/restaurant/movie with a group and didn't know everyone ? Anyone who gets in your car could accidentally forget something they stashed. The sentence for pills is worse than weed now. You might want to check every now and then. If you are in a car accident, they find it, it's yours. (Advice that my DA friend tells his kids).

[Deuce 1]

Quote

Duece:

I'm just bouncing around the problem. I like to examine things lots of different ways. Don't take offense, dude... I often do that.

Now... back to regularly scheduled programming... how do we keep the drug culture out of skydiving and keep personal liberties intact? Is it even possible?

Cool. I like a spirited discussion. It's just with typing you can't see the glint in the eye that let's you know its just talk. Thanks for the PM

• Quote

[SniperCJ 0]

Among all the talk about random testing and such, why has no one mentioned the fact that this guy was an AAF-I?

If he went up to swoop a pond high, its also possible he went up with students high. And say said student goes out of control or whatever and the same poor reaction that caused him to hit the pond cause him to miss helping the student he is responsible for. Hmm, random testing might not seem like such a bad idea there huh? Of course the AFF-I doesnt have any money, so the lawsuit is directed at the "deep pockets" of the DZO (who of course doesnt have any money either, so the DZ closes).

Bad for all of us.

Test em all I say. You wanna work here, submit to random testing. You wanna smoke weed or whatever, then go skydive your ass off, but youre not working here.

As for having a search warrant for your trunk goes, if we want in there bad enough, theres always a (legal) way...

JC

[freeflir29 0]

Quote

theres always a (legal) way...

I sure hope you don't pull me over some day. It's gonna be ugly.....

[SniperCJ 0]

Fortunately I dont pull anybody over these days. I dont work Patrol.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

why are you opposed to random drug screening? i take about 6 drug screens a year, all random, it doesn't bother me, nor does it offend me, because i have absolutely nothing to hide

this is what a lot of people think. Until they get a false positive drug test result & lose their jobs. And it happens a lot. Ibuprofen can cause a false positive for marijuana. Over the counter cold & allergy medicines can cause false positives for opiates or speed.

And then there's the user error fuck-ups....I remember one scandal (might have been at Fort Meade in Maryland) where a whole bunch of recruits tested positive for drugs...when they researched the testing procedure they found all sorts of screw-ups...un-rinsed glassware, test tubes of urine samples that were not labeled (identified only by the tube's position in the rack!!).

A lot of people think, "Well I don't do drugs, so no problem!" But this is assuming that the people in charge are doing their job in a competent matter.

Having performed a few immuno-assays myself, I can tell you that even with the most careful workers, tests can give false positives, high backgrounds, etc. Drug tests are usually based on the ability of an antibody to bind specifically with a drug metabolite, but that same antibody can cross-react with similar compounds as well.

rgoper, if, god forbid, you ever do get a "positive" result, demand that they verify it by doing a second assay using a different scientific mechanism, such as gas chromatography or HPLC (high performance liquid chromatography)

but, for God's sake, don't trust the system to figure everything out right! A lot of these people doing these tests don't have a scientific background. They just mix the piss with the ingredients like it says in the little booklet & wait to see if the test tube turns a pretty color. Then they just accept it as gospel truth that you're a druggie.

It's one of the dangers of scientific power in the hands of non-scientists.

The other problem with wide scale drug testing is quite often only a small percentage of people in the group are using drugs, and that percentage could be smaller than the percent error rate of the test. That's not good, statistically.

I wrote a 60 page manual about the hazards of drug testing, so that's why I'm going on about it.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[bbarnhouse 0]

Quote

I sure hope you don't pull me over some day. It's gonna be ugly.....

"Excuse me sir mind if I have a look in your trunk?"
"Hell NO you can't look in my trunk, do you have a search warrant?"
Bahhhhhhhh,bahhhhhhhhh (*sounds coming from the tunk)
"Alright Mister what's in the trunk?"
"Nuthin"
Bahhhhhhhhh
"Sounds like you have a woman in there"
"No SIR that's just my lil'pet".........
"Open it up"
"Well okay.but I ain't sharing!!!"

[Deuce 1]

Clay, I don't think anybody can beat a full toxicology, but that's not what they use for screening, I agree they can be beat. That's why the best evidence is blood, and I don't think you can defeat a full blood tox screen. I'd be curious as to how you'd mask the presence of morphine, THC, or cocaine metabolite in the blood.

Never let anybody search you or your stuff without a warrant. Never sign a release. You are in charge of your car, regardless of what your passengers have been doing. And that segues nicely into B-squared's point that the pilot gets hosed when we do stupid sh*t to his/her plane.

"Wingsuit flyer on smack" best quote of the day.

I will pass whatever screen they could put in place, but it is still an infringement. Thanks for looking up that article Michael.

[PhillyKev 0]

LOL...Hah!!!

I hate that stupid "LOL" acronym, way overused. But that definitely did cause some audible chuckling on my part.

[PhillyKev 0]

Next thing you know there will be random testing for the presence of sheep secretions on your willy. A wise man once said, "He who make sweet love to wooly animals is a danger to himself and others."

[billvon 2,478]

>why are you opposed to random drug screening?

Would it bother you if you tested false-positive and couldn't work for the 2-5 days it took to get the better test (a GC/MS) done? Or would you just work anyway, thus sort of negating the purpose of the drug test?

(BTW false-positive rates average around 1-5% depending on what you eat and drink, and how you take the test)

[skybytch 259]

Quote

Never let anybody search you or your stuff without a warrant. Never sign a release.

When someone who used to be a law enforcement officer gives me advice like that, I listen. Strangely enough, it's the exact same advice my drug dealer used to give me back when I was into that.

Re: cop who pulled you over wanting to search your car. I've found that simply being respectful in how you speak to the officer goes a long way towards helping them decide they don't need to see what's in your car... on more than one occasion it's even gotten me out of tickets that I richly deserved. Generally if you give them a reason to give you a break, they will. Discretion is a wonderful thing