Cadet with Alcohol Misdemeanor

[Майор Хаткевич]

And its useless because we don't test cadets for drugs...

[Eclipse]

And its useless because we don't test cadets for drugs...

CAP doesn't need to.  Disciplinary actions are "at will" - if a CC felt he had enough evidence to support
a termination, he can.  From there the burden would actually be on the cadet, which would probably
include providing a clean test.

[Майор Хаткевич]

And its useless because we don't test cadets for drugs...

CAP doesn't need to.  Disciplinary actions are "at will" - if a CC felt he had enough evidence to support
a termination, he can.  From there the burden would actually be on the cadet, which would probably
include providing a clean test.

Granted, not on top of the law, and IIRC, the MJ states limit it to 21+, but again, that sentence is not necessary, because even if it happens, unless the cadet is a goober about, talking at the meetings, or comes in smelling of skunk/gets arrested for it, how will we know? I've been surprised many times by people I never expected to, to be partaking in the practice.

[Eclipse]

That's just it, discretion, etc., means only the most egregious or dumb offenders will get caught,
but if they do, you still have to have it written some where that there is zero allowance.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Having not partook of the Ganja, I know little about it other than picking up a contact buzz at many, many rock concerts.

I don't know how long it stays in the system.  I imagine it would depend on the potency of it and how much was smoked.

I remember having gone to a rock concert a couple of weeks before a job interview, after which I had to submit a whizz-quizz.  I remember worrying that trace amounts would show up, so I called my doctor's office.  His nurse told me "not impossible, but unlikely."  Nothing showed up.

I was going to ask about Colorado and Washington, but PHall answered the question for me.

That does not keep the military from prohibiting use under the UCMJ, or CAP under 52-16.

What I do wonder is: if someone is actually, on paper, prescribed marijuana for medical purposes, can they still be kicked out of CAP, or would that fall under our nondiscrimination policy?

[Eclipse]

I don't know how long it stays in the system.  I imagine it would depend on the potency of it and how much was smoked.

Urinalysis tends to only detect usage in the last 12-24 hours, but a follicle test can detect usage up to 90 days.

What I do wonder is: if someone is actually, on paper, prescribed marijuana for medical purposes, can they still be kicked out of CAP, or would that fall under our nondiscrimination policy?

As far as the federal government is concerned, there's no such thing as "medical" marijuana, so it's still illegal and would not be grounds for a discrimination
complaint.

[NIN]

Having not partook of the Ganja, I know little about it other than picking up a contact buzz at many, many rock concerts.

[Emphasis mine]

Sure, buddy, sure...

[lordmonar]

Having not partook of the Ganja, I know little about it other than picking up a contact buzz at many, many rock concerts.

I don't know how long it stays in the system.  I imagine it would depend on the potency of it and how much was smoked.

I remember having gone to a rock concert a couple of weeks before a job interview, after which I had to submit a whizz-quizz.  I remember worrying that trace amounts would show up, so I called my doctor's office.  His nurse told me "not impossible, but unlikely."  Nothing showed up.

I was going to ask about Colorado and Washington, but PHall answered the question for me.

That does not keep the military from prohibiting use under the UCMJ, or CAP under 52-16.

What I do wonder is: if someone is actually, on paper, prescribed marijuana for medical purposes, can they still be kicked out of CAP, or would that fall under our nondiscrimination policy?

yes

[LSThiker]

Urinalysis tends to only detect usage in the last 12-24 hours, but a follicle test can detect usage up to 90 days.

That is not true.  It depends on the test method and manufacturer used to analyze the urine.  The ELISA test (rapid) is generally non-specific but sensitive.  The GC-MS method (confirmatory) is both specific and very sensitive.  The Oral/saliva drug test (which is not FDA approved) is very short lived of 1-24 hours for THC.  However, generally speaking for urinanalysis drug screening:

Amphetamines:  1 - 3 days
Methamphetamine:  3 - 5 days
Ecstasy / MDMA:  1 - 4 days
Barbiturates:  1 day for "short" acting and 1 to 3 weeks for "long acting"
Phenobarbital:  2 - 3 weeks
Benzodiazepines:  7 days to 6 weeks depending on the user
Cannabis:  7 - 30 days depending on the user
Cocaine:  2 - 5 days
Cotinine:  2 - 4 days
Morphine:  2 - 4 days
TCA:  7 - 10 days
LSD:  2 - 24 hours
PCP:  3 - 30 days depending on user

You will find variation in these numbers but they are in the ball park.  There are a number of biological factors that come into play such as when the urine was collected, how hydrated the patient was, and how much urine is collected.

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

Having not partook of the Ganja, I know little about it other than picking up a contact buzz at many, many rock concerts.

[Emphasis mine]

Sure, buddy, sure...

I think the first time I smelt it was when I was a little kid and my stepbrother smoked it...other than that, the first time would have been seeing Van Halen in 1980.

But no, really, I never have.  I was too scared of what my dad would do to me if I did and he found out - and he WOULD find out, he was like a Sith Lord in that respect - and I'd have rather dealt with law enforcement than with him!

[NIN]

I think the first time I smelt it was when I was a little kid and my stepbrother smoked it...other than that, the first time would have been seeing Van Halen in 1980.

But no, really, I never have.  I was too scared of what my dad would do to me if I did and he found out - and he WOULD find out, he was like a Sith Lord in that respect - and I'd have rather dealt with law enforcement than with him!

Funny story. I went to my first actual concert in 1982.  The house lights went down in the Joe Louis Arena, and everybody around us started lighting up cigarettes.

"Thats odd," I thought, but pretty soon, this rather pungent smell wafted my way.

"Ugh! What the hell is that smell?"

"You don't know what that is?" my buddy asked me.

"No..."

"Thats dope, you idiot!"

"oooh, really?"

Almost 16 years old and I didn't even know what it smelled like. Go figure.

[PHall]

I think the first time I smelt it was when I was a little kid and my stepbrother smoked it...other than that, the first time would have been seeing Van Halen in 1980.

But no, really, I never have.  I was too scared of what my dad would do to me if I did and he found out - and he WOULD find out, he was like a Sith Lord in that respect - and I'd have rather dealt with law enforcement than with him!

Funny story. I went to my first actual concert in 1982.  The house lights went down in the Joe Louis Arena, and everybody around us started lighting up cigarettes.

"Thats odd," I thought, but pretty soon, this rather pungent smell wafted my way.

"Ugh! What the hell is that smell?"

"You don't know what that is?" my buddy asked me.

"No..."

"Thats dope, you idiot!"

"oooh, really?"

Almost 16 years old and I didn't even know what it smelled like. Go figure.

I'm 10 years older then you Nin, trust me, at 16 I knew what dope smelled like!

Of course when I entered the military in 1974 the question wasn't "have you ever used drugs?"
It was "when was the last time you used drugs?"

[blackrain]

And its useless because we don't test cadets for drugs...

CAP doesn't need to.  Disciplinary actions are "at will" - if a CC felt he had enough evidence to support
a termination, he can.  From there the burden would actually be on the cadet, which would probably
include providing a clean test.

I'd be interested to know what would constitute "enough evidence" absent a positive test or actual observation of said infraction. We had this discussion recently among several members and to an individual we agreed it's next to impossible to make a termination stick on a 35-3 appeal without solid proof, (like a positive test) at least in my wing. Any body out there know a time where a test was ever required especially under a "guilty until proven innocent scenario"? (or in the aftermath of some sort of vehicle/aircraft accident/incident) If I'm accused of something of which I'm not guilty I'm thinking a defamation suit would be in order (5 minutes after my test comes back clean) whether my membership was terminated or not.

[lordmonar]

And its useless because we don't test cadets for drugs...

CAP doesn't need to.  Disciplinary actions are "at will" - if a CC felt he had enough evidence to support
a termination, he can.  From there the burden would actually be on the cadet, which would probably
include providing a clean test.

I'd be interested to know what would constitute "enough evidence" absent a positive test or actual observation of said infraction. We had this discussion recently among several members and to an individual we agreed it's next to impossible to make a termination stick on a 35-3 appeal without solid proof, (like a positive test) at least in my wing. Any body out there know a time where a test was ever required especially under a "guilty until proven innocent scenario"? (or in the aftermath of some sort of vehicle/aircraft accident/incident) If I'm accused of something of which I'm not guilty I'm thinking a defamation suit would be in order (5 minutes after my test comes back clean) whether my membership was terminated or not.

First off.....the guy you need to talk to is your wing commander....he is the guy who determines "if there is enough evidence".  Second.....you can't bring defamation if the actors were working in good faith. 
Third......go ahead and sue CAP...it is what we have lawyers for.   Commanders should not let the threat of getting sued stopping them from doing what is right.

It works both ways....if you are innocent.....fight.
But it is our duty as leaders to pursue matters we think are important.....and to fight for them.

[JeffDG]

First off.....the guy you need to talk to is your wing commander....he is the guy who determines "if there is enough evidence". 

Depends.  If your wing has Groups, the Wing Commander will never see a termination action, either directly or upon appeal.  The appeal is to the Group, and from there to MARP.

Second.....you can't bring defamation if the actors were working in good faith. 

That's not true.  False statements of fact are subject to defamation claims regardless of "good faith".  The "absence of malice" standard applies only to "public figures" who may be defamed, not to ordinary individuals.

Third......go ahead and sue CAP...it is what we have lawyers for.   Commanders should not let the threat of getting sued stopping them from doing what is right.

It's not "right" to accuse someone without any basis of evidence.  If that accusation is factually false and causes damage, the commander personally, and CAP as an entity, could be jointly and severally liable.

[lordmonar]

It's not "right" to accuse someone without any basis of evidence.  If that accusation is factually false and causes damage, the commander personally, and CAP as an entity, could be jointly and severally liable.

never said that.   If you are working in good faith....which I mean you are following the regs, you have a reasonable suspicion, and reasonable evidence for that suspicion,.... then you are not making accusations "without any basis of evidence".  It just means we do not have to have the fidelity of evidence that a DA would need to bring a case to trial.

If SM X came to a meeting with alcohol on his breath and seemed to be inebriated.....that's all I need.  I don't need a field sobriety test, or a BAC sample.    It is just CAP.

If I'm wrong.....then I'm wrong....and you can sue me to your hearts content.  Have fun. 

[JeffDG]

It's not "right" to accuse someone without any basis of evidence.  If that accusation is factually false and causes damage, the commander personally, and CAP as an entity, could be jointly and severally liable.

never said that.   If you are working in good faith....which I mean you are following the regs, you have a reasonable suspicion, and reasonable evidence for that suspicion,.... then you are not making accusations "without any basis of evidence".  It just means we do not have to have the fidelity of evidence that a DA would need to bring a case to trial.

If SM X came to a meeting with alcohol on his breath and seemed to be inebriated.....that's all I need.  I don't need a field sobriety test, or a BAC sample.    It is just CAP.

If I'm wrong.....then I'm wrong....and you can sue me to your hearts content.  Have fun.

Not going to be your decision anyway.  You've foresworn ever wanting to be considered for command anyway, so not your problem.

[lordmonar]

Used to be my problem and as a former commander advising my current commander most certainly something I would be involved with. 

[Private Investigator]

So after two weeks of discussion has the Cadet reached "their moment of clarity"?   

[LSThiker]

First off.....the guy you need to talk to is your wing commander....he is the guy who determines "if there is enough evidence". 

Depends.  If your wing has Groups, the Wing Commander will never see a termination action, either directly or upon appeal.  The appeal is to the Group, and from there to MARP.

The wing commander is to be notified:

Within 10 days of the commander's decision to terminate, the letter of notification should be delivered by personal delivery to the member or a copy mailed both by certified mail and by regular mail to the member's residence address as recorded in the membership unit. At the time the letter of notification is sent to the member, a copy of the letter will be sent to the appropriate approving authority, to the wing commander (if the approving authority is below wing level) and to NHQ/DP.

Also, even during an appeal, the wing commander, assuming if the approving authority is at group, should be notified.  While not stated in black and white, it would be hard for the wing commander (next higher level) to determine any possible conflicts of interest:

In the event the approving authority is determined by the next higher level commander to be disqualified from making the final decision due to an impermissible conflict of interest, the next higher level commander shall appoint another commander at the same level to act as the approving authority and appoint the appeal board.