Category 1 with past marijuana use?

[xsbank]

This is getting boring, let's discuss abortion,

[No Smoke, No Fire]

Haha, and just like abortion, I'm sure all sides will never really agree. But it will be interesting to see how the industry deals with cannabis, seeing as how its legalization is coming down the pipe. No pun intended

[Blueontop]

Ignorance? As there is no universally-agreed level of thc in the blood to determine intoxication, would you agree, strictly as a professional pilot, that as thc is detectable in the blood for up to 30 days, that you have no idea if the effects of thc are gone "by Monday morning?"

Still under the influence and impaired at the beginning of next week?! That's some good ass weed!

And no one is talking about smoking weed and then going flying right away let's stay on point people.

[xsbank]

Blue, on what basis do you decide when you can go flying after smoking? 1 day, three days, seven days? What do you base that decision on, when you've run out of Doritos?

[Cat Driver]

Xsbank, here is your problem ( and mine ).

I had to check my calendar to make sure I hadn't time-travelled back to 1952. The ignorance, and frankly hypocrisy, in this thread is stunning.

We are from an older generation, thus we are ignorant.

Would you hire that expert?

[No Smoke, No Fire]

Xsbank, here is your problem ( and mine ).

We are from an older generation, thus we are ignorant.

Would you hire that expert?

It's called doing just a little bit of research, because it's such a contentious topic. But hey, if that earns me the title of "expert", then great. Never knew it was forbidden to read up on things. Have fun in the past.

[Cat Driver]

Have fun in the past.

Thanks, any chance you can get together with Xsbank and me and bring us up to date in aviation so we can fit into this new era?

Hell you can start here on the forum, write up an article about your experiences and advice for flying through the ITCZ below FL180.

[cncpc]

Blue, on what basis do you decide when you can go flying after smoking? 1 day, three days, seven days? What do you base that decision on, when you've run out of Doritos?

Ah, really?

[cncpc]

Haha, and just like abortion, I'm sure all sides will never really agree. But it will be interesting to see how the industry deals with cannabis, seeing as how its legalization is coming down the pipe. No pun intended

We don't know what the effects of marijuana use are on pilots. It seems within our contemplation of human rights that pilots have as much right as anybody to smoke legal pot. I think a reasonable position to take is don't fly if pot shows up in a pee test. Yep, I know that can take 30 days or more to come clear, but its seems quite reasonable that you are safe to fly if it doesn't show in a urine test.

My personal interpretation. Everyone is free to have different ones, of course. Ultimately, you'll likely be finished in aviation if you ever are caught stoned getting ready for a flight. And you should be finished. I think companies should be able to pee test for pot, but failing a test isn't grounds for dismissal. It is grounds for a real heart to heart with the ops manager and the cp though.

[WastedFlyer]

Both the pro-weed and the anti-weed people are guilty of spreading fake facts.

Agreed. Sadly, pot has become so politicized that science has been thrown out of the window. There seems to be nothing out there but biased studies (either way) and personal opinions on what's right or wrong.

If you smoke you're probably giving your money to Hells Angels or other violent criminal organizations. Not me.

Exactly. Whether pot is harmful or not, that's the one argument that tips the balance for me, until pot is legalized and regulated. As of now, the only way to buy pot in Canada is via criminal organizations. It's telling that most people don't seem to care...

[complexintentions]

I think meatservo had the most sensible, articulate response to the issue. Defer judgment until there's more science to understand exactly what's going on with marijuana use, both short and longterm. The attempts to equate it with alcohol is what is called a "non sequitur" (look it up. The logical definition, not the literary one).

The people attempting to portray Cat Driver as out of touch are idiots. Here's a thought - tap into experience, benefit from it, instead of disparaging it. But I suppose it's always been that way, youth and arrogance always know better. I dunno, I was always taught that those with more years in the game had more you could learn from, but I guess now with the internet and apps an' shit everyone's an instant expert on everything. Although I find it amusing that potheads would try and make intellectual arguments. All I can say is I have silently thanked those older and wiser than me over and over during my career for what I learned from them in an airplane.

Cat, pretty sure that admission of any drug use or conviction still is an instant disqualification from entering the US. But they are a mess, with their federal law being at direct odds with their state law in the "legal use" states.

[Cat Driver]

Cat, pretty sure that admission of any drug use or conviction still is an instant disqualification from entering the US. But they are a mess, with their federal law being at direct odds with their state law in the "legal use" states.

Yes, that is still the situation and that alone should be enough reason for anyone who is in aviation with any common sense to treat it as using good decision making to not use it.

Conversely if anyone here can put forward verifiable evidence that the use of MJ produces a cumulative improvement in a pilots ability to operate an aircraft and make sound decisions by all means lets hear it.

By the way complex I don't really feel depressed when some of these new age thinkers try and put down my opinions about flying.

The underwriters at Lloyds of London thought my opinion was valuable enough they had me working for them as an in the field adviser to help identify incompetents in their insurance applications.

Their office in London is a mammoth fortress and they are very careful who they invite in there.

[cncpc]

The people attempting to portray Cat Driver as out of touch are idiots.

What? Cat Driver IS out of touch. Where have you been for the last 10 years on this forum. Cat isn't here to add wisdom to discussions, or to add balance, or a word of caution. Here is here solely to advance his manufactured legend of Cat Driver and to forever remind us of his experience and of our lack of it.

Nobody but . portrays himself as out of touch. His ideas on marijuana and his sanctimonious babble has nothing to do with what the OP asked.

Cat has Little Man Syndrome. You haven't talked to many people in western Canadian aviation over the past 40 years if you don't know that.

Still, I like the guy.

Call people idiots for pointing out the obvious, and somebody is going to yank your chain.

[No Smoke, No Fire]

[quote="complexintentions" I was always taught that those with more years in the game had more you could learn from, but I guess now with the internet and apps an' shit everyone's an instant expert on everything. Although I find it amusing that potheads would try and make intellectual arguments. All I can say is I have silently thanked those older and wiser than me over and over during my career for what I learned from them in an airplane.[/quote]

Yes, that is still the situation and that alone should be enough reason for anyone who is in aviation with any common sense to treat it as using good decision making to not use it.

Conversely if anyone here can put forward verifiable evidence that the use of MJ produces a cumulative improvement in a pilots ability to operate an aircraft and make sound decisions by all means lets hear it.

By the way complex I don't really feel depressed when some of these new age thinkers try and put down my opinions about flying.

To clarify, I was not intending to put down Cat Driver's opinions about flying, as I'm sure he's forgotten more than I know. However I disagree with his and xsbank's suggestion (and spreading of misinformation) that nothing is known about the duration of impairment after the use of cannabis. From what I have been reading, there is actually significant scientific consensus in it's effects and duration of impairment (where things are less clear is use by adolescents and the long term effects from that), and it seems that people who may partake in the use of cannabis are not categorically degenerates/idiots/stupid/lacking safe judgement etc.

My personal interpretation. Everyone is free to have different ones, of course. Ultimately, you'll likely be finished in aviation if you ever are caught stoned getting ready for a flight. And you should be finished. I think companies should be able to pee test for pot, but failing a test isn't grounds for dismissal. It is grounds for a real heart to heart with the ops manager and the cp though.

I'd agree with that. There is no place for being stoned, drunk, intoxicated, whatever you want to call it, and then operate an airplane. But for people to make moral judgements of individuals who may partake in something that doesn't come into contact with their professional life is highly questionable.

Exactly. Whether pot is harmful or not, that's the one argument that tips the balance for me, until pot is legalized and regulated. As of now, the only way to buy pot in Canada is via criminal organizations. It's telling that most people don't seem to care...

And that's why cannabis needs to become legal in this country. I'm under the impression that a sizeable segment of the population uses or has used cannabis in their lives, and instead of spending taxpayer money incarcerating people for minor drug offences while organized crime makes a fortune, the government could be taxing a legal product and using some of that profit to help those with substance abuse issues. And since its legalization seems to be almost a done deal, the aviation industry would do well to study up on the facts of the drug, and not just bury their heads under the sand. I think there is going to be a significant amount of contention between employers and employees once a Canadian citizen (pilots included) can legally purchase and use recreational cannabis, so why not learn how to deal with it effectively?

[Blueontop]

Blue, on what basis do you decide when you can go flying after smoking? 1 day, three days, seven days? What do you base that decision on, when you've run out of Doritos?

not that I have to worry about such judgment calls or decision making but the research and just common sense would indicate 24-48 hours at least to make sure the impairment effects had completely metabolized out of the system but using a dorito consumption scale might work just as well too

[confusedalot]

Never mind weed. If you bust the 12 hour company limit by 15 minutes, never mind the 8 hour government limit, after 3 beers over 4 hours, the TC doctors will turn you in and yer in for a helluva lot of fun..............prove that you are not an alcoholic because you drank 3 beers in a row, guilty until proven innocent.

So, if you smoke, never admit it. Yer screwed big time if you do. It is a spring loaded reactive system that sends arrrows a flyin'

Really, your answer is that you never used the stuff.

[Bede]

Just to emphasise again, a doctor can't ask you if you smoke marijuana. Or are gay, or voted for Trump. Other things, that depending on your perspective, may indicate degeneracy.

Umm, yes they can. They can also ask how many times you've had homosexual sex and decide not to allow you to donate blood.

[Blueontop]

Really, your answer is that you never used the stuff.

Or at least paraphrase slick willie, I tried it but did not inhale

[cncpc]

As of now, the only way to buy pot in Canada is via criminal organizations. It's telling that most people don't seem to care...

I'm sorry, but real criminal organisations probably account for less than 5% of the production and distribution of pot in this country. Unless you consider a criminal organisation to be someone who grows pot (admittedly a crime) and shows up for coffee at Timmies on time (demonstrating organisation).

The marijuana industry consists of hundreds of thousands of people operating in thousands of unconnected guerilla type cells. Very few of those people are involved in any other type of crime.

Not paying all their taxes, perhaps.

[SuperchargedRS]

I doubt that I know a pilot who hasn't smoked marijuana.

Never did, never will. I'm not a degenerate and I don't believe I'm alone in this industry.

No but you are a uneducated puritan.


Off the cuff I can think of way more people who dabbled in politically incorrect substances and had great success in life compared to close minded uneducated puritans.

[pelmet]

Certain things are best not said to the doctor.

[Bede]

I doubt that I know a pilot who hasn't smoked marijuana.

Never did, never will. I'm not a degenerate and I don't believe I'm alone in this industry.

No but you are a uneducated puritan.


Off the cuff I can think of way more people who dabbled in politically incorrect substances and had great success in life compared to close minded uneducated puritans.

Because your anecdotal observations are clearly consistent with research studies demonstrating a correlation between recreational drug use and success in life. And you're calling people uneducated?

I always get a kick out of dope heads like cnpc. They go to the ends of the earth defending recreational drug use making personal attacks against "puritans" like Cat who probably understand, from personal experience, the dangers of drug use. After enough recreational use, eventually their recreational use becomes an addiction and then they're the first to proclaim that addiction is a disease and they were born with it, and our tax dollars should be used to treat them just like we pay for treating other diseases.

Signed,
An educated puritan

[cncpc]

Never did, never will. I'm not a degenerate and I don't believe I'm alone in this industry.

No but you are a uneducated puritan.


Off the cuff I can think of way more people who dabbled in politically incorrect substances and had great success in life compared to close minded uneducated puritans.

Because your anecdotal observations are clearly consistent with research studies demonstrating a correlation between recreational drug use and success in life. And you're calling people uneducated?

I always get a kick out of dope heads like cnpc. They go to the ends of the earth defending recreational drug use making personal attacks against "puritans" like Cat who probably understand, from personal experience, the dangers of drug use. After enough recreational use, eventually their recreational use becomes an addiction and then they're the first to proclaim that addiction is a disease and they were born with it, and our tax dollars should be used to treat them just like we pay for treating other diseases.

Signed,
An educated puritan

I take it my boot has been buried in your watery arse sometime in the past on here. Otherwise, why would you start lying about me? It has been many years since I smoked pot, so many I can remember very little of it. So, not a dope head. I also haven't gone to the ends of the earth defending recreational drug use. I have said clearly that my personal choice was to never smoke pot and fly and I gave the reason that there is very little evidence as to the effects on the necessary skills for flying aircraft. I never said Cat was a puritan. I said he had LMS. I hardly think Cat understands, from "personal experience", the dangers of drug use. Are you lying about him now, implying he's gowed up every night and some afternoons? Recreational use? I don't think Cat has ever used pot.

Read what you wrote. Look up "rambling wanker" in the dictionary. Have a look in the mirror, and another look at what you wrote.

Addiction is not a disease. It is a choice.

There you go, wee fella. You've got your kick. Just as you wanted.