Failed DOT Pre-Employment Drug Test. Emergency Medical Revocation

[QUOTE="James331] I've heard about folks not even blowing a .08 and getting poped[/QUOTE]

You absolutely can. The 0.08 standard is just the level at which you are *presumed* to be impaired -- in other words, a BAC that high in and of itself is enough. If you blow, say a 0.02, and the officer can demonstrate your impairment with field sobriety tests or other means, then you are legally just as "drunk" as the 0.08 guy.
 
Otoh he is a good example of what happens to your brain if you bathe your nerve cells in the stuff for an extended period of time.

C'mon, the man still tours and has made great music forever. He's 82 years old so he's having a long life. Not condoning his lifestyle one way or the other.
 
He is probably right.

Otoh he is a good example of what happens to your brain if you bathe your nerve cells in the stuff for an extended period of time.

If that's the case, then I think I may just take it up. He's in better shape, mentally and physically, than any other man his age I know.

Rich
 
You absolutely can. The 0.08 standard is just the level at which you are *presumed* to be impaired -- in other words, a BAC that high in and of itself is enough. If you blow, say a 0.02, and the officer can demonstrate your impairment with field sobriety tests or other means, then you are legally just as "drunk" as the 0.08 guy.


Which is hogwash,

Based on their logic, if I blow a .08 or over but can still pass all their field sobriety tests I should NOT receive a DUI... sadly there is no money in that, oh yeah, almost forgot it's not about money, it's about "the children".
 
good news for the airman - he has begun SI -HIMS process. Should be back in the air in ... 18 months!
 
Which is hogwash,

Based on their logic, if I blow a .08 or over but can still pass all their field sobriety tests I should NOT receive a DUI... sadly there is no money in that, oh yeah, almost forgot it's not about money, it's about "the children".

Nope, it's the opposite of their logic. The law says you can't drive while impaired. The state is given a pass on having to prove impairment at .08.

If you've ever been a paramedic and had to scrape the bodies up that some drunk hit, you'd know it's more than the "children." I can almost guess I'm going to find an intoxicated driver in most of these accidents. The oddest damn one was a drunk who rear ended a stopped motorcyclist. I come on scene to find the bike welded upright to the front of the car. The biker has yanked the driver out of his car by his hair. I'm trying to keep the two seperated b y bribing the biker to let me check him out in the back of the ambulance until the police get there to haul off the drunk to jail.
 
My guess is that the OP was caught up in the moment of his honeymoon, and wasn't thinking about the FAA's views on controlled substances or his flying career when he was offered the opportunity to partake. And then consumed enough so that it remained in his system when is reported for the whiz quiz many weeks later.

In some emails between he and I, he's asked questions about Dr. Bruce and the HIMS process. What I have learned leads me to believe he isn't a habitual user. Just someone whose one time "let's party big time" event got him wrapped around the axle. He has found the HIMS AME list and is seeking guidance from someone close to him. He is aware that he is grounded for a very long time and subject to an extensive and expensive process to return.

That level and a timeline that include the elements of 'single use' and 'many weeks later' dont go together.
 
Nope, it's the opposite of their logic. The law says you can't drive while impaired. The state is given a pass on having to prove impairment at .08.

If you've ever been a paramedic and had to scrape the bodies up that some drunk hit, you'd know it's more than the "children." I can almost guess I'm going to find an intoxicated driver in most of these accidents. The oddest damn one was a drunk who rear ended a stopped motorcyclist. I come on scene to find the bike welded upright to the front of the car. The biker has yanked the driver out of his car by his hair. I'm trying to keep the two seperated b y bribing the biker to let me check him out in the back of the ambulance until the police get there to haul off the drunk to jail.


You know I work in a very ALS settling right?

Still you're not going to sell me with the illusion of "saftey" or "security", ain't no such thing my man...

So, again if I get caught up by police in a random unconstitutional stop, no swerving or anything, but still blow over a 0.08, but can pass all their tests, how am I a evil alacholic danger who needs to be stopped by our heroic police state?
 
That level and a timeline that include the elements of 'single use' and 'many weeks later' dont go together.
If the level reported was the correct one... he hasn't returned to the thread to confirm or correct.
 
good news for the airman - he has begun SI -HIMS process. Should be back in the air in ... 18 months!
Lou, for my education, is the bulk of this down time so that he can have the proven track record of sobriety?
 
So, again if I get caught up by police in a random unconstitutional stop, no swerving or anything, but still blow over a 0.08, but can pass all their tests, how am I a evil alacholic danger who needs to be stopped by our heroic police state?

The fact you can function at that BAC would indicate a very serious tolerance only achievable with regular significant abuse. Yeah, you should be stopped from flying under those circumstances.
 
If the level reported was the correct one... he hasn't returned to the thread to confirm or correct.

The detection threshold for failing the federal test is 50ng/ml. So if he had 0.77 or some other substantially lower number, he wouldn"t have failed the test.

By testing at 77ng/ml he either:
- ingested within the three to five days prior to the test (for a single exposure)
- had a chronic habit but stopped several weeks prior to test.
- has a THC metabolism substantially different from the rest of the human race.

Either way, the story doesn"t add up.
 
The fact you can function at that BAC would indicate a very serious tolerance only achievable with regular significant abuse. Yeah, you should be stopped from flying under those circumstances.
The fact you can function at that BAC would indicate a very serious tolerance only achievable with regular significant abuse. Yeah, you should be stopped from flying under those circumstances.


Non doubt, but that's not the deal, if you're not acting off why is it a DUI?
 
Last edited:
Lou, for my education, is the bulk of this down time so that he can have the proven track record of sobriety?

basically yes. MJ, being illegal, is a 1 year revocation. FAA will not even much countenance a conversation ... but airman can take advantage of the year & document sobriety during this period. i have further advised enrolling in a ~12 wk intensive out-patient program, AA or NA (90/90 the tons more ...) and a sponsor. In 11th mo can proceed to PnP evals and will be ready for submission in 12mo. Could get SI in 14th mo but i would anticipate at least 1 back and forth letter from OKC to DC back to OKC then to airman after submission. They can't make it too easy lol! No corporate entity to deal with. This airman avoided criminal charges.

this outline works for alcohol too ... but since booze is legal 6 months can be possible. depending on BAC refusal to blow etc.

At this point ... i am not this airman's HIMS-AME ... and he lives a few states away. I have provided the best free skinny i can. I wish someone had done the same for me 16 years ago ... would have shaved significant time off my rehab and return to practice/flying.
 
If the level reported was the correct one... he hasn't returned to the thread to confirm or correct.

lol ! i told him 'stick and stones'! forums and the internet can be brutal but i wish i had such many years ago!
 
Many MANY years ago, someone whose wisdom I trust, told me, " There are two ways to get high. One of them involves airplanes. You can't do both. Choose wisely".
 
I still remember the last year when you guys took me to dinner while I was in town and there was a dispencery next door. When I said I had wanted something with local flavor, I was wondering if you were taking it a bit too literal.

I remember thinking at first, "What's Mike talking about?" We really don't even notice the dispensaries anymore. They're there and you noticed how few customers they had compared to the restaurant next door. I don't think a single person went in or out anytime we were in sight of the storefront. One that's near one of the fast food joints near my office in a strip mall in a not so nice part of town, I'll sit and eat lunch in the car and watch and they're lucky if one person walks in, in an hour long lunch. The pawn shop the same owners own has three or four customers in that part of town in the same timeframe.

If you've ever been a paramedic and had to scrape the bodies up that some drunk hit, you'd know it's more than the "children." I can almost guess I'm going to find an intoxicated driver in most of these accidents. The oddest damn one was a drunk who rear ended a stopped motorcyclist. I come on scene to find the bike welded upright to the front of the car. The biker has yanked the driver out of his car by his hair. I'm trying to keep the two seperated b y bribing the biker to let me check him out in the back of the ambulance until the police get there to haul off the drunk to jail.

This is why I always had to work the other end of the radio. I'd be too tempted to walk back to the bus saying I had to check on something and let him beat the holy hell out of the idiot. Heck, we have supplies to patch him up sitting right there anyway, and if it got really out of hand I'd just call dispatch for another bus. Ha.

Nowadays most departments around here barely let a bus get anywhere near anything without officers on scene. If anyone had said there was a fight with unknown weapons, the dispatcher would slow the bus down if they were going to beat the PD to the scene, for better or for worse.

Obviously it's never that controlled or predictable in the real world, but I've heard busses pulled over and parked by the dispatcher for fairly long periods of time if a fight breaks out at an MVA. Or told to use their own discretion and they do, by waiting around the corner.

Often times the FD arrives in enough numbers to act as muscle for the Medics before PD arrives and that usually works, too.

Kinda glad fate didn't have me stay in that biz.

Never had anyone seriously hurt on the other end of the radio while I was a Sheriff's dispatch intern, but had a couple of scary moments. Getting a call from a nearly panicked Sheriff's deputy in a bad radio coverage area, knowing his backup was nearly thirty minutes out, on snowy mountain roads, wasn't a good feeling in dispatch. He called us on a land line a minute or so later and was ok, but he had us all pretty worried for a minute or two -- and it sure seemed like longer than that.

We had a call from a State Trooper in our area on the mutual aid channel who came within inches of being dead when a driver barely missed him while he was making a traffic stop on the Interstate. He was calling to give us a plate number of the idiot to see if we had anyone who could pop up out of the small town onto the highway and pull the second car over to check sobriety.

Amazingly time, speed, and distance worked out right that night, and a Sheriff's deputy managed to pull over the second car. And they were drunk. They got to enjoy a tour of the Sally port and a free night in the county jailhouse downstairs from dispatch. Trooper came upstairs and had a cup of coffee and thanked us for the help.
 
If you've ever been a paramedic and had to scrape the bodies up that some drunk hit, you'd know it's more than the "children." I can almost guess I'm going to find an intoxicated driver in most of these accidents.

You're right. I spent many years working the back of an ambulance and have no tolerance for the alcohol impaired. They were involved in most of the horrendous and disastrous incidents.

So, again if I get caught up by police in a random unconstitutional stop, no swerving or anything, but still blow over a 0.08, but can pass all their tests, how am I a evil alacholic danger who needs to be stopped by our heroic police state?

Yes, you're still and "evil alcoholic danger". Its as much about decision making as it is functionality.
 
Non doubt, but that's not the deal, if you're not acting off why is it a DUI?

Because they had to draw the line somewhere and .08 was it.

Why is it considered speeding when you drive 20 MPH over the speed limit but have better control then knuckleheads that drive 5 MPH hour under? Because you're 20 MPH over the posted limit. A BAC of .08 is over the legal limit.

Doesn't matter how well you can perform. And as others have said if you CAN perform well and show no major impairment that's just another sign of tolerance which puts you in a bad place in either case.
 
Because they had to draw the line somewhere and .08 was it.

A lot of places draw the line at .05 these days.

The effects of alcohol on motor skills can diminish due to habituation. The effect on cognitive skills is less affected by habituation. The main difference between habitual drinkers and others is that they consistently under-estimate the degree of their impairment. They think they are doing much better than they really are. There is some fun footage from driving simulator experiments.
 
A lot of places draw the line at .05 these days.

The effects of alcohol on motor skills can diminish due to habituation. The effect on cognitive skills is less affected by habituation. The main difference between habitual drinkers and others is that they consistently under-estimate the degree of their impairment. They think they are doing much better than they really are. There is some fun footage from driving simulator experiments.

Yeah, you should also see the videos on sleep deprivation or people who drive while texting as well. Those are equally impressive. So many people think they drive "just fine" while sleepy or while texting on a phone and studies show that no matter how "good" you think you are..you really aren't..

DUI/DWI incidents are definitely no joke.
 
Non doubt, but that's not the deal, if you're not acting off why is it a DUI?

"Under the Influence" doesn't specify what you can and cannot accomplish in that condition. It simply means you're "under the influence", which is objectively true.
 
"Under the Influence" doesn't specify what you can and cannot accomplish in that condition. It simply means you're "under the influence", which is objectively true.

But if you can hold a conversation, pass all the field tests how are you under its influence?

Yeah, if you can function at 0.08 you got some history, however beating the crap out of your body isn't anyone's business but yours, it's how you interface with the outside world and if somehow you can handle yourself with a bunch of booze in your system I fail to see the problem.

Frankly sober folks tail gating, folks driving tired, folks on their phones are WAAY more of a risk, about 5 years ago I almost got side swiped by a cop who was protecting and serving on his laptop while driving.


Real drunk drivers are a problem, heck yes, but the DUI system has turned into a money grab, I'd wager if all the money in fines, profits for ignition locks, lawyers, etc had to be 100% given to say, the schools, you wouldn't see nearly as many DUI arrests.
 
In Texas (Dallas County anyway) its pretty rare for anyone arrested for DUI at 0.08bac who passes field sobriety exercises to get convicted of DUI. Dallas County does not consider 0.08 to be prima facie evidence of intoxication. A conviction requires proof of imparement, such as failure to adequately perform field sobriety exercises.
 
But if you can hold a conversation, pass all the field tests how are you under its influence?

Yeah, if you can function at 0.08 you got some history, however beating the crap out of your body isn't anyone's business but yours, it's how you interface with the outside world and if somehow you can handle yourself with a bunch of booze in your system I fail to see the problem.

Frankly sober folks tail gating, folks driving tired, folks on their phones are WAAY more of a risk, about 5 years ago I almost got side swiped by a cop who was protecting and serving on his laptop while driving.


Real drunk drivers are a problem, heck yes, but the DUI system has turned into a money grab, I'd wager if all the money in fines, profits for ignition locks, lawyers, etc had to be 100% given to say, the schools, you wouldn't see nearly as many DUI arrests.

So for everyone who gets a speeding ticket are we supposed to administer special tests to evaluate their driving skills at said speed, you know - to determine if they really are a risk? No. We draw the line. You're either over it or not. Same with drugs and alcohol. If you have a license then you've agreed to this system.

If cops were actually ticketing people on their phones or tailgating then you guys would say that's a "money grab" too.

Not being sanctimonious but if one feels the need to get high or drunk then flying airplanes should be the last thing on their mind. Get your life together.
 
Who said anything about flying drunk?

Also if you're not under the influence you're not under the influence, i.e. If you can pass the tests your by definition not being influenced by the booze.
 
basically yes. MJ, being illegal, is a 1 year revocation. FAA will not even much countenance a conversation ... but airman can take advantage of the year & document sobriety during this period. i have further advised enrolling in a ~12 wk intensive out-patient program, AA or NA (90/90 the tons more ...) and a sponsor. In 11th mo can proceed to PnP evals and will be ready for submission in 12mo. Could get SI in 14th mo but i would anticipate at least 1 back and forth letter from OKC to DC back to OKC then to airman after submission. They can't make it too easy lol! No corporate entity to deal with. This airman avoided criminal charges.

this outline works for alcohol too ... but since booze is legal 6 months can be possible. depending on BAC refusal to blow etc.

At this point ... i am not this airman's HIMS-AME ... and he lives a few states away. I have provided the best free skinny i can. I wish someone had done the same for me 16 years ago ... would have shaved significant time off my rehab and return to practice/flying.
Fresh from the Dallas HIMS meeting: it's 1 year if it can be shown to be 67.107 abuse, not dependency. Onus is on the airman. It's two years if dependency......but good that the OP has started.
 
I'm saying if you can pass the field sobriety tests you arnt "under the influence" of anything.
 
I'm saying if you can pass the field sobriety tests you arnt "under the influence" of anything.

You can certainly say that, but it would be incorrect.

The field sobriety test is a very crude measure to pick up significant motor and cognitive impairment due to alcohol. You could pass it yet show significant impairment in more sophisticated testing. It is in use because the police can't haul around a testing technician with a lab.
 
Even IF person still possesses adequate motor skill to pass a field test, do you think reaction time is affected at that bac?

Judgement and decision making?
 
Im also curious about your position "I'm saying if you can pass the field sobriety tests you arnt "under the influence" of anything."

If this is your belief, why do you think flying is different than driving?

If field sobriety tests are the standard, does it not follow that having a few drinks but passing the test be ok in the air as you advocate on the road?
 
Even IF person still possesses adequate motor skill to pass a field test, do you think reaction time is affected at that bac?

It certainly can. Choice reaction time and secondary reaction time really start to go up at about 0.02 and there is a considerable difference between .05 and .08
The standard field sobriety test is a test of motor function and balance. Doesn't even touch on reaction times.

Judgement and decision making?

One of the more complex things to test for.

Had one of our local drunks in front of me on the way home from kids activities tonight. 30 in a 45 section of highway, then 60 in a 40, 1/2 way across the centerline followed by jerky corrections into the shoulder. I was just hoping he wouldn't get into an offset crash right in front of me.
 
I'm against drunk driving, I'm also against predatory policing, and there is just too much profit in DUIs for the system to be trusted.
 
I have been seriously F'd up by a drunk driver in 1995 and had my landscape altered by drunk or distracted drivers seven times in the 15 years that I have lived here. I don't think there is nearly enough profit in the DUI enforcement racket.
 
I'm against drunk driving, I'm also against predatory policing, and there is just too much profit in DUIs for the system to be trusted.

Profit for who? The cops? Puh-leese. The only people who profit from DUI arrests are the defense lawyers.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top