Marijuana Possession

This thread is getting tiresome. Don't smoke pot and expect to fly. Bye, now.
 
spiderweb said:
This thread is getting tiresome. Don't smoke pot and expect to fly. Bye, now.
Click to expand...

Bbbbutt its misunderstood, there is this big goverment consipiracy, and the mexicans, just the man keeping us down, and anyone who is against it is a racist, and it cures alopecia, cancer and congestive heart failure :rolleyes2: .
 
ScottM said:
Which underlying medical condition?
Click to expand...
The one requiring the presecription of medicinal marijuana -- you know, like terminal cancer?
I clearly said prescribed this and "otherwise medically fit to fly".
Click to expand...
That's the point -- it's hard to imagine what condition requiring treatment with medicinal marijuana wouldn't in and of itself be grounding already.
 
Ron Levy said:
91.17 is not limited to operations requiring a medical certificate.
Click to expand...
91.17(a)(3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety;

So someone can fly a glider or balloon as long as they are not currently under the effects of an illegal drug?
 
Gary F said:
91.17(a)(3) While using any drug that affects the person's faculties in any way contrary to safety;

So someone can fly a glider or balloon as long as they are not currently under the effects of an illegal drug?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't recommend it -- I gotta figure the Chief Counsel would find something somewhere on which to hang an enforcement hat if they felt the urge, but who knows? And just how long do the effects of an unquantifiable dose (quantity, concentration, purity, etc) of that illegal drug involved last? There are folks who dropped acid in the 60's and still haven't come back from their trips.
 
Last edited:
You guys certainly have a lot of endurance...I'll give you that.

I'll say but one thing. When it comes to regulating drug use, only two thing have been proven to work:

1. Legalize it.
2. Kill everyone caught using it.

Since we don't have the stomach for #2, I think it's inevitable that we will adopt #1 sooner or later.

Every other form of control has proven futile.

Personally, I don't care because I'm way past my pot smoking days but, just as an observation, what we're doing today is pretty stupid and a huge waste of money.
 
Ron Levy said:
I wouldn't recommend it -- I gotta figure the Chief Counsel would find something somewhere on which to hang an enforcement hat if they felt the urge, but who knows? And just how long do the effects of an unquantifiable dose (quantity, concentration, purity, etc) of that illegal drug involved last? There are folks who dropped acid in the 60's and still haven't come back from their trips.
Click to expand...
I am not advocating psychotropic drug use by any pilot. I am just curious as to what might happen if the stuff gets legalized. Flying is hazardous enough without altering your brain chemistry. Marijuana has been detected in the autopsy specimens some pilots in aircraft accidents.

http://www.postindependent.com/article/20070208/FRONTPAGE/70208006
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/9042937.html
http://www.fosters.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101117/GJNEWS02/711179923/0/CITOPINION
http://www.newschannel5.com/story/5405782/pot-smoking-called-factor-in-teens-plane-crash
 
Gary F said:
I am not advocating psychotropic drug use by any pilot. I am just curious as to what might happen if the stuff gets legalized.
Click to expand...
You didn't ask about that part in the question I answered. If it gets "legalized," the FAA's position would probably depend on how the law was written, so that's unpredictable.
 
Unregistered said:
If marijuana was legal, the government would not only be making money off of it, but would also be SAVING money and reducing crime. They would tax the hell out of it, be able to spend much less on law enforcement and the incarceration of marijuana users. Further, LEOs would be able to focus more criminals who actually hinder society.
Click to expand...

And we, as a society, would be dealing with a much larger problem of "high" people than we do today. So now we trade the "drug war" to more carnage on the streets, in our homes? No thanks.

BTW...this ALWAYS seems to be limited to MJ. Why is it OK to legalize that but meth, heroin, cocaine must stay illegal? The same basic concept applies, if they are not harming anyone they should be allowed to do it right? Do you have a clue as to what we would unleash making all drugs legal? As has been said, there are other reasons to not do this, specifically the enforcement of DUI laws becomes nigh impossible given current technology.

At least now, if someone tokes they do it carefully, with planning (usually) to avoid getting caught. DUI convictions do not mean squat compared to a drug charge, so even those I know that do smoke it are VERY careful. That will go out the window when it is legalized.

In the end I have my view, legalizing MJ and other drugs = BAD. *shrug*
 
steingar said:
What you leave out is that we already loose plenty of people. I do agree, in the wake of a hypothetical legalization movement the number of damaged individuals will likely rise, then fall as the societal damage becomes evident. That has already happened with cocaine, despite it's illegality. However, dollars from the taxation of narcotic substances can be routed into treatment programs to try and limit the damage. Moreover, legalization would restrict the damage done to the innocent in foreign lands, where the drug trade is run by criminal organizations whose violence readily spills into the population around them, and does far more damage than addiction does here.
Click to expand...

Does anyone really believe that "legalize and taxing it" will stop the cartels? Really?
 
Ron Levy said:
You didn't ask about that part in the question I answered. If it gets "legalized," the FAA's position would probably depend on how the law was written, so that's unpredictable.
Click to expand...
Legalized was a poor choice of words on my part as I think it is much more likely that marijuana will be decriminalized or legalized for "medical purposes" at the national level which should not really change things for those who hold a medical certificate. Light Sport, balloon and glider appear to be fairly user friendly, even at this time. The OP might want to consider this option if he wants to fly at lower legal risk.
 
Last edited:
tdager said:
Does anyone really believe that "legalize and taxing it" will stop the cartels? Really?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Without the legal stigma, prices will plummet. You can grow the stuff just about anywhere. Without the money, the cartels have little reason to exist.

However, I suspect they make far more money on meth, cocaine, and all their other little pals. Personally I think all the stuff should be legalized. None of it is any different from booze. You can wreck your life with it or not. Sooner or later people will wake up and realize that they can't do the stuff and realize their potential. Behavioral mechanisms will keep the use limited.

Anyone who really thinks these substances aren't widely available currently to those who want them is in serious denial.
 
steingar said:
However, I suspect they make far more money on meth, cocaine, and all their other little pals.
Click to expand...

It is my understanding that due to pure bulk, the amount of money in the illegal system derived from cannabis is higher than all the other drugs.

Also, Cannabis is easy to grow and requires no processing. You can bale the stuff right on the farm, no pesky processing chemicals that could allow LE to trace your activities.
 
Gary F said:
Legalized was a poor choice of words on my part as I think it is much more likely that marijuana will be decriminalized or legalized for "medical purposes" at the national level which should not really change things for those who hold a medical certificate. Light Sport, balloon and glider appear to be fairly user friendly, even at this time. The OP might want to consider this option if he wants to fly at lower legal risk.
Click to expand...
I don't think any "decriminalization" or "legalization for medicinal purposes" will lower the FAA legal risk to any pilots, whether they are required to hold a medical certifiate or not. I think those risks will remain the same as they are for those pilots right now. But that's just a guess.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't think any "decriminalization" or "legalization for medicinal purposes" will lower the FAA legal risk to any pilots, whether they are required to hold a medical certifiate or not. I think those risks will remain the same as they are for those pilots right now. But that's just a guess.
Click to expand...
One thing I learned by reading this thread is that marijuana use among pilots is more common than I previously thought. I am not sure how many pilots have been caught by the FAA using marijuana other than at autopsy following an accident. I expect that the prevalence of use may increase with decriminalization. It appears that the majority of the legal risk to pilots now (other than killing yourself in an airplane) is from falsifying the application for the medical certificate. I wonder if marijuana use is more common by Light Sport or Glider pilots than pilots with a medical certificate.
 
Gary F said:
One thing I learned by reading this thread is that marijuana use among pilots is more common than I previously thought. I am not sure how many pilots have been caught by the FAA using marijuana other than at autopsy following an accident. I expect that the prevalence of use may increase with decriminalization. It appears that the majority of the legal risk to pilots now (other than killing yourself in an airplane) is from falsifying the application for the medical certificate. I wonder if marijuana use is more common by Light Sport or Glider pilots than pilots with a medical certificate.
Click to expand...

That is just untrue, and the Netherlands have shown us that repeatedly.

more than 15% of teens have tried marijuana whereas less than 8% of Dutch teens have.

Once you take the taboo away, the thrill goes along with it.


American example: Binge drinking while underage. Why do it? Because you don't know the next time you'll be able to get a drink. Once you turn 21, you rarely binge drink. I can attest to this happening amongst pretty much every set of peers I was around in college (that being: My pilot friends, my high school friends, my newlyfound college friends, my girlfriends friends, work friends, etc)


Once it's no longer illegal, it doesn't really matter anymore.

But whatever. Not that I'm for or against it(marijuana), I'm just stating the facts (Netherlands) and some anecdotal evidence of the same phenomenon happening right here right now.
 
Marijuana is extremely easy to get in most place in America. I have heard it is easier for kids (under 21) to buy marijuana than alcohol... not doubting it either.

Any type of person uses marijuana. It is not just your typical "druggie", "hippie", or kid. Those are just the stereotypical users. I assure you there are people who have excellent careers who also use marijuana, but they don't go around telling everybody they do.
 
elmetal said:
That is just untrue, and the Netherlands have shown us that repeatedly.

more than 15% of teens have tried marijuana whereas less than 8% of Dutch teens have.

Once you take the taboo away, the thrill goes along with it.


American example: Binge drinking while underage. Why do it? Because you don't know the next time you'll be able to get a drink. Once you turn 21, you rarely binge drink. I can attest to this happening amongst pretty much every set of peers I was around in college (that being: My pilot friends, my high school friends, my newlyfound college friends, my girlfriends friends, work friends, etc)


Once it's no longer illegal, it doesn't really matter anymore.

But whatever. Not that I'm for or against it(marijuana), I'm just stating the facts (Netherlands) and some anecdotal evidence of the same phenomenon happening right here right now.
Click to expand...
Nice theory but nobody knows for sure what will happen here if marijuana is decriminalized. The U.S. is not the Netherlands, there are a lot of cultural and social differences. I am heavily influenced by libertarian principles so I favor decriminalization. I am willing to admit that this might result in adverse unintended consequences. If marijuana use becomes more widespread among pilots then the FAA may start some type of drug screening process.
 
Gary F said:
Nice theory but nobody knows for sure what will happen here if marijuana is decriminalized. The U.S. is not the Netherlands, there are a lot of cultural and social differences. I am heavily influenced by libertarian principles so I favor decriminalization. I am willing to admit that this might result in adverse unintended consequences. If marijuana use becomes more widespread among pilots then the FAA may start some type of drug screening process.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying I want pilots sitting there tokin and yokin, but you get my point.

Of course for the first half decade or so the use will somewhat increase but not as drastic as people think. Right now, I can't get the figure from a source atm (I'm in TV commercials, no time!), but it's something like more than 5 or 10% of Americans smoke on a regular basis.

But anyway, sure all of a sudden people will think OMG the country is going downhill because of marijuana and all the other typical crazy comments but after the novelty wears off it'll be just like alcohol. We drink it, it's there, but only a few of us REALLY need it.
 
Mommie, for Christmas, could you ask Santa to make this thread stop? :cheerswine:
 
spiderweb said:
Mommie, for Christmas, could you ask Santa to make this thread stop? :cheerswine:
Click to expand...
You can either smoke some marijuana and you wouldn't care anymore or you can stop reading this thread. Go to quick links and click "Mark Forums Read". Another option is to start a new thread in Medical Topics and change the subject.
 
elmetal said:
That is just untrue, and the Netherlands have shown us that repeatedly.

more than 15% of teens have tried marijuana whereas less than 8% of Dutch teens have.
Click to expand...

The remaining 7% are on heroine :wink2:

I dont think the experience in the netherlands has been an unmitigated success. Their drug problem has changed, but not necessarliy decreased. The positive change has been that the police spends less time chasing around a medical problem that they are incapable of solving.
 
If we played by libertarian rules this would not be an issue. Adults could engage in any behavior including drug use as long as nobody else suffers the adverse consequences. I would allow all drugs to be sold to anybody over 25 with severe consequences (like being sent to a Turkish prison) for supplying an underage individual. If you get an infected heart valve from IV drug use you better have the cash if you want to be treated at a hospital. Nobody would be forced to pay for any other person's medical expenses, disability, unemployment, retirement or the consequences of stupidity. Employers could drug test any employee at anytime, if you do not want to be drug tested you can quit and find a new job. The FAA would be allowed to drug test you as part of a ramp check or during the exam for the medical certificate.

This is obviously not going to happen. Practically all governments in the world are increasing the economic dependency of citizens and regulating almost every aspect of our lives. New York City has banned trans fats, San Francisco won't let McDonalds put toys in Happy Meals, the federal government wants to regulate bake sales. What's next?

As a compromise I favor decriminalizing many drugs. We know that people can get them anyway. I just wish the government would stop protecting people from their own stupidity and taxing me to pay for it.
 
Last edited:
Gary F said:
As a compromise I favor decriminalizing many drugs. We know that people can get them anyway. I just wish the government would stop protecting people from their own stupidity and taxing me to pay for it.
Click to expand...


That's my biggest issue! People who want heroin, cocaine or crack are getting it at the present moment. People who want marijuana are getting it as well. When I was underage, it was LITERALLY easier to get weed than to get alcohol. Keeping it illegal does nothing aside from wasting our own dollars against what people want to do to themselves. it's ridiculous.

Should we ban racecars and fast motorcycles as well?
 
Gary F said:
If we played by libertarian rules this would not be an issue. Adults could engage in any behavior including drug use as long as nobody else suffers the adverse consequences. I would allow all drugs to be sold to anybody over 25 with severe consequences (like being sent to a Turkish prison) for supplying an underage individual. If you get an infected heart valve from IV drug use you better have the cash if you want to be treated at a hospital. Nobody would be forced to pay for any other person's medical expenses, disability, unemployment, retirement or the consequences of stupidity. Employers could drug test any employee at anytime, if you do not want to be drug tested you can quit and find a new job. The FAA would be allowed to drug test you as part of a ramp check or during the exam for the medical certificate.

This is obviously not going to happen. Practically all governments in the world are increasing the economic dependency of citizens and regulating almost every aspect of our lives. New York City has banned trans fats, San Francisco won't let McDonalds put toys in Happy Meals, the federal government wants to regulate bake sales. What's next?

As a compromise I favor decriminalizing many drugs. We know that people can get them anyway. I just wish the government would stop protecting people from their own stupidity and taxing me to pay for it.
Click to expand...

As a long-time LP member, I don't know a single Libertarian who favors our party's "official" position on drug legalization, hook, line, and sinker. Seriously. Not a single one.

Most of us favor something short of a free-for-all, such as allowing doctors to prescribe Schedule I drugs, and pharmacists to dispense them, for maintenance purposes. This is for pragmatic reasons. Pharmaceutical-grade drugs would be safer, cheaper (thus putting the illegal suppliers out of business -- hopefully), and less harmful to the community at large. We have a hard time envisioning rival pharmacists doing drive-bys and accidentally capping the old lady who just happened to be walking down the street at the time.

Having said all that, it's hard to take even the above position once you've dealt with a few people addicted to crack or any of the various methamphetamine analogs. They make heroin withdrawal seem easy by comparison. And the various meths sometimes cause immediate and possibly irreversible brain damage, as well as cravings that can last for decades. It's real evil stuff.

But marijuana, I agree, should be legalized or decriminalized, simply for pragmatic reasons.

It's not a "safe" drug, no matter what the potheads want to believe. But the potential for harm simply doesn't justify the expense of outlawing it, nor have the efforts been at all effective. It grows anywhere and requires no processing, after all.

That's not to say I think it should legal for pilots, commercial drivers, surgeons, and so forth to use, just to be clear. I just think that it's not worth the government's attention in terms of general prohibition of the substance.

-Rich
 
RJM62 said:
Most of us favor something short of a free-for-all, such as allowing doctors to prescribe Schedule I drugs, and pharmacists to dispense them, for maintenance purposes. This is for pragmatic reasons. Pharmaceutical-grade drugs would be safer, cheaper (thus putting the illegal suppliers out of business -- hopefully), and less harmful to the community at large. We have a hard time envisioning rival pharmacists doing drive-bys and accidentally capping the old lady who just happened to be walking down the street at the time.
Click to expand...

It would basically turn what is now abuse of illegal drugs into simple prescription drug abuse.


Having said all that, it's hard to take even the above position once you've dealt with a few people addicted to crack or any of the various methamphetamine analogs.
Click to expand...

Cocaine is not an expensive drug to produce (in the olden days it was used to dilate the pupil for cataract surgery, if you really want to get the DEA excited, you can still order it :wink2: ). Take it out of the illegal system and the reason to use crack instead of straight cocaine pretty much disappears.
 
weilke said:
Cocaine is not an expensive drug to produce (in the olden days it was used to dilate the pupil for cataract surgery, if you really want to get the DEA excited, you can still order it :wink2: ).
Click to expand...

We still use it as part of a topical anesthetic cocktail for suturing pediatric patient's wounds... TAC solution.. the C is cocaine.
 
Doggtyred said:
We still use it as part of a topical anesthetic cocktail for suturing pediatric patient's wounds... TAC solution.. the C is cocaine.
Click to expand...

My dentist once told me it's occasionally used in dental practice. Apparently some patients can't tolerate the synthetics.

-Rich
 
elmetal said:
more than 15% of teens have tried marijuana whereas less than 8% of Dutch teens have.
Click to expand...

As a teenager that would NEVER use Marijuana or any type of drug. I can attest that it is likely MUCH more than 15%, likely 25% or even 33% I wouldnt be surprised if it were higher than that. Of course I have no research to back this up. I have seen plenty of my friends, some of which very close (see uhh nvm the thread no longer exists) lives go to hell after beginning drug use.

I always used to take pride in if asked if I do that stuff (not criminally asked) To say "Im a pilot I do not will not and have not" Just starting to realize maybe I shouldn't take pride in it.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if we'd always have about the same number of substance abusers regardless of legality... maybe only the modality would change with legalization. I suspect you'd still have drunks, stoners, and dopers making up the same total concentration, but you might find more heroin addicts and fewer alcoholics, more potheads and fewer Valium-poppers. In dry counties where a majority of people adhere to a religion that forbids alcohol, the number of people who can't get through the day without their benzos is much higher than places where drinking is accepted. In the Middle East, I'm told, alcoholism isn't much of a problem, but burnt-out, lazy, stupid potheads are.

Maybe you pays yer money, you takes yer choice, with a relatively stable number of people whose psychic pain causes them to seek chemical nirvana of one sort or another.
 
Amelia said:
I wonder if we'd always have about the same number of substance abusers regardless of legality... maybe only the modality would change with legalization. I suspect you'd still have drunks, stoners, and dopers making up the same total concentration, but you might find more heroin addicts and fewer alcoholics, more potheads and fewer Valium-poppers. In dry counties where a majority of people adhere to a religion that forbids alcohol, the number of people who can't get through the day without their benzos is much higher than places where drinking is accepted. In the Middle East, I'm told, alcoholism isn't much of a problem, but burnt-out, lazy, stupid potheads are.

Maybe you pays yer money, you takes yer choice, with a relatively stable number of people whose psychic pain causes them to seek chemical nirvana of one sort or another.
Click to expand...
Historically the county is dry but the people in dry counties aren't the no alcohol because of religion type. It's only history that hasn't been changed.

Go to any dry county and ask anybody where to buy and they will direct you to the nearest countyline and everybody in town will know where that is.

Dry counties are a waste of time
 
elmetal said:
Historically the county is dry but the people in dry counties aren't the no alcohol because of religion type. It's only history that hasn't been changed.

Go to any dry county and ask anybody where to buy and they will direct you to the nearest countyline and everybody in town will know where that is.

Dry counties are a waste of time
Click to expand...
That's how it works. The reason counties are dry is to eliminate bars and public drinking but a social club still might be able to serve beer.
Amelia said:
In dry counties where a majority of people adhere to a religion that forbids alcohol, the number of people who can't get through the day without their benzos is much higher than places where drinking is accepted.
Maybe you pays yer money, you takes yer choice, with a relatively stable number of people whose psychic pain causes them to seek chemical nirvana of one sort or another.
Click to expand...
Down South Valium has been referred to as Baptist Booze since Southern Baptists are not allowed to consume alcohol. There are plenty of little 'ol ladies that want a daily pill for their nerves.
 
Unregistered said:
Marijuana is extremely easy to get in most place in America. I have heard it is easier for kids (under 21) to buy marijuana than alcohol... not doubting it either.

Any type of person uses marijuana. It is not just your typical "druggie", "hippie", or kid. Those are just the stereotypical users. I assure you there are people who have excellent careers who also use marijuana, but they don't go around telling everybody they do.
Click to expand...


I have a friend who is a nurse and he uses marijuana. Normal person, good at his job, together, etc. Just likes it because it makes him relax. I never smoked anything, so its just not something I want to do.
 
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