Honesty

[PhiLandShiR 18]

An excellent idea. More so if he drives.

No insult intended but I think he would know what pot smells like by the time he gets old enough for university...

Not that he smokes it mind you, just that he knows the smell...

I gotta warn my son, who is now in university, to stay away from parties with smoking going on. He does not know what pot smells likes and may accidentally inhale it.

[Pinay Wife 47]

Son was born and raised in the Philippines the first 17 years of his life and went to Catholic school. He is pretty much sheltered all his life. In high school, he did not socialize much, never went out with friends or classmates. He is an introvert. Now that he's in university, however, he's become more outgoing and is starting to attend parties. He has even told me there's drinking going on in the parties and he tried a shot. He's a good kid but I know that somewhere down the road, he will be very curious about other things.

I'm 47 but I won't be able to distinguish pot from other cigarette smoke. The only time I smelled it was 30 years ago when a classmate started smoking in my presence and I never smelled it since.

An excellent idea. More so if he drives.

No insult intended but I think he would know what pot smells like by the time he gets old enough for university...

Not that he smokes it mind you, just that he knows the smell...

I gotta warn my son, who is now in university, to stay away from parties with smoking going on. He does not know what pot smells likes and may accidentally inhale it.

[Minya's wife 24]

The threshold for testing "positive" for THC is 50 ng/ml or above...and the test subjects had a level way below that. Anything below that is negligible, and yes could be from passive pot inhalation, but would not be termed a positive drug test. Go back and read what I wrote. I didn't say it wasn't possible...I said you really have to be trying to inhale second-hand pot fumes, and even if you have, the drug tests would not term it a 'positive' test, because the level of THC in your urine/blood would not be high enough.

Not true:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6149279

J Pharm Pharmacol. 1984 Sep;36(9):578-81.

Passive inhalation of cannabis smoke.

Law B, Mason PA, Moffat AC, King LJ, Marks V.

Six volunteers each smoked simultaneously, in a small unventilated room (volume 27 950 litre), a cannabis cigarette containing 17.1 mg delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). A further four subjects - passive inhalers - remained in the room during smoking and afterwards for a total of 3 h. Blood and urine samples were taken from all ten subjects and analysed by radioimmunoassay for THC metabolites. The blood samples from the passive subjects taken up to 3 h after the start of exposure to cannabis smoke showed a complete absence of cannabinoids. In contrast, their urine samples taken up to 6 h after exposure showed significant concentrations of cannabinoid metabolites (less than or equal to 6.8 ng ml-1). These data, taken with the results of other workers, show passive inhalation of cannabis smoke to be possible. These results have important implications for forensic toxicologists who are frequently called upon to interpret cannabinoid levels in body fluids.

This is true but its also a very gray area as to what constitutes 'drug use'.

I believe that the courts have said that to be a 'drug user' requires multiple long term usage...

To have experimented in the past does not make one a 'drug user'.

And to ask "Have you ever used drugs?"

I would answer NO, for I may have experimented in the past but that's not 'using' drugs. I understand that many would not agree with this statement.

An example might be, a person walks into a room where people are smoking marijuana, because a person must breath its for certain that some will be inhaled. Does this make this person a drug user? I think not. But it still allows a blood test to be positive.

Not everyone lives in a black and white world...

Not even USCIS....

You have to work really hard to get a positive blood/urine test from second-hand smoke that would indicate one smoked it and not just inhaled it second hand. Prolonged inhalation in a non-ventilated area may show some THC, but the cut-off level for a positive test is high enough to rule out false positives due to passive inhalation. So it is black and white....if you smoked pot, and tested positive for it, then the answer is "yes" you have used drugs.

And USCIS does live in a black and white world...drugs are drugs and testing positive for having used them is something that could disqualify someone from being issued a visa.

[Minya's wife 24]

i'd like to think that most beneficiaries are bright enough not to go stand in a room for over 3 hours like portrayed in that study.

but don't you know its not all black and white...sometimes its gray, and sometimes you could very well be stuck in a small room windowless w/ 6 pot smokers for 3+ hours and have to go take a visa drug test the next morning.

[John&Juvy 36]

OK...people use common sense....will you....!!!!!

Google for DRUG test......depending on what substance that was used....

mostly it will explain how long the chemical stay in your BODY that it can be detected by the a test....

If it is chemical the stay in your body for a week, and some young FOOL experimented with it 15 years ago, what is the point of bring it up?

Confession regarding "cleansing of your soul" are best done in your CHURCH or with the appropriate ministry of your choice.

Amen....

quite simply because one better be honest. a lie can get the beneficiary a lifetime ban. now about the common sense part you mention above - you might consider reading the vj terms of service, specifically the part about:

• Condone or instruct, either directly or indirectly, others on how to commit fraudulent or illegal immigration activities in any way, shape, manner or method.

Agreed with Ndarangeta. All Illegal drugs have different certain amount of time to stay on your blood depend of what kind of drug you been using and if how long that you been using it. So I still dont understand why you deleted my first two post when I just told to the OP that maybe if she was using a drugs like PCP, Opium and Crack Cocaine then maybe 100% she will fail the test. Specially if she was really been addicted to it till it start affecting her mentally, physically and emotionally. Or been on jail or rehab about it. So if she didnt end to that point.... Like what happened to one of my friend, She probably still have a chance and not fraudalent....... in which part ? That she admitted that she was using drugs 8 years ago lol.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

i'd like to think that most beneficiaries are bright enough not to go stand in a room for over 3 hours like portrayed in that study.

but don't you know its not all black and white...sometimes its gray, and sometimes you could very well be stuck in a small room windowless w/ 6 pot smokers for 3+ hours and have to go take a visa drug test the next morning.

I puffy heart you sooooooooooo much

[morocco4ever 63]

When you sign the DS-156 forms it states that: "the answers I have furnished on this form are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

So if the applicant did it while unconscious then that would make it subjective. But if they clearly remember "experimenting", and they deny it at the interview, it is lying. It seems pretty simple to me.

[Minya's wife 24]

When you sign the DS-156 forms it states that: "the answers I have furnished on this form are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

So if the applicant did it while unconscious then that would make it subjective. But if they clearly remember "experimenting", and they deny it at the interview, it is lying. It seems pretty simple to me.

No...its choosing to focus not on the best of one's knowledge...but to the best of one's belief. So if you believe that experimenting doesn't make you a 'drug user' then its OK to lie on a government form.

[morocco4ever 63]

When you sign the DS-156 forms it states that: "the answers I have furnished on this form are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

So if the applicant did it while unconscious then that would make it subjective. But if they clearly remember "experimenting", and they deny it at the interview, it is lying. It seems pretty simple to me.

No...its choosing to focus not on the best of one's knowledge...but to the best of one's belief. So if you believe that experimenting doesn't make you a 'drug user' then its OK to lie on a government form.

Ah....I see now. Thanks for straightening me out. So if I apply for a government position, and the application asks my age, then I should put 35, since this is how old I feel. Am I getting it now?

[Jenn! 918]

Bottom line, we at VJ cannot advocate lying in order to obtain a visa.

All that can be said is that admitting to drug use could potentially earn you a lifetime ban. Now, let's everyone just use their common sense and interpet that as you will.

[morocco4ever 63]

Party pooper.

[Minya's wife 24]

When you sign the DS-156 forms it states that: "the answers I have furnished on this form are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

So if the applicant did it while unconscious then that would make it subjective. But if they clearly remember "experimenting", and they deny it at the interview, it is lying. It seems pretty simple to me.

No...its choosing to focus not on the best of one's knowledge...but to the best of one's belief. So if you believe that experimenting doesn't make you a 'drug user' then its OK to lie on a government form.

Ah....I see now. Thanks for straightening me out. So if I apply for a government position, and the application asks my age, then I should put 35, since this is how old I feel. Am I getting it now?

Yes...

Edited December 9, 2009 by Minya's wife

[morocco4ever 63]

My God....I have had it wrong all of these years. Imagine the possibilities!

[SMOKE 1,426]

more posts with links made invisible.

now let's get back to the topic without any bickering.

#######?

we want the real charles back!

[muñequita linda 0]

Bottom line, we at VJ cannot advocate lying in order to obtain a visa.

All that can be said is that admitting to drug use could potentially earn you a lifetime ban. Now, let's everyone just use their common sense and interpet that as you will.

Who cares what VJ advocates? If somebody has to lie to get a visa, so be it! He's gonna be refused anyway, if he admits drug usage. So, folks, be pragmatic and don't be wet blankets like the mods!