Admission at medical : marijuana

[geowrian 22,338]

35 minutes ago, implife said:

Two years ago???

Why would you ever bring this up? Under what circumstances?

Forget it. No one will care. You are not an addict.

No need to bring it up...it's typically on the form and they will ask about past usage.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, geowrian said:

No need to bring it up...it's typically on the form and they will ask about past usage.

I don't think one puff qualifies as past usage. I don't think it would have been found in a drug test even right on the next day. It's so small to be insignificant. 

 

And BTW, here in California if you drive the speed limit, you're creating danger on the road. And I've never met a single American that waited until 21 to try drinking. So yeah, it's full of honest, law abiding citizens who drive 5 mph and more over the speed limit and have had alcohol before the age of 21 and this speaks nothing about their character. Not all laws make sense. 

[Limey 551]

13 hours ago, Orangesapples said:

I don't think one puff qualifies as past usage. I don't think it would have been found in a drug test even right on the next day. It's so small to be insignificant. 

 

And BTW, here in California if you drive the speed limit, you're creating danger on the road. And I've never met a single American that waited until 21 to try drinking. So yeah, it's full of honest, law abiding citizens who drive 5 mph and more over the speed limit and have had alcohol before the age of 21 and this speaks nothing about their character. Not all laws make sense. 

However, immigrants are held to a higher standard than US born citizens

1) they have to be vaccinated (with exceptions). No requirement on US born citizens to do so

2) if we want to become citizens we have to pass a test about history, constitution etc.

3) we are asked questions like whether we are communists, or want to oppose the US govt etc. Citizens have rights about freedom of speech and association.

 

I'm not complaining about it, just stating the facts. If we're treated by a different standard on these things, why not on obeying the law too? The US doesn't have to let us in, so it makes sense that they'd set the bar a little higher for those wanting to come here.

[Boiler 46,322]

13 hours ago, Orangesapples said:

I don't think one puff qualifies as past usage.

A bit like pregnancy?

[LionessDeon 2,060]

http://www.visajourney.com/sitesearch/?cx=partner-pub-3407508467788263%3A9725800110&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF-8&q=admitted+to+marijuana+on+medical&sa=Search&siteurl=www.visajourney.com%2Fforums%2Fdiscover%2Funread%2F&ref=&ss=9776j11199118j34

 

 

You can read up on the hundreds of posts already made on this topic

[Orangesapples 1,954]

3 hours ago, Limey said:

However, immigrants are held to a higher standard than US born citizens

1) they have to be vaccinated (with exceptions). No requirement on US born citizens to do so

2) if we want to become citizens we have to pass a test about history, constitution etc.

3) we are asked questions like whether we are communists, or want to oppose the US govt etc. Citizens have rights about freedom of speech and association.

 

I'm not complaining about it, just stating the facts. If we're treated by a different standard on these things, why not on obeying the law too? The US doesn't have to let us in, so it makes sense that they'd set the bar a little higher for those wanting to come here.

But one puff is not past usage. It's very insignificant and probably wouldn't be detected. So I don't think taking one puff qualifies as breaking the law. You can't really call that person law breaker in any meaningful way. I'm not even discussing how ridiculous the law is and that people should not be punished for substances they put in their own bodies. 

[geowrian 22,338]

9 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

But one puff is not past usage. It's very insignificant and probably wouldn't be detected. So I don't think taking one puff qualifies as breaking the law. You can't really call that person law breaker in any meaningful way. I'm not even discussing how ridiculous the law is and that people should not be punished for substances they put in their own bodies. 

That's fine. But immigration considers it usage (as evidenced by some individuals having received a ban based on "one puff"), and when going for a visa that's what matters. Whether or not it would be found on a test is irrelevant with regard to a truthful answer to the question.

If/When asked, one can state the circumstances to the physician and they can make the determination. They are either qualified to make said decision, or can refer the applicant to somebody who is qualified to make that decision.

 

Nobody (here) said laws make sense or that everybody always follows every law at all times. But immigration law has certain requirements to qualify for a benefit, which is much different than the criminal or civil codes.

Edited December 18, 2017 by geowrian

[Limey 551]

22 hours ago, Orangesapples said:

But one puff is not past usage. It's very insignificant and probably wouldn't be detected. So I don't think taking one puff qualifies as breaking the law. You can't really call that person law breaker in any meaningful way. I'm not even discussing how ridiculous the law is and that people should not be punished for substances they put in their own bodies. 

If one puff isn't "past usage" then is two? Or three? Does USCIS define how many puffs constitute reportable usage?

 

I'm sure that many people who only had one or two puffs many years ago don't report it, but difficult to argue that they are being honest in that case.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

1 hour ago, Limey said:

If one puff isn't "past usage" then is two? Or three? Does USCIS define how many puffs constitute reportable usage?

 

I'm sure that many people who only had one or two puffs many years ago don't report it, but difficult to argue that they are being honest in that case.

I would say getting high is the limit. If you never had enough to be even slightly affected by it, then I wouldn't say it counts. It's not dishonest to say no in that case. 

[Unlockable 7,316]

47 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

I would say getting high is the limit. If you never had enough to be even slightly affected by it, then I wouldn't say it counts. It's not dishonest to say no in that case. 

Then people who use multiple times can get around it by saying they never "got high" from drug use.

 

Say a girl takes one puff of marijuana with her bf when they hang out with his friends once a week. Once a week she only takes "one or two puffs" but she doesn't feel she gets high. After one year she will have used a drug over 50 times. Should she get a pass because she feels she didn't get high? Just a hypothetical question for thought.

[Limey 551]

4 hours ago, Orangesapples said:

I would say getting high is the limit. If you never had enough to be even slightly affected by it, then I wouldn't say it counts. It's not dishonest to say no in that case. 

Well tell the doctor "I tried it but didn't get high". That's honest.

 

Saying you've never tried drugs when you have is dishonest.

[Boiler 46,322]

So if you have a few Beers but do not get Drunk = you do not drink?

[chi6488 94]

Enjoy your video chats after being denied the K1 and wait the allotted time for admission. Maybe someone with common sense will let it slide

 

Edited December 20, 2017 by chi6488