Safariland is in deep doo-doo

[Creeker]

What do mean by “without additional verification of the substance”?

[Joe_Blacke]

No, inaccurate. In arizona when field tests are completed the individual is generally released with long form recommendations pending lab test results. If someone ends up at 4th avenue on only field testing they will be released pending hearing in the arresting jurisdiction

The only significant difference would generally be when it is a large amount and has been verified with field test supported by something like trunarc and other supportive evidence and even then after initial hearing at 4th the individual is likely released pending

But, you're still being arrested and booked even if you've done nothing wrong and the field tests show positive. It's wrong.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

Wrong.

Pretty much every time the person will simply voluntarily admit what type of drug it is even before testing. Druggies aren’t the smartest people. Their admission alone is Probable Cause for an arrest. The old school way was not to even bother with a test if they already confessed. However every department has their own policies and some do the test anyway after a confession. Police work ain’t like you saw on 80s cop shows on TV.

The other thing is that the vast majority of time someone arrested for drugs had another arrestable offense at the time. Usually we caught them with a warrant, they were shoplifting, or doing a burglary. Most cops aren’t arresting someone with a simple joint, unless they were also DUI drugs.

As Lobo said if it is just drugs, it’s easiest to cite and release (misdemeanor), or long form it (felony) through the county attorney and let them decide if they are going to charge. The county attorney won’t charge until crime lab results are in confirming the drugs.

[kenpoprofessor]

No, inaccurate. In arizona when field tests are completed the individual is generally released with long form recommendations pending lab test results. If someone ends up at 4th avenue on only field testing they will be released pending hearing in the arresting jurisdiction

The only significant difference would generally be when it is a large amount and has been verified with field test supported by something like trunarc and other supportive evidence and even then after initial hearing at 4th the individual is likely released pending

But, you're still being arrested and booked even if you've done nothing wrong and the field tests show positive. It's wrong.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

Wrong.

Pretty much every time the person will simply voluntarily admit what type of drug it is even before testing. Druggies aren’t the smartest people. Their admission alone is Probable Cause for an arrest. The old school way was not to even bother with a test if they already confessed. However every department has their own policies and some do the test anyway after a confession. Police work ain’t like you saw on 80s cop shows on TV.

The other thing is that the vast majority of time someone arrested for drugs had another arrestable offense at the time. Usually we caught them with a warrant, they were shoplifting, or doing a burglary. Most cops aren’t arresting someone with a simple joint, unless they were also DUI drugs.

As Lobo said if it is just drugs, it’s easiest to cite and release (misdemeanor), or long form it (felony) through the county attorney and let them decide if they are going to charge. The county attorney won’t charge until crime lab results are in confirming the drugs.

Do you only cite them and release them? From what I've seen, if they test a substance and it's shown to be positive, they get hooked and booked, no matter if they're innocent. Too many vids out there with cops planting drugs on innocent people as well.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... ting+drugs


Clyde

[Lobo2087]

Clyde, Why do you continually ask for input and such when your mind is clearly, to put it kindly, made up. You have no interest in hearing anything beyond what you believe the universe to be. Go speak with your circle and leave us out of it if you do not truly want to hear our thoughts and experiences.

[Joe_Blacke]

But, you're still being arrested and booked even if you've done nothing wrong and the field tests show positive. It's wrong.

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

Wrong.

Pretty much every time the person will simply voluntarily admit what type of drug it is even before testing. Druggies aren’t the smartest people. Their admission alone is Probable Cause for an arrest. The old school way was not to even bother with a test if they already confessed. However every department has their own policies and some do the test anyway after a confession. Police work ain’t like you saw on 80s cop shows on TV.

The other thing is that the vast majority of time someone arrested for drugs had another arrestable offense at the time. Usually we caught them with a warrant, they were shoplifting, or doing a burglary. Most cops aren’t arresting someone with a simple joint, unless they were also DUI drugs.

As Lobo said if it is just drugs, it’s easiest to cite and release (misdemeanor), or long form it (felony) through the county attorney and let them decide if they are going to charge. The county attorney won’t charge until crime lab results are in confirming the drugs.

Do you only cite them and release them? From what I've seen, if they test a substance and it's shown to be positive, they get hooked and booked, no matter if they're innocent. Too many vids out there with cops planting drugs on innocent people as well.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... ting+drugs


Clyde

Already asked and answered.


As for LEO who plant evidence. Does it happen? Probably. Have I ever seen it? No. What happens far more often is a 4th amendment violation. Mostly because of ignorance and not malevolence. However I’m a firm believer that sunlight is the best disinfectant. That behavior needs to be exposed, rooted out if malicious, and dealt with severely.

However, I’ve seen way more of “these aren’t my pants” types of people than actual bad cops.

[xerts1191]

Maybe Safari should just stick to making holsters

[Crippledtrigger]

They have been making these for around 45 years or more that I know of. I used them in the late very 80s I believe. So not new.

Should they stop making all the other law enforcement or military products the are outrage of the day fodder just cause some group bitches.

[needsmostuff]

Don't know a thing, just wondering, if maybe these tests are used by company quaks (Industrial Medicine) that you get sent to if you have an incident on the job ?
Results of those don't go to court but can get you fired.

[Joe_Blacke]

Don't know a thing, just wondering, if maybe these tests are used by company quaks (Industrial Medicine) that you get sent to if you have an incident on the job ?
Results of those don't go to court but can get you fired.

These aren’t urinalysis tests to see if someone is under the influence.

These are field tests to check if a found substance is indicative of illegal drugs. You need a sample of the suspected drugs.

[needsmostuff]

These aren’t urinalysis tests to see if someone is under the influence.

These are field tests to check if a found substance is indicative of illegal drugs. You need a sample of the suspected drugs.

Cool , thanks.

[Limper]

I retired from the Phoenix PD crime lab (Toxicology and Firearms sections) in 2017. If I didn't have a valid confirmation test that backed up the findings of a positive screening test then I wrote a negative (nothing present) report. While I didn't work in the Controlled Substances section, every section in the crime lab had the same basic protocol. To have a positive result/finding you have to have a valid confirmation test (typically a more sensitive method) that backs up the positive screening test. I authored multiple negative toxicology drug confirmation analysis reports that had a positive drug screen. I'm not saying those tests can't be faulty or dismissing the impact that you could be arrested because of the faulty drug screening test. Just conveying my experience working in a closely related forensic field.