Safariland is in deep doo-doo

[Suck My Glock]

On another forum I hang out on, someone posted this;...




I am sure many of us have bought products from Safariland over the years, as they have long been a major supplier of holsters and related carrying and shooting gear.

But I just read about this:

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/28/cheap-field-drug-tests-are-finally-getting-called-out-by-courts-as-the-bullshit-they-are/

I did not realize Safariland produced these garbage tests, or I would have spoken up sooner. In any case, I will never buy anything from Safariland again, at least as long as they continue producing these completely unreliable, unethical, and immoral field drug test kits. These kits have been widely used by law enforcement for many years, frequently providing an excuse to violate people's Constitutional rights. Fortunately the courts are at least starting to recognize these test for the garbage that they are, and are beginning to disallow them as evidence or probable cause. The courts may also eventually allow the manufacturers of these tests to be potentially held liable for the damage these tests cause:

Quote
In September, a federal judge ruled that field test sellers can potentially be held liable for harm caused by erroneous results.


However, these recent (slightly / potentially) positive developments in no way absolve Safariland (or any other manufacturer) of their culpability in producing and selling these garbage tests in the first place.

I would recommend that y'all use your dollar vote and discontinue supporting Safariland (and any other company that produces these bogus field drug test kits) in any way, as well.

 

[Joe_Blacke]

I guess if you are a druggie, you might care.

 

[Lobo2087]

Never had a field test show positive for a substance that was not confirmed by lab test and arizona does not allow prosecution off only field test results, prosecution requires confirmation by lab test for type of substance and useable quantity.

But Im sure someone here knows someone who knows someone whose cousin knew someone who dated someone that knew who it happened too

 

[QuietM4]

Illegal drug addicts are being unfairly treated? Oh, no....looks like my "give a shit" meter is empty.

 

[Crippledtrigger]

I have used hundreds of tests from Safariland. As Lobo said they are not used beyond the presumptive field testing stage.

All actual charges depend on laboratory verification. Field testing is all they were designed for. They were never intended to be used in court essentially because the tiny ammount used to test is destroyed and can't itself be verified in a lab. A person may very well be arrested based on the test being positive but without a laboratory verification it would go nowhere. So you have a choice, blame the test for the drug users choices and getting caught or blame the drug user for his choices and getting caught. I guess the answer says more about you than the test kits.

Prisons and jails use the results for their internal discipline. No new charges.

With the exception of older marijuana charges where people could have been arrested for a few seeds found laying about no one today would be arrested based on the tiny ammount needed to test. There would have to be, as stated, enough for laboratory testing and verification so there is no doubt as to weather the person has the substance in their possession.

Drug addicts are always filthy and there is always evidence of their drug of choice laying all over the place. It's not too difficult to find. Safariland is not responsible for any damage to anyone from their own personal choices.

A bunch of handwringing pearl clutching outrage addicted pussies.

 

[mtptwo]

Illegal drug addicts are being unfairly treated? Oh, no....looks like my "give a s***" meter is empty.

This isn't about drug users, it's about the people that got tested that resulted in a false positive losing their rights.

 

[Joe_Blacke]

Illegal drug addicts are being unfairly treated? Oh, no....looks like my "give a s***" meter is empty.

This isn't about drug users, it's about the people that got tested that resulted in a false positive losing their rights.

Except that doesn’t happen. Field tests aren’t admissible in court. Your fake innocent people don’t exist.

The standard for evidence in court is quite clear. That is why law enforcement uses an actual criminal lab.

 

[tunnug]

the list of “illegal” substances deemed illegal by faulty field tests: donut crumbs, cotton candy, honey, aspirin, and diesel-Quote

Did you guys even read the report before the "druggies get what they deserve" posts.

 

[Joe_Blacke]

the list of “illegal” substances deemed illegal by faulty field tests: donut crumbs, cotton candy, honey, aspirin, and diesel-Quote

Did you guys even read the report before the "druggies get what they deserve" posts.

Did you even read that field tests aren’t admissible in court to determine if a substance is an illegal drug?

Before the state prosecuted a case it gets the results from a real crime lab.

Same as a DUI and using sobriety tests and portable breath testers. They only lead to probable cause for an arrest. After an arrest, the person then has to give blood, breath, urine, or other bodily fluid. Usually it is the breathalyzer that is used. The results of the breathalyzer is what is used as evidence of their BAC.

So the results from the crime lab determine if they were in fact illegal drugs.

 

[Crippledtrigger]

Ignorant outrage.

 

[Suck My Glock]

In posting this, I knew it was likely to cause some arguing and be controversial. But as long as it is done calmly and respectfully, I think this can be positive.

For me, the more salient point is the liability for Safariland now that the federal judge has cleared the way for them to be sued by anyone who can show cause. And that will ultimately be the test of whether the group of people allegedly harmed are indeed just a phantom or real.

While field test kits are not used here with our members as they apparently are in some other jurisdictions, wherever they ARE being inappropriately relied upon,...this seems to spell the doom for those practices wherever that actually is. Which is positive, I think we can all agree.

 

[tunnug]

the list of “illegal” substances deemed illegal by faulty field tests: donut crumbs, cotton candy, honey, aspirin, and diesel-Quote

Did you guys even read the report before the "druggies get what they deserve" posts.

Did you even read that field tests aren’t admissible in court to determine if a substance is an illegal drug?

Before the state prosecuted a case it gets the results from a real crime lab.

Same as a DUI and using sobriety tests and portable breath testers. They only lead to probable cause for an arrest. After an arrest, the person then has to give blood, breath, urine, or other bodily fluid. Usually it is the breathalyzer that is used. The results of the breathalyzer is what is used as evidence of their BAC.

So the results from the crime lab determine if they were in fact illegal drugs.

I did read that, meanwhile you're sitting in jail waiting on the results at the mercy of whoever is in charge with the potential of losing money/jobs and then having to fight them to clean up your record and good luck with making up the loses because of that.

 

[Lobo2087]

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

 

[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

 

[Lobo2087]

Clyde, I have already tried to explain a person does not get booked generally without additional verification of the substance. When a field test is conducted and the substance is sent for lab testing long form charges are submitted. This means later, if the substance confirms illicit; you will get court appearance information from the prosecutor's office.

It appears this is some meandering in another state not arizona. It is in relation to INMATE testing IN prison not roadside arrests

 

[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_query=police+planting+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_query=police+planting+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.