Marijuana was decriminalized in Canada in October 2018. Since that time, many Canadian police departments have implemented policies regarding officials using marijuana that would probably shock many Americans. For example, the Vancouver Police Department says that it will not impose any restrictions on their officers for using marijuana while off-duty. The only policy they will enforce is that all officers must be fit for duty when they report to work. It essentially holds them to the same standards as after-hours alcohol consumption.

Changes are happening in the United States as well. In Atlanta, Georgia, which is a state where marijuana use is still illegal, the Atlanta Police Department will no longer ask applicants if they have smoked marijuana and consider its use as a factor in eligibility to join the force. They claim that they have lost too many qualified candidates when asking them about marijuana smoking.

Share your opinions, from both the perspective of a criminal justice administrator working in a state where marijuana use has been decriminalized and from the perspective of a private citizen, on whether criminal justice personnel (in states where it is legal) should be allowed to use marijuana while off-duty. Explain the rationale for your opinions.

REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE’S RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTION AND EXPLAIN WHY YOU AGREE? (A MINIMUM OF 150 WORDS or MORE)

                                                          CLASSMATE’S POST

Marijuana was decriminalized in Canada in October 2018. Since that time, many Canadian police departments have implemented policies regarding officials using marijuana that would probably shock many Americans. For example, the Vancouver Police Department says that it will not impose any restrictions on their officers for using marijuana while off-duty. The only policy they will enforce is that all officers must be fit for duty when they report to work. It essentially holds them to the same standards as after-hours alcohol consumption.

Changes are happening in the United States as well. In Atlanta, Georgia, which is a state where marijuana use is still illegal, the Atlanta Police Department will no longer ask applicants if they have smoked marijuana and consider its use as a factor in eligibility to join the force. They claim that they have lost too many qualified candidates when asking them about marijuana smoking.

Share your opinions, from both the perspective of a criminal justice administrator working in a state where marijuana use has been decriminalized and from the perspective of a private citizen, on whether criminal justice personnel (in states where it is legal) should be allowed to use marijuana while off-duty. Explain the rationale for your opinions.

As a criminal justice administrator working in a state where marijuana has been decriminalized, I would still ask the questions of, do you smoke marijuana, have you ever smoked marijuana, and when was the last time you consumed marijuana? This would be for documentation purposes to have notated in the officer’s file. I would like to have a policy of no smoking marijuana 24 hours prior to their shift. 

My rationale for this reasoning is that if a person consumes marijuana prior to being employed versus someone that says they do not consume marijuana but may pick up the habit after being influenced to try it by co-workers. If an incident should occur with an employee after consuming marijuana for the first time an incident occurs at work and the marijuana consumption played a part in the behavior of the officer, it would be good for the employer to have notated this information prior to their start date. Being a new consumer of marijuana may have played a major role in the officer’s behavior versus his conduct before ever consuming marijuana. 

As a private citizen, I do not believe criminal justice personnel should be able to consume marijuana off-duty even if it is legal in the state, they work in. My rationale for this is that criminal justice personnel are held to a higher standard and looked upon by citizens as professional persons that they go to for help. I think that if they use marijuana and are corrupt, they will possibly take drugs from citizens to consume for themselves. I think that they will not follow the policy as directed by the department that will possibly lead to bad judgment calls and the use of force issues.

1:  The formula for the difference of two squares is a² – b² = (a+b)(a-b). To factor 81x² – 1 you first write it as the difference of two squares. In the expression 81x² -1, identify a and b; a=9x and b=1. (9x)²-12 is in the form of a²-b², so replace a with 9x and replace b with 1 in the formula for the difference of two squares.

A² – b² = (a+b)(a-b)

(9x)² – 1² = (9x+1)(9x-1)

2:

Squaring a binomial creates a perfect square trinomial: (a + b)2 (a – b)2 (a + b)2 = a2 + 2ab + b2 (a – b)2 = a2 – 2ab + b2

Factor: x2 + 12x + 36 Solution: Does this fit the pattern of a perfect square trinomial?

Yes. Both x2 and 36 are perfect squares, and 12x is twice the product of x and 6.

Since all signs are positive, the pattern is (a + b)2 = a2 + 2ab + b2. Let a = x and b = 6.

Answer: (x + 6)2 or (x + 6)(x + 6)

3:36a^2-60a+25. When factoring a trinomial, the first step is to factor out any common factors. The trinomial, 36a^2-60a+25, doesn’t have any common factors besides 1. The next step is to determine if the trinomial is a perfect square trinomial. A trinomial is a perfect square when two terms, a^2 and b^2, are squares and the other term is 2*a*b or -2*a*b, this term is twice the product of a and b. 36a^2=(6a)^2 and 25=(5)^2 are perfect squares and -60a=-2*6a*5,36a^2-60a+25, is a perfect square trinomial. A perfet square trinomial of the form a^2-2ab+b^2 is factored as (a-b)^2.  36a^2-60a+25=(6a)^2*5+5^2= (6a-5)^2

Three of the most important study designs in modern epidemiology are ecologic studies, cross-sectional studies, and case-control studies. Briefly explain each of these study designs. Also, for each design, present at least one example of a research scenario in which the design would be appropriate. 

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH MY CLASSMATE RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTION AND WHY? (A MININUM OF 150 WORDS) 

                                                             CLASSMATE’S POST

Ecologic studies-In ecological studies the unit of observation is the population or community. Disease rates and exposures are measured in each of a series of populations and their relation is examined. Often the information about disease and exposure is abstracted from published statistics and therefore does not require expensive or time-consuming data collection. The populations compared may be defined in various ways. An example would be to look at geographical correlations between disease incidences and mortality rates and the prevalence of risk factors. The mortality rate of people dying of measles in the present day in Houston and compare it to the mortality rate of the measles mortality rate 50 years earlier.

In a cross-sectional study, data are collected on the whole study population at a single point in time to examine the relationship between disease (or other health related state) and other variables of interest.

Cross-sectional studies therefore provide a snapshot of the frequency of a disease or other health related characteristics in a population at a given point in time. This methodology can be used to assess the burden of disease or health needs of a population, for example, and is therefore particularly useful in informing the planning and allocation of health resources. An example of a research scenario would be the random sample of children in the urban school elementary schools prevalence of excessive absenteeism due to poor compliance of asthma treatment.

Case Control Studies- By definition, a case-control study is always retrospective because it starts with an outcome then traces back to investigate exposures. When the subjects are enrolled in their respective groups, the outcome of each subject is already known by the investigator. This, and not the fact that the investigator usually makes use of previously collected data, is what makes case-control studies ‘retrospective. An example of research pertaining to this would be a situation in which a large number of cases of post-operative endophthalmitis have occurred in a few weeks. The case group would consist of all those patients at the hospital who developed post-operative endophthalmitis during a pre-defined period.

In your own words, what is the Constitution?

What does it say about the rights of people?  Be careful because it is not obvious what “Rights” are really in the Constitution and it would be a mistake to use that stuff “everybody knows” because it is technically insufficient and often incorrect.

Rather than taking on the whole landscape, choose 4 “rights” and give specific evidence that it is a right and from where this right emanates. Be sure what you choose truly addresses granting rights to the people specifically and not rights that you think are implied by the wording.

How would you characterize the overall position of perspective of the current United States Supreme Court (USSC)? BTW— highlighted in blue is the only acceptable way to refer to the Court the first time you mention it, and there after “the Court” is proper.

One might say that the Warren Court was more concerned with Due Process and individual rights.

This Court is likely to deal with some tough issues about privacy, and acceptable behavior towards the interrogation of non-citizens.

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH MY CLASSMATE RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE QUESTION AND WHY? (A MININUM OF 150 WORDS)

                                                     CLASSMATE’S POST

In my own opinion, the Constitution is a system of governing each state sets as rules for the justice system to abide by to ensure all citizens receive equal rights whether in criminal or civil cases. 

The Constitution says the rights of the people is protection through due process of law. This law means the courts must follow Constitutional rules or statues in judiciary settings. There are many situations when physical evidence is inadmissible because of contamination or mishandling. The evidence thrown out could be the strength of a case. Even serial killers, rapists, and pedophiles’ had escaped punishment when their Constitutional Rights were violated through evidence handling. 

The First Amendment Right to the Constitution is the freedom of speech, religion, and the press.  The laws of Congress states that no citizen is prohibited from religious beliefs, speaking their mind, or publicizing what is believed to have occurred. This law is one of the 10 Amendment rights of citizens of the United States.

The 4th Amendment to the Constitution is protection for the citizens against illegal search and seizure. These are laws that prohibit law enforcement from entering a person’s home without consent or any establishment without the proper warrant or probable cause. 

The 6th Amendment Right to the Constitution aids individuals, who have been arrested, to a speedy trial. I especially like this Amendment because individuals who are found innocent of the accused crime are not held up in a jail cell for long periods of time for a crime they did not commit.

The matter in question of the opioid crisis that rolls unrestrained throughout the United States, has a potential of being solved with the fulfillment of micromanaging the distribution of prescription opioids, broadening access to prescription drug monitoring programs, and making the overdose antidote; Naloxone more accessible.

1. Micromanaging the distribution of prescription opioid can allow clinicians to investigate prescription histories.
   1. Possessing a track on prescription use can identify early indications of mistrustful utilization.
   2. Bringing awareness to the clinicians will have them more engaged in the patients use.
2. Broadening access to prescription drug monitoring programs has a potential of providing users with skills to maintain the prescription use.
   1. Users of opioids may be using the prescription incorrectly, which leads to further harm.
   2. The users that are currently addicted may want help but don’t have access to how or where to find it. 
3. Making the overdose antidote; Naloxone more accessible, has a potential of lessening more overdose deaths.
   1. Having the antidote to become more accessible causes sudden opiate withdrawal effects.
   2. Users that no longer want to be an addict, have a easier transition into living a healthier life.

References

Iodine. (2017, April 14). How naloxone saves lives – and why it’s so controversial. Retrieved May 23, 2019, from https://blog.iodine.com/how-naloxone-saves-lives-and-why-its-so-controversial-f22e22175038

Narcan Uses, Side Effects, Interactions & Warnings. (2018, December 11). Retrieved May 23, 2019, from https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/narcan-addiction/side-effects/

Times, T. N. (2017, November 01). The Facts on America’s Opioid Epidemic. Retrieved May 23, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHlaz0kQlRE

Times, T. N. (2017, November 01). Retrieved May 23, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHlaz0kQlRE