# Navy Drugs Bust



## loylobby (Sep 23, 2007)

The RN have had another drugs bust but not where they would want to!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...r-class-A-drug-aboard-Royal-Navy-warship.html


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Wonderful isn't it. A Navy to be proud of.


----------



## John N MacDonald (Apr 1, 2008)

I don't know what these sailors were thinking about! Unfortunately a lot of the younger generation appear to think it's ok to take drugs and think they will not become addicted!
I have seen what has happened to quite a few of these kids and have had to inform their parents of their untimely death due to drugs overdoses.
I don't know what the cure is as very little seems to impress drug addicts.


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Little to do with drug addiction, I'd have thought, as it seems to be cocaine rather than heroine and the like, but much to do with taking drugs because they want to. I should imagine that an addict would find it very hard to keep, and take, a regular supply on an RN ship.


----------



## LEEJ (Mar 25, 2006)

My generation drank - this generation does cocaine. It is the culture and I think older members would be astonished at how widespread cocaine use is amongst the general public -of ALL classes.


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

Chouan

Of course this is to do with drug addiction. It does not matter what the drug is, cocaine, heroine or nicotine or whatever. They are all addictive and all killers. The sooner we stop saying one or other is more powerful than the other is the day we may start getting to grips with the situation. Nicotine should be banned as well. It is what drives smokers, makes them bad tempered when they can't get that fix, and why they do not want to give up just like any drug. And of course, smoking alone kills the smoker as well as others. The same for other drugs, they are all lethal. 

It also does not matter whether you are a sailor or whatever your status. We are all humans. Once you have tried these addictive products including alcohol you want more. Many can curb this addiction whatever it may be, but many can't. I worked directly with this for years so knew that such addiction knows no bounds, it affects us all no matter who we are. If these sailors wanted drugs, they would find some way of getting them. 

They only want to take them because they are addicted, purely and simply. 

The only way to cure this is to ban all addictive drugs. If not, those hell bent on finding them will. But that will never happen, so we are stuck with it whatever the drug may be or whoever takes it. 

David


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Sorry, I was referring to the difference between physical and psychological addiction, I suppose. Your heroine addict is physically addicted, whereas in many cases, your cocaine addict, for quite a long while is only psycholgically addicted.


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Chouan,

Sorry for being pedantic: It is heroin. The one you use is, I believe, a female star usually in the movies some of whom I'd love tio get addicted to! 

Jonty


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

Sorry, my mistake!


----------



## lesbryan (May 30, 2008)

Chouan said:


> Wonderful isn't it. A Navy to be proud of.


Yes still a navy to be very proud of .Just kick these ******s out with a spell in colchester first (MAD)


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Chouan - no probs!

Drugs are freely available anywhere you want them to be. It's a curse that we can't stop, despite best efforts. However, in the Armed Forces they should be severely punished by a spell at Colchester and then civvy prison - maybe then the louts who think it's dead cool to do it might think twice.....

Jonty


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

All part of a general malaise, I think. Proper uniforms don't suit them anymore, so they have to wear combat gear with big boots for some reason (I know that that is directed from above, but its part of the same thing). They take i-pods and MP3 players on ops. They sneak mobile phones into briefings and then sell the recordings to newspapers. And now this. I know that Navy people got into trouble before, but are they so short of people that they accept people with no concept of honour or idea of how to behave at all now?


----------



## Hugh MacLean (Nov 18, 2005)

*Drug abuse*

I was aboard a frigate in 1980 on a visit to Amsterdam. There was dope available in every bar we visited and the locals were trying very hard to sell it to us - in this case it was Cannabis. Anyway, we sailed and arrived back in UK waters where we were met by the SIB. They found a substantial haul of the stuff onboard and took away several ratings. This incident I think was one of the first involving drug abuse among the crew of a British warship.

All the ratings were sent to DQ's (Colchester, I think) and then dismissed the service. As far as I understand it, the military, all services, have a zero tolerance approach to drug abuse and I would imagine they will all be dismissed the service if found guilty. If they are guilty I have absolutely no sympathy for any of them - they have brought dishonour to themselves and to the RN. 

Regards


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

I refer to David & Hugh's posts which are both informative. I think that Hugh hit the nail on the head that it was the fact that there were so many pushers around while David indicated a similar scenario. If one assumes that the RN regularly test their personnel for drug use then one must assume that these sailors had previously been tested (including prior to being accepted by the navy) & had shown negative results. We are all grown persons & many of us are sailors & we know what we've been offered in ports all around the globe & in many cases sampled & enjoyed: most of us got away with it although I'm not talking drugs here.

HM vessel after longish patrol in cramped quarters without daylight in accommodation arrives in Santos for R&R. Lads go up the road to the Love Story Bar, have a few bevvies and are presented with all sorts of offers they can't refuse. Somehow get back to the ship & later get tested & their world & career is ruined. The inference here is that they are not addicts but that they tried it - I think some of our statesmen have indicated likewise but don't end up in Colchester. It may have been better for the RN to sort out their own domestic problems & shut-up about a hiccup while rehablilitating & educating thier men who, as we are always reminded, put their lives on the line for whatever reason. Why did they tell the press? 

Those of us who know (& love) Santos should wonder about the intelligence & competence of whichever senior naval officer that made the descision to give our matelots a carte blanche in that port.

I ask one question: Did the jobsworth who crucified these guys actually find drugs on their person or in their possesion? 

I have a little authority in the matter of shipborne drugs as I was the editor of The Manual to prevent Drug Smuggling in Reefer Ships published by Cool Carriers in the late 1980s & provided to more than 400 ships.

If your child takes drugs, look at yourself.

Honestly,
Tony


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Tony,

At the risk of sounding pompous or 'tree hugging', it is more factual to state that the root cause of drugs useage is from peer pressure and the demands of a society that makes that useage 'glamorous' and a 'social neccesity'. After all, drug taking is done by people in the public eye and often is seen as being done with impunity too. So what is good for the likes of pop stars and models etc is good enough for Joe Anybody, 18 of Anytown UK.

Working with offenders - and their families - I am now no longer surprised when - having just discovered their offspring is a drugs user (casual or otherwise) - the first question I hear families say is 'What did we do wrong?'. The answer is usually that they didn't. The pressures on youngsters today are immense - from possessions (the latest mobiole 'phone) to 'recreation' (everyone else is doing it).

So saying 'if your child takes drigs look to yoursel' could be misinterpreted as being the definitive cause when, in actuality, it isn't. It isn't quite as easy as that.

Jonty


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

?? like the two women talking about a third lady. it was said "her sons in the navy, quite high i believe" now i understand what she was talking about...LOL


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

for tony breach..

may i ask?..........

by "jobsworth" do you imply that the task of investigating drug abuse in h.m. forces is not neccesary?

would it be considered correct if every senior officer cancelled shore leave wherever he considered his crew to be of so low a calibre as to be incapable of refusing drugs?

do you regard the suppression of the results of such an investigation as being
desirable? if so......is this to protect the guilty? or the navy? or the taxpayer to funds the navy?


does the reference to "your child taking drugs" apply to adult volunteers in a professional navy ?


best regards..................


----------



## Pompeyfan (Aug 9, 2005)

I repeat what I said in an earlier post that drug addition knows no bounds. If these men had tried drugs before whether class A or Class Z they will be tempted no matter what rank or how highly trained.

There is no excuse for what they did, and will almost certainly be kicked out of the Royal Navy, and rightly so. We cannot have people like this in the armed services.

However, it must be understood why they did it and try to get to the root of the problem to make sure others do not fall into the same trap, but sadly that is unlikely to happen.

Jonty is right when he mentioned peer pressure, and of course working with it like he does he speaks with great authority.

The problem is although these sailors will be chastised, they are by no means alone. Like I said if they had tried drugs before they may have been tempted if thrust into their face ashore, and peer pressure could have made others try it. They had been at sea, and we all know what that is like, how being away for so long can affect us all. As far as I am aware, no drugs were found on board. These sailors could well have thought they would get away with it. They didn't and the message is there for all even though they would have known they should not do it.

The Royal Navy has a drug education programme. All personnel must attend a lecture once every two years setting out navy policy on drugs as well as explaining about the effects and answering questions. One of the deterrents the RN has in the fight against drugs is the compulsory drug testing scheme. This team has the power to test anyone in the RN at any time. Individuals provide a urine sample, which is sent to the lab for testing for a wide variety of illegal drugs. The normal procedure for a person who is found to have taken drugs is a dishonourable discharge.

That is the background so these sailors knew the risks but still willing to take them possibly because of the power of the drugs, being at sea for a long time and so on. No excuse, but as I said before, they are human, and the body sometimes takes over just as it does when the smoker has gone without a *** for a while and would do almost anything to get that fix. And that is not a banned drug, but just as addictive.

As a medical professional I see no difference between physical and psychological addiction. I am not qualified in Psychology, but medically addiction is basically where the body relies on these drugs of whatever class that develop into physical dependence. When they can no longer get this drug, they go into withdrawal symptoms. 

The trick is to stay away from them, never try them or have strong will power if you have. Many have, especially trained servicemen. But there where always be a few who cannot resist despite knowing what will happen if caught which seem to be the case here?.

David


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

Hi Sparkie,

No, not implying that at all just that it would be better to find out the depth of the problem. Did they go ashore & do a bit of drugs for the first time or are they hardened addicts & have their own supplies on board. 

If the RN put a ship into a specific port for R&R they should, as a duty of care, assess the vulnerability of their personnel to the risk of exposure to the known vices of that port. If considered to be a high risk port it would be wise to consider its suitability for the intended purpose. 

I am not discussing suppression of results, I am asking why they made it so public. It it was a one off incident on that ship as far as I can see. Frankly, I beleive that the RN needs to clean its own house in private. 

The reference to parents of children taking drugs is general. There is no doubt that the family unit is not what it was & parents have in a great many cases lost control. In many cases the parents have themselves taken drugs -if one is in public life it is called "experimentation" and is apparently socially acceptable. There are parents & children who see Amy Winehouse as a role model. 

These sailors are probably just the victims & their lives may be changed forever - if they become jailbirds then the RN has failed them. OK, lock them up for a couple of days, stop a months pay, test them daily, give them no shore leave for a long period & send them on a service controlled special course but don't publically pillory them as they may well be lost forever. 
The criminals are the producers, smugglers & suppliers.

Best regards,
Tony


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

This thread could go much broader as drugs are endemic at all levels of society nowadays. At the units I work on - and these are secure units - patients still fail random drugs tests. Why? Because drugs are freely available on site. One unit has a bad problem and despite crackdowns and other searches, drugs continue to find their way onto the units.

Despite education and the fact that there is also increasing evidence of a link between cannabis and mental health problems such as schizophrenia, individuals with a history of mental health problems, depression or paranoia still use. A recent crackdown showed that a pusher off one of the units - in there for severe schizophrenia and sectioned under the MHA'83 - was supplying to all inmates via the gym. The drugs were taped under a speciofic seat and buyers would sit next to him, hand the money over, and then be told where to go. Fortunately, two random tests on two of my clients set alarm bells ringi8ng and the method was found and stopped. The amazing thing is, they still get drugs onto a unit.

Is it staff? There is a suggestion there may be involvement. Is it visitors? Definitely. Patients transferred to us from Prison also say that drugs are readily available sometimes with staff turning a blind eye.

The moral being - you can get them anywhere.

Tony, you say many parents have lost control and that in many cases have used themselves. That's a generalisation, in fact. I think if you do some research on it you will find that it depends on age. Parents who are now in their 40's and 50's will show as unlikely or low history of useage themselves. Parents under 30 and definitelt ynder 20 will show an above average - the drugs of choice being ecstacy etc.

It is a 'youth' thing in the main. It is seen as cool and very neccessary (as you point out) and I have always thought that the best deterrent is seizure of assets, compulsory prison and an aggressive drugs educationprogramme as part of the sentence. However, we have the Human Rights Act....Imagine what might have happened if Ms. Whine House had had her assets seized and been imprisoned. Maybe that would have deterred a few youngsters from taking and made them see that when the authoprities say they mean business, then they really do.

Jonty


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

I am not in any way surprised at the amount oof drugs coming innto this country.
Approximately 1990 I ordered a new golf club direct from manufacturers, my wife phoned me up to tell me it had arrived. As we lived not to far from Hull at the time and the ship was berthed in the KG dock at Hull she brought it over. She asked at the gate where the berth was, after giving her directions they waved her through. We then drove back out to the local driving range, again we were not stopped. Finished on the driving range drove back to the ship, again were not stopped. Had a shower and took my wife for a meal, again were not stopped, back to the ship and then my wife drove home again were not stopped.
That was six times in total we passed the dock gate in a matter of about three hours and not once did the security people stop us or check the car.

Robert


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

sorry tony.......

i dont see how the forces can be seen as failing adult volunteers, highly disciplined and trained, who go ashore of their own free will and buy and consume drugs.

it is their decision........

they are at fault..........no one else

on the point of keeping drugs abuse investigations "in house" in h.m. armed forces.........

can you imagine the fallout when the "News of the world" gets hold of a
cover up?

who resigns first? minister of defence? first sea lord?

on the very valid point you made about politicians refusing to comment on their own misuse of drugs.........they should be treated in exactly the same way if found to have broken the law in the same manner.


----------



## lesbryan (May 30, 2008)

RN has failed them
NO NO they have failed themselves as rspectable service personal and individuals (MAD)


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

I don't think it's the RN that has failed anyone. As has been pointed out, individuals have their own decisions to make and if they did it, they are responsible. The Duty of care only goes so far and I am sure that the RN did as much as it could.

On that note, my kid - in the RAF - says that security is so tight nowadays and random drugs testing commonplace that no one dares try it. His section (He's a Chief Tech) are - in his words - a good bunch of lads who play hard and work hard. He's had to caution one or two for being bleary eyed after a night on the lash but says (proudly) that they submit to random drugs tests with no fuss - and no results.

Seems it is the issue of when they do the tests. If they suspect that the port has a particular reputation ( and I think we could have informed them of that!) then they should have issued the caveat 'Drugs testing will be done when personnel return aboard' - and maintained it.

Jonty


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

so.........

if the druggies are caught by s.i.b. in full swing after a run ashore in some derelict albanian port......no problem...... let them get on with it.......no issue.

but if they are tested after a run ashore in say for example, santos........just an example...........
there IS an issue?


the navy should never need to issue any warning to anyone serving, anywhere at anytime.

the "duty of care" of the navy (royal or merchant) is to find drug abusers aboard ship and stamp them out.

where is the "duty of care" of the drug abuser onboard for his/her shipmates?


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Sparkie,

I meant ANY port, not just Santos. Santos was an example.

The Merchant Navy was a commercial ioperation - when I was in the Duty of Care was laughable but I hope it's changed now. As for stamping them out, it's totally different in the Merch to what it is in the Royal. The 'stamping out' is a lot harder.

Jonty


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

maybe a lot harder jonty.......

but i dont want a 2nd mate "blown away" on drugs on the bridge on the 0001/0400 watch while i am having my zzzzzzzzzz's below.

i think i was fortunate inasmuch my shipmates never gave me the slightest concern.....i never encountered anyone "worse for wear" on duty. 
i know others who have differing recollections......drink being the factor here.


sparkie2182


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Drink was always the big factor.

However, to the credit of the crews, the offending party was either 'covered' for by one of the other hands or the Mate usually issued a five star rolocking folowed by a logging if there was any doubt.

On the majority of the offshore vessels I sailed on, you were warned once. If it happened again, there was always a new face the following trip.....

But drugs? That's a whole different ball game.

Jonty


----------



## lesbryan (May 30, 2008)

sparkie2182 said:


> so.........
> 
> if the druggies are caught by s.i.b. in full swing after a run ashore in some derelict albanian port......no problem...... let them get on with it.......no issue.
> 
> ...


I disaggree if they are caught or found out wherever they are be it guzz pompey rosyth or timbuktoo!!.They should be brought to book and punished accordingly (sent to colchester then a spell in civvy nick just to top it up )There is no room for any person in any of the services Who abuses themselves and there positions with drugs .In my mind it is definitely a big NO NO (MAD)


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

that's what i said.........


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

There was a BBC report yesterday from the Probation Staff Union NAPO that 8,500 former servicemen are currently in UK prisons. That is about 9% of prisoners. It also said that the vast majority of offences were violent & related to drugs & alcohol.

Tony


----------



## lesbryan (May 30, 2008)

Tony Breach said:


> There was a BBC report yesterday from the Probation Staff Union NAPO that 8,500 former servicemen are currently in UK prisons. That is about 9% of prisoners. It also said that the vast majority of offences were violent & related to drugs & alcohol.
> 
> Tony


Its the best place for em then innit ?????(==D)


----------



## Peter4447 (Jan 26, 2006)

Without going too much off-thread, there are also a great many ex-Servicemen living rough, who have failed to adjust to life in 'civvy street'. 
Some years ago I was watching a local TV News item about a hostel for the homeless and saw what I thought was a very familiar face. I contacted the Hostel and sure enough, it was a chap I had served with who had fallen on hard times.
Peter(Smoke)


----------



## Chouan (Apr 20, 2006)

They, to generalise, live in a male society, which is focused on exclusively male activities. They are trained to rely on their mates, to socialise with their mates, usually reliant on alcohol, as that is part of the "play hard" environment, and, especially in the army and the Marines, to be aggressive and violent. If they have served for more than a few years they become institutionalised, unless they have a very strong individualised personality, as the service training is designed to make them part of that institution and to minimise their individualism.
Consequently, on leaving the forces, one has an institutionalised person, reliant on his mates who are no longer there, or on his superior officers, be they NCOs or commissioned officers, who are also no longer there, trained to act violently and aggressively, and reliant on alcohol. Most manage, but a sizeable minority do not. They are, therefore, likely to get involved in crime that relates to violence and alcohol/drugs.
There is also a considerably higher proportion of domestic violence (massively so, I can't quote the figures as I don't have them to hand) and alcoholic dependency in the forces than in the civil population.

"best place for em then innit ?????"

In terms of protectrion for the rest of the population, perhaps, but perhaps something more needs to be done to look after those who cannot adjust?


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

There is a fairly youngish man in the town where I live who lives rough and begs. It transpires that he served in the army in Iraq and probably saw things that most of us have not and hopefully never will, such as his own mates getting killed or wounded, the mutilated bodies of innocent children and other horrors of an unnecessary war.
When he came home he took to alcohol and drugs, lost his wife and family and finished sleeping rough. 
I do stop and pass the time of day with him, I never give him money for as I know it would go on more drugs and alcohol but I have bought him sandwiches, or a pasty and coffee, I have the odd time bought him the a packet of cigarettes.
I do not do it out of repect for an ex service person (politically correctness) but because we never know the cir***stances as to how people end up in this situation.
People in this situation need help rather than being berated, a case of there but for good fortune go you or I.

Regards Robert


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

Rob,

There's a truth. 

Jonty


----------



## Peter4447 (Jan 26, 2006)

Thank you for that Robert.
Although I mentioned the problem we have today with ex-Servicemen, failing to adjust to 'civvy street' has had an effect on the lives of so many over the years. The Merchant Navy is not immune and even today, I am still asked to conduct funerals for those who have no family, no friends and who have passed away alone and unnoticed and whose only history that can be be found amongst their meagre possessions, amounts to nothing more than a very worn and tattered MN Discharge Book. 
There are no easy answers as to why or how this should happen to some and yet not to others.
Peter


----------



## sparkie2182 (May 12, 2007)

"have you seen the old man, outside the seamans mission,memory failing with the medal ribbons that he wears?.......
in our winter city the rain cries a little pity for one more forgotten hero and a world that doesn't care"

Ralph Mctell


----------



## ddraigmor (Sep 13, 2006)

What was it that poet said?

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:

We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.

Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face

The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck 'im out, the brute!"

But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;

An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;

An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

Rudyard Kipling.

As true today as then - and goes for Merchant Seaman as well.

Jonty


----------

