Marijuana breathalyzer

[speedog]

So a marijuana breathalyzer is potentially on the horizon - not sure how charges will hold up in court because there's a lot of variables but we can all be assured that this thing will probably be coming to a Checkstop near you at some point in the future. Link to one of the many news stories and yeah, there's news stories dating back to 2013 if not earlier - this just happens to be one the was in the news today.

To me, driving while impaired whether it be alcohol, drugs or sleep deprivation is all the same - it all impairs your ability to operate a vehicle. I know there's been times when I've been driving a vehicle while sleep deprived and I've been so lucky that I didn't get into an accident - my brother actually did run off the road falling asleep at the wheel. As far as marijuana, I am quite sure it impairs a person's ability to react to things properly - I guess the difficult part is determining what level of impairment is okay and what is not. Can they even measure that effectively?

[finboy]

i support this *IF* they have a minimum threshold that is allowable. Unfortunately because it isn't legal yet, i haven't found much in the way of tests that show how much is a safe ammount, and i doubt many people care to find out.

first hit on google, biased as it might be...

http://norml.org/library/item/mariju...tific-evidence

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/he...uana.html?_r=0

[Supa Dexta]

Originally posted by speedog
I know there's been times when I've been driving a vehicle while sleep deprived and I've been so lucky that I didn't get into an accident - my brother actually did run off the road falling asleep at the wheel.

You're as guilty as any drunk and I wish you were locked up for that.



As for the weed, this is just the gov't ramping up for the future legalization and taxation scheme they are working on. Guaranteed you will start to see more and more ads (brainwashing) about how deadly and terrible driving while high is.

[finboy]

Originally posted by Supa Dexta


You're as guilty as any drunk and I wish you were locked up for that.



As for the weed, this is just the gov't ramping up for the future legalization and taxation scheme they are working on. Guaranteed you will start to see more and more ads (brainwashing) about how deadly and terrible driving while high is.

My concern is that there will be no real science or reason behind the decisions. From the second link, they are saying impairment and increased chance of accident is two-fold, while drunk driving is twenty-fold. I would be curious to see how sleep deprivation, texting, eating, etc. while driving stack up by comparison.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Supa Dexta
You're as guilty as any drunk and I wish you were locked up for that.

It is actually quite dangerous and selfish to drive while on the verge of falling asleep.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conservatively estimates that 100,000 police-reported crashes are the direct result of driver fatigue each year. This results in an estimated 1,550 deaths, 71,000 injuries, and $12.5 billion in monetary losses. These figures may be the tip of the iceberg, since currently it is difficult to attribute crashes to sleepiness.

A study by researchers in Australia showed that being awake for 18 hours produced an impairment equal to a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .05, and .10 after 24 hours; .08 is considered legally drunk.

Several drowsy driving incidents have resulted in jail sentences for the driver.

[mr2mike]

What if you don't inhale.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Why do all the stoners always think it's perfectly fine to drive high?

The comments I've been reading on articles online pretty much seal the deal that stoners are, by and large, incapable of understanding reality. Bunch of brainwashed idiots braying on like mindless, tunnel visioned sheep. Ha.

[JordanEG6]

Originally posted by Supa Dexta


You're as guilty as any drunk and I wish you were locked up for that.



As for the weed, this is just the gov't ramping up for the future legalization and taxation scheme they are working on. Guaranteed you will start to see more and more ads (brainwashing) about how deadly and terrible driving while high is.

I'm already hearing the commercials on the radio. None of which are backed up by any actual facts (ie: deaths, injuries or accidents attributed to driving high). It simply just delivers the message that 1 in XX amount of teens have ridden with a high driver. I don't condone driving high, but the commercial was ridiculous and only designed to brainwash the already conservative public.

[dexlargo]

My understanding is that there isn't enough science to determine what amount of cannabis (and many other drugs) in the blood system basically guarantees impairment of any person's ability to drive.

I have been told that there is such wide variation from person to person with drugs (alcohol being an exception in that it has a nice, predictable curve to the effects) making an 'over 80' type charge impracticable for drug impairment.

What I think this could be is some sort of roadside screening test to determine if there is any cannabis in your system, in order to justify a Drug Recognition Expert demand, where they take you to the police station and videotape you doing 20-30 minutes of impairment testing (walk and turn test, balance test, etc.)

[ercchry]

they did a test in Washington where they got a bunch of people high and sent them around a road course and gave them a driving test, what they found is the casual users were worst off driving high while the career potheads actually improved... so yeah, i dont agree on a "breathalyzer" style test, but a roadside sobriety test would be good since everyone will react differently

[speedog]

Originally posted by Supa Dexta


You're as guilty as any drunk and I wish you were locked up for that.

Sleep deprivation - maybe I used the wrong description but while driving and over a relatively short period of time you can find yourself doing head nods and such. For some, they may very well have had a great and long sleep period before their travels, but often circumstances can still result in one all of sudden feeling weary while at the wheel.

So while you may wish I was locked up, at the same time it would be a difficult thing to prove in court that someone may have been driving impaired due to sleep deprivation. By the time an officer may have pulled someone over, chances are that that someone will have woken up quite and it would be quite difficult to assess someone as sleep deprived at that point.

[Kloubek]

I fully support legalization and taxation of weed, but in doing so I do believe a roadside test is a good idea to avoid an increase of accidents due to driving high.

While not typically as impairing as alcohol, weed still does affect the driving ability of someone whether they want to admit it or not. In most cases I don't believe motor functions are severely impaired, but brain function and judgement often is.

I don't think the amount that would be allowable is any more an issue than it is for alcohol. I've known of people driving seemingly fine after consuming a ton of drinks, but others being unable to drive after just a couple. Yet, an "allowable" level was established. I think the government needs to do a study under simulated driving tests and find out what is deemed an acceptable level.

With this said, there is currently no roadside test for other drugs which can impair a driver far more than weed. Yet, the cops still have it in their authority to take someone off the road if they believe they are impaired by other drugs as well. I just don't think it is enough to remain status quo if weed is to become legal.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE
Why do all the stoners always think it's perfectly fine to drive high?

I don't think I've heard anyone argue that, it's always "Driving high is WAY safer than driving drunk.... mannn."

Which is totally true, but doesn't mean you should be driving high either

[speedog]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


I don't think I've heard anyone argue that, it's always "Driving high is WAY safer than driving drunk.... mannn."

Which is totally true, but doesn't mean you should be driving high either

How is it safer?

Help me understand this or point us all to some credible studies that substantiate this.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by speedog

How is it safer?

Help me understand this or point us all to some credible studies that substantiate this.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3456923/

Coles notes: 30% of stoned drives failed the tests that failed 100% of drunk drivers.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by speedog

How is it safer?

Help me understand this or point us all to some credible studies that substantiate this.

instead of blowing through red lights at double the limit, stoned drivers drive extra slow with their heads on a swivel due to the paranoia

[speedog]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
[Bhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3456923/

Coles notes: 30% of stoned drives failed the tests that failed 100% of drunk drivers. [/B]

So just using this study as a guideline, should we be okay with 30% failing the tests?

Or should there be a larger study done to determine what is an "allowable" level of marijuana in one's system akin to Kloubek's post further up in this thread?

For the record, haven't smoked marijuana for over 30 years and lucky if I have a single drink once every two months and as such, any new or updated impaired driving laws serve only to protect me from other people's actions. For the most part, I fail to understand why people would be against an "allowable" limit to be set if there was a measuring system in place akin to alcohol breathalyzers - yeah, some people's bodies process or handle alcohol differently than others no different than marijuana and as such, why the opposition to a set impaired limit for marijuana?

Yeah, yeah, I know - government cash cow, government control, government whatever but when I look over and see someone actually toking up in the vehicle next to me at a red light, I have to wonder exactly how safe that driver is on our roads.

[Toma]

Really? and all this time when I have observed "those under the influence", ANY amount results in a 500 fold slowing of reflexes and cognitive function

A guy I once worked with would smoke some just a bit to "take the edge of his nerves", and would then take 3 hours to do a 1 hour job. lol.

[Supa Dexta]

Originally posted by speedog

So just using this study as a guideline, should we be okay with 30% failing the tests?

Yeah, yeah, I know - government cash cow, government control, government whatever but when I look over and see someone actually toking up in the vehicle next to me at a red light, I have to wonder exactly how safe that driver is on our roads.

- I'd wager more than 30% of regular schmucks on the road would fail a surprise driving test.

- If you look over at someone texting, do you feel the same panic set in? - I'd also bet the texter is more of a hazard.

- Also, I don't smoke it. But I am against gov'ts ever increasing baby sitting and profit hunting, that will find it's way into interrupting my life. I don't drink and drive, but have to stop in check stops.. this will be no different.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by speedog

So just using this study as a guideline, should we be okay with 30% failing the tests?

I didn't say that I said this:

Originally posted by Tik-Tok

I don't think I've heard anyone argue that, it's always "Driving high is WAY safer than driving drunk.... mannn."


Which is totally true, but doesn't mean you should be driving high either