• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Stoned driving epidemic puts wrinkle in Marijuana debate

23536

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
7,725
DENVER – Angeline Chilton says she can't drive unless she smokes pot.

The suburban Denver woman uses medical marijuana to ease multiple sclerosis symptoms and says she'd never get behind the wheel right after smoking. But her case underscores a problem that no one's sure how to solve: How do you tell if someone is too stoned to drive?

States that allow medical marijuana have grappled with determining impairment levels for years. And voters in Colorado and Washington state will decide this fall whether to legalize the drug for recreational use, bringing a new urgency to the issue.

A Denver marijuana advocate says officials are scrambling for limits in part because more drivers acknowledge using the drug.

"The explosion of medical marijuana patients has led to a lot of drivers sticking the (marijuana) card in law enforcement's face, saying, 'You can't do anything to me, I'm legal,'" said Sean McAllister, a lawyer who defends people charged with driving under the influence of marijuana.

It's not that simple. Driving while impaired by any drug is illegal in all states.

But it highlights the challenges law enforcement officers face using old tools to try to fix a new problem. Most convictions for drugged driving now are based on police observations, followed later by a blood test.

Authorities envision a legal threshold for pot that would be comparable to the blood-alcohol standard used to determine drunken driving.

But unlike alcohol, marijuana stays in the blood long after the high wears off a few hours after use, and there is no quick test to determine someone's level of impairment — not that scientists haven't been working on it.

Dr. Marilyn Huestis of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a government research lab, says that soon there will be a saliva test to detect recent marijuana use.

But government officials say that doesn't address the question of impairment.

"I'll be dead — and so will lots of other people — from old age, before we know the impairment levels" for marijuana and other drugs, said White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske.

Authorities recognize the need for a solution. Marijuana causes dizziness, slowed reaction time and drivers are more likely to drift and swerve while they're high.


Dr. Bob DuPont, president of the Institute for Behavior and Health, a non-government institute that works to reduce drug abuse, says research proves "the terrible carnage out there on the roads caused by marijuana."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/...ts-wrinkle-in-marijuana-debate/#ixzz1pUwe9fUD
 
When someone is impaired to the point where they drive dangerously than that is wrong. Driving dangerously is a threat to society, nots what is in your blood.
 
in indiana there abusing this new excuse to take take stoners to jail out the ass. since they dont have an accurate way to tell if your impared or not they take you in for a blood test which can go back about month and if you have any tch in your syatem they can charge you with o.w.i. whether your high or not.

So when these asshole cops see and judge someone to be a stoner they pull them over, say they they smell marijuana, and whether they find anything or not or whether your even stoned or not they still take you to jail and if you refuse the blood test you still get charged and automaticly loose your liscence for a year.

I think untill they have a better way it tell if your really SO high that you cant drive good they need to stop giving o.w.i.s for marijuana because if anything usualy it makes you drive more cautiously because your paranoid and you don't want to get pulled over. youu have to be Very Very high for it to cause you to make mistakes you wouldnt have made otherwise and if your not an experienced smoker your not gonna want to drive anyway because of the parinoia.
 
^

Sorry, I feel I can not drive safely after blazing. I am not a safer driver, I am a worse driver. I however realize this and avoid blazing when I know I need to drive soon/will not drive after toking. Same as I won't drive after drinking, or taking a benzo, or dropping a tab.

Really, what is so hard or wrong about responsible drug use? Harm reduction? I'd say avoiding hitting a bridge pillar and being ejected from your car fits the meaning of harm reduction. Not to mention, when I am driving sober, I don't want to be hit an impaired driver, regardless of if they are impaired from booze, bud, or sleep deprivation.

Lets look it another way, would you want your airline pilot to blaze as he comes in for final approach? Want your surgeon to blaze before she splits your rib cage in half and cuts into your heart?
 
No, the test they are using is detecting cannabis from the month prior. Ie you could smoke, then 3 days later get a dui.

I think smoking while cannabis is still affecting you is a bad idea, like the 6 -8 hours after smoking.
 
co-relation, causation, etc.

What else has happened in that period? U.S. Forces pulled out of Iraq? Therefore, expeditionary military action must be the cause of MVAs 10,000km away from the threater of conflict.

Equally, there has been a reduction of civil aviation accidents as a percentage of air craft flying since the introduction of synthetic opioids and benzodiazapines. (For that matter, a reduction in the number of lives lost at sea since the introduction of benzodiazapines too) causation, or un-related co-incidence? Therefore, benzo's make you a better navigator.

Life expectancy in most of the world has increased since the start of the H.I.V. pandemic. Thus, H.I.V. makes you healthier and reduces mortality.
 
Last edited:
we have saliva tests here for drug driving, i've heard a few stories from users who have smoked a few hrs prior and been pulled over and been swab tested and still passed ok. I guess it depends on many factors. Like how strong the weed is/was, your size, sex, shit like that.

I looked it up and one of the states driving websites here stated 5 hrs after smoking pot you should be ok.
 
co-relation, causation, etc.

What else has happened in that period? U.S. Forces pulled out of Iraq? Therefore, expeditionary military action must be the cause of MVAs 10,000km away from the threater of conflict.

Equally, there has been a reduction of civil aviation accidents as a percentage of air craft flying since the introduction of synthetic opioids and benzodiazapines. (For that matter, a reduction in the number of lives lost at sea since the introduction of benzodiazapines too) causation, or un-related co-incidence? Therefore, benzo's make you a better navigator.

Life expectancy in most of the world has increased since the start of the H.I.V. pandemic. Thus, H.I.V. makes you healthier and reduces mortality.

my point being, the prohibitionists are screaming about "the terrible carnage out there on the roads caused by marijuana". Is there data to back their argument?

And but so then but then I entirely believe that more smokers = fewer drinkers and fewer drinkers = fewer automobile fatalities.
 
my point being, the prohibitionists are screaming about "the terrible carnage out there on the roads caused by marijuana". Is there data to back their argument?

I'm no prohibitionist, I'm a damn member of L.E.A.P. While I have no real study on MJ effects on driving ability, I am only using personal experience with it, personally, after smoking up a big blunt, I am not safe to drive, my reaction time is slowed and my spatial co-ordination is skewed... hell, I have hard time using the terminal in UNIX after smoking cause I can't think straight. I know this is hardly a proper study, but I still feel that MJ, like alcohol, should be legal, but driving while intoxicated should not be.
 
"I'll be dead — and so will lots of other people — from old age, before we know the impairment levels" for marijuana and other drugs, said White House drug czar Gil Kerlikowske.

Countin' down the days, Gilly boy, countin' down the days..
 
Lets look it another way, would you want your airline pilot to blaze as he comes in for final approach? Want your surgeon to blaze before she splits your rib cage in half and cuts into your heart?
depends.

how much does the pilot smoke? does he need to smoke his regular dose in order to feel normal?

does he have an illness that cannabis helps, and not smoking the medicine could make his piloting worse?
 
^

Who knows, cause with no regulation on driving with under the influence of cannabis, it, is well, unregulated. So we'll make it a crap shoot. Maybe he needs it for a condition and smokes the minimum he needs, or maybe he's smoking up til he looks like this.
35e1t3.jpg

Enjoy your flight!
 
i'm not arguing for no regulation, i'm arguing for reasonable regulation. you wouldn't want your pilot sick or in WD just like you wouldn't want him shitfaced.
 
I'm not even trying to sound cool or anything I really dont think weed effects my driving skills. If anything I drive safer because I know im stoned. If Im about to make a turn and a cars coming and I think I could make it, if I were sober id just go. If I was high I'd play it safe.

They need to ban cell phone usage while driving thats way more impairing than being high. And way more people do it too
 
I think its hard to qualify someone as intoxicated from marijuana. Things like tolerance come into play, though if someone is using it medically, I'd assume they'd eventually build up a tolerance as they'd use it at least once a day, correct? I mean, I've seen anywhere from once a day to multiple times a day so I suppose it depends on the illness as well as form of cannabis used.

I think they need to do more research on this and even then, how does one qualify what is too high to drive and what is not? It seems like it'd have to be a case by case basis. I mean, it is easy to know when you're wayyy too stoned to drive but where does sober enough become not sober enough?
 
^^
Agreed
I think many of us have been 'too stoned' at one point or another. I don't think many people will argue against the fact that you can be too stoned to drive. The '10 guy' picture/meme, for instance, he wouldn't even be able to get off the couch much less put together two coherent thoughts about driving...

Alcohol is the same way. ITs really easy to tell when you're too drunk to drive. But its always that in between stage that gets people in trouble.(not that people don't get into trouble at other levels of soberness/drunkeness either) But that in between stage is where you are jsut dangerous enough to say, 'nah I 'm ok I can still drive'

I thik a lot of the problem is just people mindset. For many people its inherently non harm reductionist. So when that question comes up, they just don't think enough - is it worth going to jail, worth dying, worth killing someone? no it isn't but is it convenient to just hop in the car and head home? absolutely

I'm all for rational regulation/legislation concerning driving under the influence of any drug. And I think it needs to be strictly enforced be it pot or booze, you shouldn't be able to pay x number of dollars to a lawyer and get out of the ticket... (knew plenty of people who did that in high school!) there should be major penalties for such infractions, not a slap on the wrist.
 
Top