• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Shambles

UK Driving Drug Test....

pjd555 said:
I wouldn't get too carried away by these statutory rules. For my entire career it has always been an offence to drive whilst unfit to drive for any reason. The section 4 offence covering driving on drugs had the effect of people losing their driving licence without a person being convicted of an offence. People would pass an alcohol test but appear to be under the influence of something. The lucky doctor on duty would then be called to assess whether the state of the patient as observed at that time meant him unfit to drive. More often than not the doctor knows what kind of drug might be involved and indicated that to the police officer. Then the weirdness sets in. The police could order a drug test which costs money and even if it came back positive was mostly of little value because the prosecution had to prove that the observed state or behaviour was caused by the drugs. Few cases got to court but people would lose their licence and not just for a year but very often for life. How, you may ask? The doctor on duty or the police officer would tell the driver to discuss the incident with his GP in some cases and in others, where there is clearly a problem, report it directly to the GP. In most cases the GP would discuss it with the patient and tell them they should not drive because of the drugs they are taking or the illness they have. If the patient was stubborn they would be offered a second opinion which was always the same as the first. If the patient continued to drive the doctor had the right and professional duty to report the patient to the DVLC (as was) or the DVLA. We didn't have to report them but the professional guidance was to consider the risk to health of the patient and others and inform the authorities if continued driving posed a significant risk. A while ago it became mandatory for doctors to inform the authorities. Younger people on drugs very often wouldn't see their GP and repeated stops with blood tests would accumulate enough evidence for a conviction if they hadn't already died as they drove off a bridge. All that is happening now is that strict liability is being introduced with the named drugs. Many of the people taking these drugs have already been advised that they should not be driving and if they continue to do so the person is more likely to lose his licence as a result of interaction with a GP than with the police.
Click to expand...

Can I introduce you to the concept of the paragraph ;)

I think most people are aware of the 'unfit through drink or drugs' rule. It was always my understanding that technically you could still be prosecuted for driving whilst unfit through drink even if you blew under the limit but that in practice prosecution would be very unlikely to be succesful.

It seems that up until now, alcohol aside testing for other drugs on the road side at least has been nothing more than subjective clap trappery and even at the station relies on the opinions of a random doctor to decide of a blood test is appropriate or not.

I'm not surprised it's taken the best part of 17 years for them to get to this point, the idea of 'legal' limits for 'illegal' drugs can't have been an easy thing to shoe horn into law. However it seems they spent so much time working on that they forgot to provide the extensive, credible research that would show people what effect these arbitrary levels of evil drugs would have on anyone's driving .
 
Having worked for the ambulance service for over 15 years first as a technician and then a paramedic whilst being in pain management I never felt that the opiates in my system made me unfit to drive an ambulance at high speeds. Occ health knew all about it but we're ok as long as my GP said that I was fit to drive. End of story and I never heard anything more about it until my GP retired and I got a new one.

This guy was a dick for many reasons but he took an instant dislike to me and started putting extreme pressure on me saying that he would inform the DVLA and they would do their own medical to determine whether I was fit to drive. There's no reason why they would think I wasn't but since for fairly obvious reasons a driving licence is my livelihood and TBH I was really scared of what might happen. I decided to do an insanely rapid detox and have suffered in ways I can't describe since (I reduced from 180mg to 100mg of physeptone tablets in 8 weeks then jumped off at 100). That was nearly 2 months ago and I still feel rough but thankfully due to an excellent work physio and some non narcotic pain relief I'm ok.

I know the doctor had a duty of care to make sure I wasn't bombing round in a 999 ambulance stoned on methadone but a quick look through my notes or even a liason with occ health could have showed him this wasn't the case. I still also feel he had a duty of care to me as well which I don't feel he lived up to.. Obviously I'm biased in that respect but how come my previous GP (s) didn't see my being a paramedic and being in pain management as being contradictory but he did?....

Bloke was an arse but he's gone now so so hey ho.....

Edit...Allein...he's a doctor mate they don't do paragraphs....surprise we can even read his writing (typing) haha!! ?
 
Also, these powers are temporary and will expire in March 2016 unless renewed.
 
I assume it's a roadside saliva test first, if positive your gonna be bleeding right?
We use them saliva tests all the time I probably do 10-12 a year had one the day after my birthday I was still wrecked chewing that sponge up in my gob n still passed! I doubt their reliability to be honest.
 
Anyone got any idea what type of blood test would be employed after failing the roadside test? I.e. would they need a barrel full, or just a couple of drops from a pinprick? Also, assuming they'd need a significant amount, what happens if they can't find a vein? I have no easily accessible veins left except for a few small ones which will blow instantly.
 
I was thinking the same, could you say you have a needle phobia? Say at hospital you need to be sedated OR say it's against your religion to have blood taken?
 
mr.buffnstuff said:
I assume it's a roadside saliva test first, if positive your gonna be bleeding right?
We use them saliva tests all the time I probably do 10-12 a year had one the day after my birthday I was still wrecked chewing that sponge up in my gob n still passed! I doubt their reliability to be honest.
Click to expand...
Possibly. The roadside tests can only test for Cocaine and Cannabis. If you test positive, you'll be taken for a blood test.

If your saliva comes back as negative, but they have a suspicion that you are under the influence of any of the other drugs, you'll be taken for a blood test.

F.U.B.A.R. said:
Anyone got any idea what type of blood test would be employed after failing the roadside test? I.e. would they need a barrel full, or just a couple of drops from a pinprick? Also, assuming they'd need a significant amount, what happens if they can't find a vein? I have no easily accessible veins left except for a few small ones which will blow instantly.
Click to expand...
Just 10ml.

5ml goes to the Crown Prosecution Service.
5ml goes to your defence counsel.

mr.buffnstuff said:
I was thinking the same, could you say you have a needle phobia? Say at hospital you need to be sedated OR say it's against your religion to have blood taken?
Click to expand...
One Thousand Words said:
That excuse doesn't work after you breathalyse for alcohol so I doubt it will work for drugs
Click to expand...
As One Thousand Words says, you'll be charged with refusal to supply a sample.

There are changes coming into effect next year with regards to drink-driving that will abolish the opportunity to ask for a blood test if you blow positive for alcohol because so many people know it causes a major delay and gives them a life line, resulting in missed opportunity for prosecution.
 
Public transport or uber.

Reality is we have had roadside drug testing for almost ten years and not once have I been arrested. We drive 3-4 hours to doof's and pretty much expect a drug bus to be set up either on the way in or out by the nearest small country town copper. I can assure you that plenty Of drugs are consumed. ;)

You either change your habits or someone is the designated driver. If you have a couple of spliffs the night before, you wait until lunchtime the next day. If you are on pills you get someone else to drive. Long gone are the days you all pile back into the car at dawn and some mounted clown drives us home. And that isn't a bad thing.

I have heard of false positives from time to time, but that's why they then blood test. The same goes for blowing the bag for alcohol. If you are only just over the limit, demand a blood test and hope you drop below the limit by the time they get you back to the doctor.
 
englandgz74 said:
I sent you a PM on a related topic to this earlier FUBAR.... Same principles apply to cannulating the external jugular as does taking a blood samples from it.
Click to expand...

Yes mate I saw it thanks. What I'm wondering though is whether a duty doctor down at the cop shop has the authority or experience to resort to the jugular, femoral or similar for routine blood testing, or whether it would necessitate a trip to hospital. Any ideas? Not that I intend deliberately flounting these drug driving laws, but I'd like to know what to expect if the worst happens...
 
One Thousand Words said:
I'm pretty sure if her job entails blood testing drug users they'd make it part of her training
Click to expand...

Surely the same would apply to the nurse at my local DSP? However, when I went for a liver function test the other week she gave up after (very painfully) blowing a small vein on the heel of my thumb. She was described to me as 'an expert at getting blood out of addicts'.. Hmmmm....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top