NEWS : 3.8.09 - Australian state to introduce new drug detection vans

[kingpin007]

Australian state to introduce new drug detection vans

2009-08-03 16:53:01

SYDNEY, Aug. 3 (Xinhua) -- The New South Wales (NSW) Police Force on Monday introduced the first of five new detection vans on the road, aimed at catching motorists who are under the influence of drugs.

The remaining four vans will be rolled out over the next two years, giving the state's police a total of eight detection vehicles at their disposal.

Since the first vans came into use in 2006, 37,700 drug tests have been conducted in NSW, with 820 positive tests.

That equates to almost one positive result in every 46 tests.

NSW Police Minister Tony Kelly said most drivers detected as being under the influence of drugs tested positive to combinations of cannabis, ecstasy and methamphetamine.

"These vans are a highly effective tool in catching those who continue to flaunt the law and put lives at risk," Kelly said.

Roadside drug tests take about 15 minutes to deliver results.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-08/03/content_11819312.htm

 

[Jakeperson]

Gonna be the same as the whole festival thing. More detection for those drugs will leave a lot of people using other drugs if they have to drive that night.
Especially at the festival before hand.

Not looking forward to the next day after a sesh and I loose my license. -_-

 

[hyroller]

Just the same as drug buses I assume?

 

[JoshE]

Just the same as drug buses I assume?

Yea same equipment just smaller vans instead of huge buses..

 

[drug_mentor]

Why don't they test people for downers and shit? I reckon I would rather people be driving on speed or after a smoke than on heavy benzo's and opiates seriously. Where are their fucking priorities when these are the 3 drugs they test for exclusively?

My theory is they care a lot more about looking tough on drugs than actually saving lives and aiming at prescription hypnotics and narcotics doesn't quite have the same effect as targetting pill, speed and choof.

 

[hyroller]

Yea same equipment just smaller vans instead of huge buses..

Ahh. Wonder if they will get introduced in other states?

And on that note.. They kinda remind me of those dental buses that used to come out to my primary school in prep. lol

And in some ways are just as daunting!

 

[skoat]

Thats so weak.

 

[filenet]

Why don't they test people for downers and shit? I reckon I would rather people be driving on speed or after a smoke than on heavy benzo's and opiates seriously..

dunno, i'd rather come across a benoz'd dude doing 5km on the median strip that a tweaked out freaker doing 110km in a 60zone while on their 8th day of the run!

 

[rolls]

So people are allowed to drive on cocaine or GHB. Great
Isn't pot in the system for days

 

[Crankinit]

^ I think the issue with GHB is that it occurs in the body naturally, so it's hard to test for.

No idea why the exclude cocaine, except perhaps it's relative rarity?

Why don't they test people for downers and shit? I reckon I would rather people be driving on speed or after a smoke than on heavy benzo's and opiates seriously. Where are their fucking priorities when these are the 3 drugs they test for exclusively?

Yes and no. Someone who's on speed is less likely to have issues driving than someone drunk, but it often lends itself to reckless and aggressive behaviour which would translate into their driving technique. Sleep deprivation is a factor too, I don't want to have people driving around on the tail end of a 3 day bender.

Honestly I completely support these methods, I think you're obliged to be certain that you're 100% alert and in a normal frame of mind when you're on the road. It's one thing to risk your own life with drug use, but it's another to put other people at risk by driving when intoxicated.

 

[mungazz]

What kind of tests do they conduct?
My friend was stoned as fuck and managed to pass a swab test once

 

[rolls]

Saliva, wait 15 min, if detected, either a better test or blood.

Refusing is breaking the law and going to court AND getting the blood test

 

[mungazz]

Well my friend must of been super lucky, he had been smoking cones all day and had one about 5 minutes before the test

 

[lil angel15]

Your friends not just super lucky, he's a super dick head!!!!!!

 

[drug_mentor]

Crankinit I know what you are saying but alcohol causes wreckless behaviour and decreased co-ordination and sedation. I am not saying they should not test for amphetamines, just that it seems like there are plenty of drugs out there that are a lot more dangerous to drive on.

What is the point in just testing for these 3 drugs when compared to a lot of, if not most of, other common intoxicants effect driving performance more? Most people who drive stoned are daily smokers and weed doesn't really impair them much, if at all. I don't condone driving stoned but in most circumstances it probably has little effect.

When I was a learner driver just starting to drive I often drove stoned. I am not proud of that and I would not do it again, my point is that with little driving experience and a tolerance to marijuana I still managed to drive sensibly and observe all road rules, never get into an accident and my driving ability was consistently improving.

I honestly believe a lot of driving offences that you get fuck all for are more dangerous than driving high on marijuana or on a reasonable dose of speed provided you aren't on a run. I must stress that I don't condone this behaviour but I think that driving on depressants and hallucinogens should atleast be looked at.

It seems like more of an extra way to give users of common drugs grief than a realistic way to make a serious dent in vehicle accidents caused by drug intoxication.

 

[Verybuffed]

Your friends not just super lucky, he's a super dick head!!!!!!

+1

Well my friend must of been super lucky, he had been smoking cones all day and had one about 5 minutes before the test

By chance is your mate an all day every day smoker? My theory has always been that all day smokers don't actually get stoned and therefore would not have enough active THC metabolites in their Saliva for detection. That is totally my opinion though with no science to back it up.

Even though it is my opinion to say that all day smokers don't actually get stoned they still shouldn't be driving.

 

[fortehlulz]

Some years ago, one of the UK 'Lad's Mags' I read (Was either Front or Loaded) actually did a 'Drug Driving Test' - got three or four blokes to take a driving, movement, stopping and parking course sober, then again after ingesting various substances (I recall for sure that one had several beers, one a couple of lines of chang, and the other a couple of pills).

Drinkie driver didn't do as well. Coke driver performed better. I can't actually remember how biccie driver went.

 

[acidprime]

Have the released any solid information on how long after ingesting various substances you can drive? Most of the pdf's i can find just say "several hours" for pot, and "more than a day" for Amphetamines.


Pisses me right off they are so vague about it, seems more like they don't want to say at all to try catch more people. Some Harm reduction group should push for testing of affected vs. detected durations.

 

[Verybuffed]

A bunch of people in Nimbin bought multiple Drugwipe testers and did their own experimentation. Their results can be found on the Mardigrass website.

 

[drug_mentor]

Verybuffed I used to be an all day, everyday smoker and I can assure you that you still do get stoned. It is just a different and lighter buzz than if you aren't such a heavy smoker.

Even if someone wass immune to THC it would still be in their system if they were smoking copious amounts of pot so I don't understand how your theory would work exactly?

I also don't understand why you believe that if everyday smokers weren't getting stoned they still shouldn't drive? Cigarette smokers don't get high on their ciggies but since its a drug should they also be banned from driving? I mean its kind of irrelevant because they DO get stoned but I am just curious why you believe they shouldn't be able to drive if they aren't stoned.