• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: Tronica

Roadside Drug Testing (NSW)

So has anyone actually seen any one of the three winebago drug vans? though my Melbourne friends have all said they've never seen them and they have 8 vans there. I'm starting to develop a paranoia with motorhomes, even though i don't tend to drive until 1-2 days after taking pills.

Though for some events i will drive after, though only when the pill has DEFINATELY worn off completely. Though no one i knew noticed any after XXX, and if any festival would attract a drug van, it'd be this one right?

I'm keeping a banana and mouth wash in the car for next time...

Edit- Removed event name. lil angel15
 
Last edited by a moderator:
see the following quote
Prince Planet said:
I don't think they know themselves, the science is not that accurate or consistent for each individual. I recently was an observer to series of Drugswipe testings conducted by an organisation in NSW that was trying to ascertain this very thing. They were hoping to put out some recommendations to inform people of some basic guidelines similar to blood alcohol guidelines, ie. 2 drinks first hour, 1 each hour after that etc. The results were pretty crazy.

One guy smoked a joint and was tested an hour later and was negative. Two days later he smoked the same cannabis and was tested 4 hours later and was positive and was still positive another 2 hours later. He then ate a couple of bananas in quick succession and was retested negative. In this test he waited several minutes for his saliva to gather again in his mouth.

All up 25 tests were conducted with no consistent results. One woman ate a considerable amount of mullcake and in her words she was shitfaced, could barely walk let alone drive and over a 6 hour period she consistently tested negative. Needless to say she did not drive home. It was really interesting some of the individuals on a subjective scale of impairment stated that they were extremely compromised yet tested negative. Others said they where fine yet tested positive.

The problem I have with this whole issue is that the tests don't test for impairment but merely the presence of saliva thc levels that are not consistent across all individuals.
Click to expand...
 
i think its silly that your not allowed to drive on amphetamines and yet many countries have given and continue to give amphetamines to military personell (meth to WW2 soldiers, weaker amphetamines to modern pilots etc) because of the known positive concentration and alertness etc benefits.

silly
 
Prince Planet said:
I don't think they know themselves, the science is not that accurate or consistent for each individual. I recently was an observer to series of Drugswipe testings conducted by an organisation in NSW that was trying to ascertain this very thing. They were hoping to put out some recommendations to inform people of some basic guidelines similar to blood alcohol guidelines, ie. 2 drinks first hour, 1 each hour after that etc. The results were pretty crazy.

One guy smoked a joint and was tested an hour later and was negative. Two days later he smoked the same cannabis and was tested 4 hours later and was positive and was still positive another 2 hours later. He then ate a couple of bananas in quick succession and was retested negative. In this test he waited several minutes for his saliva to gather again in his mouth.

All up 25 tests were conducted with no consistent results. One woman ate a considerable amount of mullcake and in her words she was shitfaced, could barely walk let alone drive and over a 6 hour period she consistently tested negative. Needless to say she did not drive home. It was really interesting some of the individuals on a subjective scale of impairment stated that they were extremely compromised yet tested negative. Others said they where fine yet tested positive.

The problem I have with this whole issue is that the tests don't test for impairment but merely the presence of saliva thc levels that are not consistent across all individuals.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU

I knew it all along

Its all just PR campaign backed by hit and miss science :|
 
Drugged driver caught by RBT
13 March 2008 - 4:40PM

A DRUGGED driver has been caught by police with amphetamines in his system two days after using illicit drugs during a night out with mates in Bathurst.
Paul Edward Connors, 31, was one of a growing number of motorists coming before the courts charged with driving under the influence of a drug since police added a Colzart drug testing operator to their random breath testing stations.

The on-the-spot Colzart test only requires an oral liquid sample.

After a RapiScan test confirmed the presence of amphetamines there was further confirmation of the presence of drugs from a laboratory report tendered as evidence in court.

Connors of Minna Place, South Bathurst was unrepresented pleading guilty to driving under the influence of methamphetamine near Lions Park Drive, Kelso about 4.50pm on October 5 last year.

He told magistrate Thomas Hodgson his mates had been in town and they had gone out and used amphetamines.

The court fined Connors a total of $870 and disqualified him for the minimum six months’ ordering Connors to surrender his licence to the court and attend the police station to be fingerprinted.
Click to expand...

Western Advocate
 
roadside drug testing question

Gday ppls,
I didnt know where to put this, but seeing it happened in sydney i thought ADD would be best place.

Anyways, My friend (really was a friend ;p) was driving out of Sydney last weekend at night when a roadside drug testing unit pulled him over. they first tested him for alcohol which came up negative so they then asked him to move up a bit and proceeded to use the drug testing kits they have. By memory they asked him to put it on his tongue (maybe wrong) and asked him to wait while they went back to the bus. He just had a joint 20-30mins before hand and been smoking them regularly through out the day (say every hour or so), after 15mins they came back and said your fine to go sir. the only thing he said that he had put in his mouth between the last joint and getting tested was some cheese and crackers before leaving his house, surely cheese didn't mask the test or did it? I have heard of other things that may mask/negate the test but cheese???

Could anyone else enlighten me to what may have saved him, or anyone else with similar experiences?

Cheers Geo
 
Originally Posted by Prince Planet
I don't think they know themselves, the science is not that accurate or consistent for each individual. I recently was an observer to series of Drugswipe testings conducted by an organisation in NSW that was trying to ascertain this very thing. They were hoping to put out some recommendations to inform people of some basic guidelines similar to blood alcohol guidelines, ie. 2 drinks first hour, 1 each hour after that etc. The results were pretty crazy.

One guy smoked a joint and was tested an hour later and was negative. Two days later he smoked the same cannabis and was tested 4 hours later and was positive and was still positive another 2 hours later. He then ate a couple of bananas in quick succession and was retested negative. In this test he waited several minutes for his saliva to gather again in his mouth.

All up 25 tests were conducted with no consistent results. One woman ate a considerable amount of mullcake and in her words she was shitfaced, could barely walk let alone drive and over a 6 hour period she consistently tested negative. Needless to say she did not drive home. It was really interesting some of the individuals on a subjective scale of impairment stated that they were extremely compromised yet tested negative. Others said they where fine yet tested positive.

The problem I have with this whole issue is that the tests don't test for impairment but merely the presence of saliva thc levels that are not consistent across all individuals.
Click to expand...

If someone could put me onto this group I'd very much like to discuss these results, and the conditions under which the tests were conducted. I have some ideas for establishing the reliability of these tests, which include other systems using immunolabeling so I'd like to know more about this group.
 
Sounds very dodgy, they wont catch many smokers... well not the ones that get the munchies like a motherfucker anyway (me).... =]
 
Maybe it's because all day smokers don't have high enough levels of active THC metabolites in their saliva?

All day smokers don't really get stoned anyway because of tolerance issues.
 
Drug bus will swoop 'anytime, anywhere'

AAP | September 20, 2009 12:32am

TWO new drug buses will hit NSW roads next month as part of a blitz aimed at high-risk parolees.

The buses will be used to conduct 30,000 random urine tests across the state each year, randomly turning up at workplaces, parolees' homes or parole offices to make sure offenders are meeting the conditions of their release.

Each bus will be staffed by a team of 10 Corrective Services officers, who will test up to 40 high-risk offenders each day for drug or alcohol use.

The initiative will boost testing capacity tenfold, with just 3000 tests undertaken last year.

"Not only do the buses mean we can test more offenders, but ... they can be tested anytime, anywhere," NSW Corrective Services Minister John Robertson said in a statement.

"Our officers can turn up unannounced at home or work, or test offenders as they arrive to report at a local Community Offender Services office.

"If you break the rules, you will get caught and risk being sent back to prison."

Last year more than 700 released offenders had their parole revoked for a breach of conditions, including drug or alcohol use, Mr Robertson said.

"Last year around 1000 offenders on parole tested positive for either drug or alcohol use in contravention of their court-ordered conditions," said Mr Robertson.

"Serious offenders or habitual drug users will most often end up back behind bars, while others can be compelled to participate in treatment and drug and alcohol counselling."

Each bus, which is equipped with a toilet, refrigerated storage and sterilisation equipment, cost the state $100,000.

News.com.au
 
^^ I guess thats not technically roadside drug testing. still fucked up though. If your on parole you've probably got enough problems, looks like you've just got more. If someone had committed serious offences which could be specifically linked to substance abuse (eg some sex offnders are more likely to offend after using substances) then I suppose its fair enough. But if its just some poor bastard wanting to smoke a joint after a boring day at some menial job then yeah, money well spent.8)
 
*bump*

has anybody had a run-in with one of these buses yet??
just want to let you guys know that they are out there, and you'll come across one when you least expect it.
unfortunately i got stung two weeks ago with positive readings of methamphetamine and THC.. its crazy.. i dont even know anybody who has encountered roadside drug testing yet.
so im waiting to find out when Ive got to see the judge, and hopefully for my sake being a first time law offender will help me slide through the process a little easier.
but, Ive really got no idea what to expect.

so just be careful guys and girls.
its a real pain in the ass, and their swab readings are heaps accurate too.
its a good way to shit all on your parade :|:|:|
 
can you give us more details about getting caught?

like were you sucking the glass dong just before you turned the key or what?


it pisses me off they are so vague about when you can drive, even 2 years on its all shrouded by "about" .. its a joke.

i had a friend who smoked 3 spun cones at 8am, tested at 12 .. negative.. he said he wasn't feeling stoned at that point (daily smoker).

The other thing that pisses me off, is that they are just letting people on OTC drugs that can cause drowsiness/bad judgement off the hook? as far as i can see, these people would be far more common and a larger danger than illicit users.

But i guess if they brought in testing for that they might get some backlash, considering its possible that someone who has had 6 cups of coffee and has a 3pm "crash"(sleep at the wheel) is dangerous. They should be testing for caffeine to right? Assuming they really are doing it for the safety of all road users and not just to start a list of drug users and gain their fingerprints.... right?
 
acidprime said:
can you give us more details about getting caught?

like were you sucking the glass dong just before you turned the key or what?


it pisses me off they are so vague about when you can drive, even 2 years on its all shrouded by "about" .. its a joke.
Click to expand...

more details.. hmm.
well actually, to be honest, i smoked two cones about 20 minutes prior to getting tested.
and i had my last suck on that wretched glass pipe approximately 7 or 8 hours before that.
i was straight up at first and told her that i only smoked some pot a few hours earlier, i guess with a little hope that i'd somehow give a negative reading.
the funny thing is, i only tested positive for meth, with no trace of THC, which i find sort of weird considering how stoned i was..
then they made me do second swab test to send away for further examining or some shit, which unfortunately read +THC aswell.
i asked the question, how long does this shit stay in my system for, and they said a swab test can return positive readings up to 24 hours after ingesting the substance/s.
they made me fill out and sign a form agreeing that i wont drive my car for 24 hours otherwise further punishment will come my way.. so that pretty much sums up how long they expect you to wait. which sucks, because i smoke pot on a daily basis :|
 
Reading through this thread shits me, I know it was posted a while ago but how unlucky for that fella being charged 2 days after using amphetamines. How is the offence "driving under the influence"? That is clearly not under the influence of drugs and I don't think any reputable medical professional or drug expert would even try argue that man was unfit to drive for consuming a little meth 48 hours or more prior.

I have been shitting myself about drug buses since I have commenced daily pot smoking again. I actually got waved through one a couple weeks ago, it said drugs on it but they all do. I have been breathalised twice since I started driving and both times the bus said drugs but they only breathalised me. If I ever lose my licence due to drugs being in my system but me not actually bein under the influence I will fight it tooth and nail, I don't expect it would make a difference but some publicity on the issue would be good.

Surely people don't think that it is just to take someones licence because they are a drug user even if they aren't doing the wrong thing? I say that but in reality they probably do, I had an argument with a few members of my TAFE class the other week about this very thing, their argument eventually boiled down to the fact that whether you were impaired or not you were in breach of the law having used drugs and deserved whatever was coming to you. Idiots...
 
As previously stated this act of roadside testing does not test for impairment but the presence of a substance. Regardless of your impairment levels. It is in fact the Drug Misuse Act in through the back door. With alcohol we have a legally, scientifically tested threshold of impairment based on a science that tests for impairment. With a blood alcohol level of 0.05 you are twice as likely to experience a crash. At 0.10 you are 7 times likely to experience a crash and at 0.15 you are 25 times more likely to experience a crash. With the roadside drug tests they are gauged on the presence of a substance and that alone. That’s not to say that I condone an individual who is clearly impaired by a substance who chooses to put the keys in the ignition and to test the boundaries of fate. If you Google the Nimbin Hemp Embassy they conducted a series of interesting studies using the police issued tests in question and concluded wholeheartedly the science is dodgy at best and dangerous in the extreme. The current saving grace in such tests is that they are far more expensive in administering compared to an alcohol breath test. If you want further info on roadside drug testing there is a mountain of info out there that I am only too willing to share. Unfortunately until the science improves we are stuck with a pseudo science dictating the lives and futures of people that purports to test for something that it clearly dosn’t.
 
The other thing that pisses me off, is that they are just letting people on OTC drugs that can cause drowsiness/bad judgement off the hook? as far as i can see, these people would be far more common and a larger danger than illicit users.
Click to expand...

I remember around the time the drug buses started coming out there were a few news articles on prescription and OTC drugs and driving, studies down on the number of people driving whilst impaired and something about cracking down but I'm not sure if anything came of it.

There might be some articles around here still.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top