-
DPMC Moderators: tryptakid
AU: Police launch world-first ecstasy blitz
- Thread starter E-llusion
- Start date
driving on e or any other mind altering substance is moronic. Jeopardising the safety of other people is simply not acceptable anywhere, anytime. However to wilfully create a more significant possibilty of an accident happening is something that should be met with very severe punishments. Added to that any endeavours to improve drug law and drug culture are seriously undermined with people behaving like this...
StagnantReaction said:
What makes you think that drving while stoned is any better than driving on E or acid or crack?
It isn't. Anything that alters your ability to be fully aware (and I include things like being very tired...) is a danger while driving and should be avoided.
I don't think it's that bad of an idea, TBH. It would be nice to know whether or not you will test positive even after several days of not using though.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
Zonee
Bluelighter
i have two thing to say to this.
Fucking media and fucking pigs.....
Fucking media and fucking pigs.....
Aconite
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2003
- Messages
- 100
They did some test here in Holland with some kind of "swipes" by the police. They just randomly tested drivers for several drugs.
The problems were: very low detction limits, cannabis users tested positive after months of abstenance. Even people who attended concerts and inhaled cannabis smoke from others tested positive. For other drug this was at least days.
Another problem was no lower limits like with alcohol. So even nanograms of coke/E whatever could result in a serious "driving while under influence" charge.
So they wanted to change the law to suit the tests: anyone using drugs is not fit to be a driver, period! Any kind of positive (even a months old, but still detectable, joint) could result in losing ones licence.
I have no problem targetting intoxinated drivers. But they should develop a prcedures that actually test you alertness and driving abilities, not just test randomly for drugs.
That way you can also screen off people using medication and drivers that are tired. I believe that tiredness causes much more accidents than drugs. When was the last conviction on tired driving?
Us funded research done here in Holland proved that people drove safer and less agressively after smoking a joint. The only thing they did worse was driving in a straight line. And this was consequently reported.....
The problems were: very low detction limits, cannabis users tested positive after months of abstenance. Even people who attended concerts and inhaled cannabis smoke from others tested positive. For other drug this was at least days.
Another problem was no lower limits like with alcohol. So even nanograms of coke/E whatever could result in a serious "driving while under influence" charge.
So they wanted to change the law to suit the tests: anyone using drugs is not fit to be a driver, period! Any kind of positive (even a months old, but still detectable, joint) could result in losing ones licence.
I have no problem targetting intoxinated drivers. But they should develop a prcedures that actually test you alertness and driving abilities, not just test randomly for drugs.
That way you can also screen off people using medication and drivers that are tired. I believe that tiredness causes much more accidents than drugs. When was the last conviction on tired driving?
Us funded research done here in Holland proved that people drove safer and less agressively after smoking a joint. The only thing they did worse was driving in a straight line. And this was consequently reported.....
arizona83
Bluelighter
I think it's fair enough to test for ppl under the influence of ectasy but I am sceptical as to the reliability of these tests. MDMA stores in your sytem for up to a week and sometimes longer after large doses. I don't think it is fair if you get tested four days after use when you are straight and return a positive result.
frizzantik
Bluelight Crew
"A large percentage" huh..
200 out of 13000 is about 1.5%, not really a "large percentage", though more than one would expect. I'm actually suprised more drivers were found to be on MDMA than cannabis... to the point where i'm suspicious
stonerfromohio
Bluelighter
I think if you are impaired to the point that you cant walk a straight line or make a coherent sentance then you shouldnt be driving. But if your able to walk a straight line and make a coherent sentance then I have no problem with you driving.
It may seem irresponsible to some but my friends drive on Ecstacy (never more then 2 pills though), Coc, Weed, and alcohol under 7 beers all the time (I dont drive).
I have never been in a car accident and only been in a car once when someone was pulled over and they werent on anything. You could call it luck, but imo if you are a good driver and fairly experienced with the drug you are on then its not that bad (as long as your not taking more then usual/insane doses). On weed I notice literly no difference in driving of my friends, on Ecstacy(if its a clean pill or at least not trippy) theres never been any swirving or speeding problems but there is occasional vision issues they say they cant see very far ahead because all the lights of oncoming traffic/road lights blend together and it makes it hard to see. All my friends and I have an alcohol tolerence so under 7 beers weve never had anything remotely close to a problem. We dont do Coc much but that seems to make them better drivers.
Im not saying drive when your fucked up or that its a good thing. Im just saying its very feasable to drive on certain substances as long as they arent rediculous doses or first time dosers... being a good driver helps as well.
It may seem irresponsible to some but my friends drive on Ecstacy (never more then 2 pills though), Coc, Weed, and alcohol under 7 beers all the time (I dont drive).
I have never been in a car accident and only been in a car once when someone was pulled over and they werent on anything. You could call it luck, but imo if you are a good driver and fairly experienced with the drug you are on then its not that bad (as long as your not taking more then usual/insane doses). On weed I notice literly no difference in driving of my friends, on Ecstacy(if its a clean pill or at least not trippy) theres never been any swirving or speeding problems but there is occasional vision issues they say they cant see very far ahead because all the lights of oncoming traffic/road lights blend together and it makes it hard to see. All my friends and I have an alcohol tolerence so under 7 beers weve never had anything remotely close to a problem. We dont do Coc much but that seems to make them better drivers.
Im not saying drive when your fucked up or that its a good thing. Im just saying its very feasable to drive on certain substances as long as they arent rediculous doses or first time dosers... being a good driver helps as well.
Last edited:
See the problem with that is, how can you "screen out" bad drivers? There really is no objective way to test this apart from having some sort of portable driving simulator and forcing people to take that for a drive, and obviously that's not feasible...stonerfromohio said:
Growfh said:
*puts fingers in ears and shakes head*
LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA
chugs
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,025
Aconite said:
um dude i don't know what sort swipes they use in Holland but the ones deployed here can't detect MDMA concentrates below 126ug....
The whole point of the swipes is not to determine quantity per litre of blood but rather vet drivers - if you're positive you get bundled off to a bus to have an urine/blood test sample grabbed.
Anyway i don't think it would be difficult to fight a court case on the basis that you had like 126-400 UG of MDMA in your blood. It’s just not active on that level - hell you could create precedent
Anyway Hoptis posted the link early in this thread -
http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/48/1/174
TheOneForU
Bluelighter
What is this world coming to?
RavinRaphael
Bluelighter
Lyk omg god, thats totally not plur......
but on a serious note dont drive under MDMA, the 1 and only time i did it i totalled my familie's 2004 camery, that god i was ok.
but on a serious note dont drive under MDMA, the 1 and only time i did it i totalled my familie's 2004 camery, that god i was ok.
z.neocide
Bluelighter
How many times do you drive down the freeway and think to yourself "Damn that fucker cut me off, he has to be rolling on E"? They need a test that shows that you've been asleep at the wheel.8)
SEVERAL drivers have tested positive to ecstasy since police began testing for the drug 10 days ago.
As revealed in the Herald Sun last month, police can now test motorists for cannabis, methamphetamines and ecstasy.
Assistant Commissioner (traffic) Noel Ashby yesterday said police were waiting on a number of laboratory tests.
"We have had a number of positive tests for the three drugs we are testing for," he said.
Confirmation of the results might be another week away, but Mr Ashby said the community had already embraced the new testing procedures.
"The support we have received from the public has been really positive," he said. "The vast majority of Victorians don't want drug drivers on our roads."
The scientific testing occurs at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine in Southbank.
VIFM helped implement the world-first testing regimen and, through chromatography and spectrometry, toxicologists confirm most of the positive preliminary saliva samples collected by police.
Toxicology manager Dimitri Gerostamoulos said: "99.6 per cent of all drivers who tested positive at the roadside . . . have been confirmed by the lab.
"I'm satisfied the program is working. It's there as a deterrent to say to people you will be caught using these drugs and then driving."
VIFM says about 30 per cent of drivers killed have some type of psychoactive drug in their system.
"There is evidence people are increasing their drug use and it's showing in the coronial population who have died in car accidents," Dr Gerostamoulos said. "It concerns me because I use the roads like everyone else."
Dr Gerostamoulos said a dearth in opiate-based drugs such as heroin had partly led to a rise in drug-driving for cannabis and methamphetamines.
"There have been less opiates around for the past three years now, so people have been looking at using other illicit drugs," he said.
"It's no secret designer drugs are on the increase, not only in Victoria but around the country."
Dr Gerostamoulos said he hoped the drug testing, based partly on VIFM road deaths research, would avert further carnage.
"That's our primary function -- finding out what we can learn from death and using that knowledge in a positive way," he said.
Herald Sun
------------------------------------------
First drug testing blitz yields results
Paul Anderson and Grant McArthur
September 11, 2006 12:00am
Article from: Herald-Sun
Link
As revealed in the Herald Sun last month, police can now test motorists for cannabis, methamphetamines and ecstasy.
Assistant Commissioner (traffic) Noel Ashby yesterday said police were waiting on a number of laboratory tests.
"We have had a number of positive tests for the three drugs we are testing for," he said.
Confirmation of the results might be another week away, but Mr Ashby said the community had already embraced the new testing procedures.
"The support we have received from the public has been really positive," he said. "The vast majority of Victorians don't want drug drivers on our roads."
The scientific testing occurs at the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine in Southbank.
VIFM helped implement the world-first testing regimen and, through chromatography and spectrometry, toxicologists confirm most of the positive preliminary saliva samples collected by police.
Toxicology manager Dimitri Gerostamoulos said: "99.6 per cent of all drivers who tested positive at the roadside . . . have been confirmed by the lab.
"I'm satisfied the program is working. It's there as a deterrent to say to people you will be caught using these drugs and then driving."
VIFM says about 30 per cent of drivers killed have some type of psychoactive drug in their system.
"There is evidence people are increasing their drug use and it's showing in the coronial population who have died in car accidents," Dr Gerostamoulos said. "It concerns me because I use the roads like everyone else."
Dr Gerostamoulos said a dearth in opiate-based drugs such as heroin had partly led to a rise in drug-driving for cannabis and methamphetamines.
"There have been less opiates around for the past three years now, so people have been looking at using other illicit drugs," he said.
"It's no secret designer drugs are on the increase, not only in Victoria but around the country."
Dr Gerostamoulos said he hoped the drug testing, based partly on VIFM road deaths research, would avert further carnage.
"That's our primary function -- finding out what we can learn from death and using that knowledge in a positive way," he said.
Herald Sun
------------------------------------------
First drug testing blitz yields results
Paul Anderson and Grant McArthur
September 11, 2006 12:00am
Article from: Herald-Sun
Link