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

Aus - Worried about roadside drug testing? Here are your rights

poledriver

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
11,543
Worried about roadside drug testing? Here are your rights

212671-drug-testing.jpg


This week, NSW Greens MP David Shoebridge started a petition calling on police to abandon their roadside drug testing program. While Shoebridge wants impaired drivers off the roads as much as anyone, he says that the technology police currently use is “inherently flawed”, regularly turning up false positives and stripping drivers who consumed drugs up to four days earlier of their license.

The current program isn’t about making the roads safer, Shoebridge says, it’s about waging an ideological war on recreational drug users. And with police in NSW aiming to triple the number of mobile drug tests they conduct by 2017, right now you’re more likely than ever to be pulled over and asked for a saliva sample.

So what are your rights if you get booked for drug driving? What can you be expect to be charged with? And what needs to change about the way Australia conducts mobile drug tests?
To find out, we interviewed David Shoebridge and for the rundown on the current laws in NSW and VIC (there might be slight variations on the laws in other states). Here’s what you need to know.
How do roadside drug tests work?

If you are pulled over for a roadside drug test, police will first ask for your license and breath test you. You’ll then be asked to wipe a mobile drug testing stick on your tongue and wait a few minutes while the results appear. If your test is positive, you’ll be taken to a roadside testing van or police station for another saliva sample and banned from driving for 24 hours. Your saliva sample will be sent to a laboratory and if the positive result is confirmed, you’ll be charged with driving with the presence of an illegal drug.

o-NSW-POLICE-DRUG-570.jpg


So what’s wrong with them?

A lot. For starters, the tests don’t determine whether drivers are under the influence of drugs at the time they are actually driving, but rather that they have a trace amount of drugs in their system. That means that a joint you smoked days earlier could return a positive result, landing you with a conviction even when you weren’t impaired.

“They’re testing for the smallest detectable trace element of drugs in your system,” Shoebridge explains. “The police standard operating producers expressly say that they’re not testing for impairment, only for presence. The smallest detectable trace element of drugs means you fail.”

How many roadside drug tests do police do? And how many come back positive?

Police in NSW, which has one of the biggest mobile drug testing programs, will conduct about 30,000 tests in 2016 and they’re looking to expand that to 100,000 over the next two years.

Overall one in ten tests comes back positive, but some police operations can see as many as one in three drivers testing positive.

That’s because despite the fact that tests are meant to be random, police target areas where they think there will be a greater likelihood of drivers with drugs in their system, Shoebridge says. Drivers coming in and out of festivals are routinely targeted, as are areas of the NSW North Coast where there is a stronger cannabis culture. Comparatively, only one in 100 alcohol breath tests returns a positive result.

It doesn’t help that the test often produces false positives, not only for drugs consumed days earlier, but also over-the-counter medicines like cold and flu tablets.

What drugs do they test for?

Currently it’s just cannabis, amphetamines and MDMA. Drivers under the influence of heroin, cocaine or psychedelics are off the hook, as are prescription painkillers and benzodiazepines, “which are known to seriously impair drivers and cause fatalities”.
“Someone can be literally zonked to the eyeballs on painkillers and they’re not tested, just waved through.

Meanwhile someone who smoked a joint four days before and has no impairment faces losing their license and receiving a $1000 fine. It’s an evidence free zone.”

How long after you take drugs is it legally safe to drive?

There’s no hard and fast answer – it depends on personal factors like how much you took and your metabolism.

Transport NSW say you can expect stimulants like speed and pills to be detectable for a day or two after they were consumed, but with the tests sometimes picking up cannabis consumed several days earlier, it’s smokers who really need to watch out.
“There are reports of someone having smoked a joint two, three or four days before being tested and still coming up positive and losing their license,” explains Shoebridge.

“That’s the equivalent of losing your license for a beer that you drank the afternoon before.”

Can you test yourself at home?

You can order your own saliva testing kits to use at home, but Shoebridge says they’ll set you back as much as $100 a pop and are as unreliable as the police testing units. (You can Google around for some cheaper ones.)
What should you do if your test comes back positive?

You can request that your saliva sample is retested at a laboratory and, Shoebridge says, “there have been a number of incidences where the laboratory test has come back negative after the initial test has come back positive”.

But there can be a six week delay between the false positive and the final laboratory test.

If the lab test comes back positive and you weren’t under the influence at time of driving, you’ll have to go to court and plead your case to the magistrate.

“In most states and territories, the magistrate has the discretion to find the offence proven but to dismiss the charges and not convict you, if they believe there are compelling reasons not to.” That means issuing what’s called a Section 10 in NSW – if this happens, you won’t lose your license.
“They are testing only for the presence of drugs and nothing to do with impairment”

“But that depends upon the good nature of the magistrate, and there are some magistrates who will simply remove your license and fine you.”

“These tests are so common now that if you go to the local court you’re likely to be on a list of 20 or 30 defendants who are facing the same charge.

In some court lists on the NSW North Coast, for example, there can 100 matters in the same list and the magistrate is churning through them ten at a time. Because there’s no evidence about the extent of the impairment or the quantity of drugs in your system, the magistrates are just guessing when they’re imposing penalties.”

What about if you’re convicted?

If it’s your first offence you’ll lose your license for six months and receive a fine of up to $1,100; subsequent convictions will leave you without a license for a year. You’ll also get a conviction for impaired driving, meaning you’ll now have a criminal record.
Can you refuse or delay a test?

No. Well, technically you can – but that’s unlawful and will cost you your license anyway. It’s also an offence to try and delay the test, so you’re better off submitting to police direction.
What needs to change about the way we conduct roadside drug tests?

The Greens want to see Australia implement a system like that operating in the UK now, where police test for the level of drugs that actually impair your driving, rather than the smallest detectable trace amount.
“The stupidity of [Australia’s system] is reasonably clear,” Shoebridge says. “They are testing only for the presence of drugs and nothing to do with impairment.

And they’re testing only for a handful of illegal drugs, even though some of the drugs that are most commonly found in road accidents, such as prescription drugs, are excluded.

“[We want] evidence based laws that reflect reality and make our roads safer. No one wants to be sharing the road with someone who is impaired from drugs. That should be a pretty easy common goal for all politicians, but instead we have these anti-drug zealots who are using roadside drug tests to run their ideological war.”
Think the Mobile Drug Testing laws need to change?

Petition - https://www.change.org/p/nsw-police...lice-stop-evidence-free-roadside-drug-testing

Article - http://inthemix.junkee.com/worried-about-roadside-drug-testing-here-are-your-rights/137069
 
This is such bullshit. I'm pretty much going to have to give up cannabis because of this. It's the only drug (besides caffeine) that I use these days.

If I got tested and tested positive to cannabis that I had used the evening before I could lose my license for 6 months? (the fine wouldnt bother me so much).

Wtf... I can't risk losing my license as I live in a semi rural area and I need to drive to go anywhere (like the shops for food).

This is fucked. I only use such a small amount each evening as well, I am in no way impaired from my use when I drive the next day.

So If I wont to use something to relax I have to go back to using alcohol? FUCK....
 
Cheers for the info. From now on instead of drink driving I'll be shooting Heroin and driving.
 
Sounds pretty unfair . Why do they charge you with a dui/dwi type charge when they aren't testing for drug intoxication but only presence? And why the fuck would they only do cannavis, amphetamine ( which many people take to drive long hours, it increases awareness unless you are spun out or sleep deprived) , and MDMA? Of al drugs... Shouldn't sedatives and depressants or perhaps just test for sobriety if a small amount is found in someone's system? Wouldn't that make it actually do some good and stop fucksd up drivers more than this law which seems to target tweakers, students , truckers, potheads , and ravers? Are they really a menace?
 
Yeah it's shit. Saliva tests can test for pharma drugs and coke and heroin but for some reason the ones our cops are using only test for cannabis/meth/MDxx. I dont know what the reason for this is, I dont think they've said, but it may be because the tests for just weed/meth/mdxx are cheaper than testing for those other drugs too.

Yep, only testing for presence not impairment, and if you are caught say with some weed in your saliva from a few days ago you are obviously not impaired but you will not be able to drive away from the scene and will have to goto court and the judges are handing out 3 months or 6 month license cancellations, large fines and you now have a criminal record.

Apparently some courts in certain regions that are well known cannabis areas are processing hundreds of cannabis related driving offences per day. I can't see this continuing for very long, maybe a few years or something at most then something will change. Hopefully.

People will be losing jobs though because they cant get to work and people will also be unable to get certain jobs as they will have a criminal record.

So I'd be fine to pass if I eat xanax all day and night, but if I use a small amount of weed I can get busted, lose my license and cop a criminal record. :\
 
I read you get a criminal record for driving with a drug in your system. I'll try and find evidence of it.
 
Penalties

Drug driving is a criminal offence and comes with a criminal conviction. The maximum penalty for a first drug driving offence is a $1,100 fine, and disqualification from driving for six months. For the second or subsequent offence, penalties increase to a fine of $2,200 and a twelve-month disqualification. Other penalties you face for a drug driving conviction include: – Good behaviour bonds – Community service orders

https://sydneydruglawyers.com.au/drug-charges/drug-driving/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah i was sure that it was a criminal matter. I am glad i stopped smoking weed after 28 years of every day smoking. I could not risk my job. I would get deregistered. Luckily they dont test for the two drugs i still occasionally use, LSD and cocaine...not that i ever drive out of it.
 
I dont drive out of it either. But I can be picked up days later after using weed, even though I only use a very small amount at night time. It'll be safer now for me to switch to using heroin, cocaine, xanax, oxy and endone as I wont get detected if I get tested and wont lose my license and wont get a criminal conviction. Only problem is I'll probably kill myself and others with my dodgy fully drug impaired driving.
 
Cannabis testing is ruining lives say protesters

Activists say they are undeterred that Lismore MP Thomas George was not present when they gathered outside his office this week to protest against the roadside drug-testing regime.

About 70 people gathered to voice their concerns against the tests, which detect cannabis and other drugs, but do not test for impairment.

Recent figures show that up to one in four drivers tested in the northern rivers were returning positive tests, although NSW Police do not say which drug – cannabis, Ice or Ecstasy – is most prevalent.

Hemp Embassy president Michael Balderstone said a number of people present at the protest had stories of losing their licences, and the impact it as having on their lives.

He said a change.org petition online had garnered more than 10,000 signatures and the popularity of north coast based Facebook site showing random drug testing locations showed that people were increasingly aware of the unfairness of the testing regime.

‘No one tries to cheat or get around the breathalyser do they?’ he said.

‘Because we all agree impaired driving is not on and we know alcohol does impair driving.

‘Cannabis users are devising all sorts of ways to avoid testing positive because there is no respect for these tests.’

‘Unfortunately it is looking more and more like a lifestyle or culture war by the police on cannabis users.

‘In fact it is pushing people needing pain relieve into deeper water as they experiment with less safe drugs which they know will not lose their licence.’

Mr Balderstone said despite Mr George not being present at the protest, a book and a letter would be delivered to him this week to pass onto the leader of the National Party, Troy Grant.

The letter is as follows.

Dear Mr Grant.

We are very concerned about the consequences of your new drug driver testing regime. We believe cannabis users are in a unique situation in that the herb is fat soluble and stay in ones body much longer than all other drugs. Months in your blood, weeks in your urine and days in your saliva.

Yes, it is illegal but medical cannabis is under review at the moment and we think losing ones licence is a disproportionate punishment compared to a caution for fifteen grams or less

Long term medical users are losing their licences and often their job goes with it. I’m not talking about young people so much as long term cannabis users who don’t use other drugs, until now. There are many who have stopped cannabis and are now using drugs that will not test positive, like pharmaceuticals, cocaine, heroin, alcohol or ice and chemical pills which they know are out of their system overnight. No one is sure how long cannabis stays in our saliva, including the police.

Medical cannabis is truly on the political agenda now and we need to sort the driving side of this out. No other country is doing this testing. In fact car accidents numbers are down in the states of America where medical cannabis is now legal. Most studies done on driving with cannabis usually show no impairment if not the opposite!

We are also the only country on Earth not allowed to eat hempseed because of this testing and police fear the seed may interfere with test results.

This book Chasing the Scream is a gift we would love you to read and then pass on to your colleagues. It explains well how the war on drugs is really a war on people who are hurting. Please give it a go with an open mind.

Yours sincerely, Michael

President, Australian HEMP Party

President, Nimbin HEMP Embassy


http://www.echo.net.au/2016/01/cannabis-testing-is-ruining-lives-say-protesters/
 
I read you get a criminal record for driving with a drug in your system. I'll try and find evidence of it.

In Qld you only receive a criminal conviction for "serious offenses", particularly if you have a history of DUI. Usually you need to cause damage to property or life. Most people receive a fine and are banned from driving between 1-9 months depending if they deem you driving under the presence of drugs or driving under the influence of drugs. I'm guessing that is the main difference with NSW
 
Greens say roadside drug testing is 'nuts' as 15 per cent of New England north west drivers test positive

The New South Wales Greens are continuing to raise concerns about the New South Wales Police Force's random drug testing program, as new figures reveal more than 350 drivers in the New England north west returned a positive result on roadside tests last year.

The figures show that out of 2,410 tests conducted in the Oxley, New England and Barwon Local Area Commands (LAC), 362 people tested positive.

Supplying the figures, a NSW Police spokesman said there was a difference in the number of roadside positives and certified positives due to examination and processing procedures.

Greens MLC David Shoebridge said the program was flawed.

Police documents he obtained last year stated: "The program does not infer impaired driving or driving a motor vehicle under the influence of a drug. This program detects the presence of an illicit drug in a subject's oral fluid."

Mr Shoebridge said the program was a grossly unfair test on motorists.

"It's proof that the Government is committed to an arbitrary, unreliable and evidence-free approach to drug driving," he said.

"It's not proof that people are driving with impairment because of drugs. The police documents make that clear.

"These are people who may have a tiny, minute trace of drugs in their system which has no impact on their driving, yet they face thousands of dollars in fines and losing their licence.

"It really is a nuts program."

Twenty-two per cent of tested drivers in the New England LAC tested positive, along with 19 per cent of drivers in the Barwon LAC and 12 per cent of drivers in the Oxley LAC.

Deputy Premier Troy Grant defended the program, saying it would contribute to improved data.

"There's been a skewed result as to the impact of alcohol in relation to crime and driving matters, more so than there has been previously for drug taking," Mr Grant said.

"That's starting to balance and I think the true drug taking across our communities is being realised."

Mr Grant said the program also was working to make roads safer.

"I'm absolutely confident in the regime we have," he said.

"We're testing for the effects of illegal drugs in people's system which we know does impair their ability to drive."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-...est-drivers-test-positive/7117878?section=nsw
 
NSW Police accused of targeting poorer drivers by omitting cocaine swab from roadside tests

The NSW Police stands accused of targeting poorer people by choosing not to test for substances preferred by wealthier sections of society such as cocaine.

The police, who are greatly increasing the use of roadside tests across NSW, test for only three types of drugs: cannabis; amphetamines and methamphetamine; and MDMA, the party drug known commonly as "ecstasy" or "molly".

But it can be revealed that Dräger, the German multinational that supplies police with roadside testing machines, boasts of its capability to detect cocaine and a range of other drugs not currently tested for in NSW.
David Shoebridge MLC wants all drugs to be tested for.

David Shoebridge MLC wants all drugs to be tested for. Photo: Max Mason Hubers

The Greens' Justice spokesman, David Shoebridge, has accused the police of targeting drug users from certain social classes.

"At least part of the answer lies in the fact that cocaine is overwhelming used by those with higher incomes and higher socioeconomic status," Mr Shoebridge said. "If [Premier Mike] Baird extended the flawed roadside testing regime to cocaine he would get a lot of grief in the Liberal heartland of the eastern and northern suburbs of Sydney".

National surveys have found cocaine is used at the same rate in the broader population as amphetamine, by about 2.1 per cent of all Australians in the past 12 months.

But the drug is used at different rates by different sections of society.

The most "socio-economically advantaged" 20 per cent of Australian society uses cocaine three times more than the bottom 20 per cent, according to 2013 federal government research.

Conversely, methamphetamine and amphetamine were found to be slightly more preferred by people in the lowest socio-economic grouping.

MDMA was much more favoured for by the wealthy, according to the survey: 1.6 per cent of the poorest people had used it recently, compared to 2.9 per cent of the most advantaged.

Research has associated cocaine use with reckless decision-making and reduced driving ability.

United Kingdom police have recently begun a national roadside drug testing for cocaine and ecstasy.

A spokesman for the NSW Police said cocaine was "under-represented" in statistics about the causes of road trauma and that police focus was on drugs that were "major, contributing factors".

The spokesman said 3.2 per cent of drug tests collected at roadside incidents and sent away for forensic testing returned a positive reading for cocaine last financial year.

But Mr Shoebridge cited British research that found that cocaine was the drug second-most commonly detected drug in roadside drug testing and studies showing it increased the risk to drivers of a traffic accident. About five per cent of drivers involved in traffic accidents where blood samples were collected tested positive for cocaine, according to statistics from the UK coroner.

Dräger machines can also detect opiates, ketamine and prescription medication, none of which are currently tested for in NSW.

Police run samples of drivers' saliva through testing machines to verify field swabs of drivers' mouths that return a positive reading for illegal drugs.

Despite the wide-ranging capability of its drug-testing machines, police only swab drivers' mouths with tests that instantly identify the three classes of drugs. Swabs with wider capabilities are available.

Arrests from the test have reached 3000 in the past nine months, a doubling from the same period the previous year.

Deputy Premier Troy Grant announced plans to triple roadside drug testing to 97,000 tests each year by 2017.

Mr Grant, a former police inspector in central NSW, has promised to "throw millions" at roadside testing but has ducked calls to expand the tests to prescription medication.

Mr Shoebridge has criticised the police for punishing users for cannabis smoked the day before and which may be latent and detectable and in users' saliva but no longer impairing their faculties.

He has also previously called for testing to be applied to prescription medication, such as benzodiazepines, a class of muscle relaxants and sedatives, most famously associated with the brand name Valium.

""Roadside drug testing needs to be drastically changed to test for all the drugs that are commonly found to impair driving [...] at levels that impair driving," Mr Shoebridge said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-polic...side-tests-20160128-gmg2tb.html#ixzz3yZ71aABO
 
I recently was pulled over the officer said I was under the influence of drugs and I did a breathalyser which was negative. I did fail the roadside test due not being able to stand on one foot( seriously I doubt anyone can ) anxiety and nervous and passenger shouting what to do so I couldn't focus. I was arrested when at police station they couldn't take blood and caused my hand to swell. I had to do a urine test. I later found out via my lawyer that I had 11 drugs in my system. I take Venaflaxin 375 mg - lamoxigine 200mg -dyhdrocoedine 30mg 4 x daily. However I had earlier that day had Sudafed sinus, cold capsules and antihistamines ( rah from lamoxigine. I took over counter medication at stated time. I had taken diazepam 2mg. However this is where I am confused. I tested positive for morphine - Amphetamine - tramezpam. Could any of my medication cause these false positives. I have ever taken morphine or amphetamines I don't take tramezpam I was prescribed diazepam by doctor previously. However due to an argument And being stressed I hunted though my medicine and found a diazepam so too it at 12pm. I was pulled over at 5:30 am on the way to Mac Donald.
Please can you help from reading your blog I can see the you have vast knowledge and I need help. In court my lawyer said plead guilty or if found guilty could be far worse. I got 17 month ban £200 fine. I am appealing but need help.
Thanx in advance for any advice or wealth of information you can share
 
I recently was pulled over the officer said I was under the influence of drugs and I did a breathalyser which was negative. I did fail the roadside test due not being able to stand on one foot( seriously I doubt anyone can ) anxiety and nervous and passenger shouting what to do so I couldn't focus. I was arrested when at police station they couldn't take blood and caused my hand to swell. I had to do a urine test. I later found out via my lawyer that I had 11 drugs in my system. I take Venaflaxin 375 mg - lamoxigine 200mg -dyhdrocoedine 30mg 4 x daily. However I had earlier that day had Sudafed sinus, cold capsules and antihistamines ( rah from lamoxigine. I took over counter medication at stated time. I had taken diazepam 2mg. However this is where I am confused. I tested positive for morphine - Amphetamine - tramezpam. Could any of my medication cause these false positives. I have ever taken morphine or amphetamines I don't take tramezpam I was prescribed diazepam by doctor previously. However due to an argument And being stressed I hunted though my medicine and found a diazepam so too it at 12pm. I was pulled over at 5:30 am on the way to Mac Donald.
Please can you help from reading your blog I can see the you have vast knowledge and I need help. In court my lawyer said plead guilty or if found guilty could be far worse. I got 17 month ban £200 fine. I am appealing but need help.
Thanx in advance for any advice or wealth of information you can share

Dihydrocodeine is metabolized into dihydromorphine (the active substance), so I wouldn't be surprised that you tested positive for morphine. I'm not sure what "tramezpam" is, but if you mean "temazepam", then diazepam is metabolized into temazepam, which explains why you tested positive for it. Pseudoephedrine in the Sudafed is an amphetamine, which would explain why you tested positive for it. Ultimately we can't help you with legal trouble though. Look into the metabolites stuff and best of luck.
 
Top