The drugalyser: new weapon in the clampdown on drug driving

7zark7

7zark7

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
2,559
Location
UK
[size=+1]The drugalyser: new weapon in the clampdown on drug driving[/size]
A new handheld “drugalyser” that detects substance abuse in under two minutes could become the latest weapon the clampdown on drug driving.
By Heidi Blake 2:16PM GMT 18 Nov 2010

The portable handheld device can detect cocaine and heroine from a saliva sample within 90 seconds and other substances within minutes. It is able to detect drugs in the body at far lower levels than existing testing devices.

The new portable device, which will be available in 2011, would mean police officers could carry out tests on suspected drug drivers at the roadside.

A positive result would mean officers would no longer have to wait for permission from a doctor before a blood test could be taken to be used as evidence in court.

Full article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...-weapon-in-the-clampdown-on-drug-driving.html
 
I think its a good idea in general. I don't want to be on the road with someone who's fucked outa their mind. Even tho I've been that person more time than I'd like to admit.

At the same time I'm worried that this thing isn't that accurate. And I have a feeling it will land a lot of people in jail unjustly until they work out the kinks. Most of us know how stupid cops can be and how much they love their new toys.

I also wonder where the fuck this technology is headed in the next decade or two.
 
I think its a good idea in general. I don't want to be on the road with someone who's fucked outa their mind
Click to expand...
i think it's a bad idea. i don't want to smoke heroin or pop oxy at night, and then the next day have some detected in my saliva

i also don't want to be taking a *maintenance-dose* (aka, if you don't take that, you *can't* drive) of whatever drug i may be dependent on, and then get the book thrown at me if i happen to get in any sort of accident
 
^^ exactly. Dankstersauce, thats the thing. Not everybody whose on a drug is fucked out of their mind or even impaired slightly. For people like heroin addicts who aint HIGH but just took enough dope not to be sick, this could fuck them over severely. when i was on dope, driving WITHOUT gettin some dope in me was incredbily dangerous. i was a horrible, awful driver when i was dopesick, a million times more danerous then after i used. this will only fuck over people like that. A person who is fucked up enough to be dangerous will be able to be picked out by their shitty driving without any kind of drug tests and pulled over. If you are drivin dangerously then you driving dangerously. If you are on any substance and you are driving fine, especially when its just a maintenance dose like qwe said , then you shouldnt be gettin penalized for somethin that didnt affect your ability to drive safely. this is horrible news.
 
more money, as well as furthering the drug war, creating 2 classes of people (those who use illegal drugs, and those who don't)

this is fucked up
they might be able to detect the presence of certain chemicals in the body, but that is not entirely correlated with being unable to drive.
 
I fail to see how this is a bad thing. Me thinks many people here on bluelight are more then happy to risk other peoples lives for the sake of their drug use.
 
Our country is becoming a police state & we are failing as to protect ourselves from the atrocities our leaders have set forth upon us.
 
static_mind said:
I fail to see how this is a bad thing. Me thinks many people here on bluelight are more then happy to risk other peoples lives for the sake of their drug use.
Click to expand...

Everything you do in life carries a risk.

When you drive (drunk, sober, fucked, whatever) you are risking other peoples' lives.

When driving, there are thousands of variables that alter this risk.

There is a tolerance on how much risk you can take before it becomes illegal.

Having a drug in your system may increase this risk… but so might driving a little tired, with cheap tires on, worn brakes, a dirty windscreen, headlight out… ad infinitum.

These increased risks may only be slight and within the tolerance of legal driving.
 
If any of the above is adversly effecting your driving then you shouldn't be driving. If they can bring out tests that would measure how tired someone is then id be all for that. Risk your own lifes as often as you like but don't risk others because you made a few bad choices and now have drug problem, or shitty tyres, or a blown head light.

Don't know what the law is in the US but in Au driving an unroadworthy car is a crime and you will be busted if caught. The road side drug tests have tollarances and are designed to catch people while under the influence. The weed test even has a margin for passive smoking.

At what point would you think road side drug test would be ok?
 
static_mind said:
If any of the above is adversly effecting your driving then you shouldn't be driving. If they can bring out tests that would measure how tired someone is then id be all for that. Risk your own lifes as often as you like but don't risk others because you made a few bad choices and now have drug problem, or shitty tyres, or a blown head light.
Click to expand...

You are missing my point. You are already risking other peoples' lives just by driving. Go from there…
 
I would say that the problem is that you might not be high now but they can still see that you have it in your system and wooops you get in a lot of trouble.
 
static_mind said:
By not risking their lives any further then necessary
Click to expand...

You can't define necessary…

Edit: Furthermore, that sort of attitude boils down to a 'zero-tolerance' policy. It is not 'necessary' to consume alcohol (for instance) - so any alcohol in your system would therefore be illegal.
 
Last edited:
static_mind said:
If any of the above is adversly effecting your driving then you shouldn't be driving. If they can bring out tests that would measure how tired someone is then id be all for that. Risk your own lifes as often as you like but don't risk others because you made a few bad choices and now have drug problem, or shitty tyres, or a blown head light.

Don't know what the law is in the US but in Au driving an unroadworthy car is a crime and you will be busted if caught. The road side drug tests have tollarances and are designed to catch people while under the influence. The weed test even has a margin for passive smoking.

At what point would you think road side drug test would be ok?
Click to expand...

The roadside drug tests would have no way of telling if a person is actually impaired or not. Take the example that me and qwe posted a day ago.

A person like me when I was addicted to opiates, is a serious threat to the road WITHOUT being high. A dopesick addict is extremely dangerous on the road. If you never experienced trying to drive while detoxing hard as hell, be thankful. Its worse than a lot of other kind of impaired driving I that i seen.

Now take that addict who cops and gets her dope and uses it, just enough to get normal. Now she aint high, she aint impaired, she aint intoxicated, none of that. she is just normal. Now she is like everybody else out there just driving around minding their bizness, and is much safer on the road.

But these tests just determine if the drug is in your system. She used it very recently, so she would definately come off as positive. Except she aint high. She aint a risk, she aint intoxicated, she aint in any way impaired. If you aint been an addict you cant quite grasp just how NORMAL doing your 'get well' dose of opiates makes you. You sure as hell aint high. You are just finally on the same level as everybody else who aint on shit.

Sure lots of people take too much and drive while nodding, etc, but i am talking here about a person who is NOT impaired, but does have very recent drug use in their system. This person would get charged with DWI even tho they aint impaired at all, aint "under the influence' and their driving ability aint no different than it is for a regular normal person. for this addict, driving while NOT on heroin is the dangerous thing. Driving on a small amount is just equal to the standard, default "sober" driving of everybody else.

Does a person like that deserve to get punished and locked up for DWI?

These tests cant distinguish between the girl in my example and someone nodding high out of their mind. That aint protecting people.
 
when i was on dope, driving WITHOUT gettin some dope in me was incredbily dangerous. i was a horrible, awful driver when i was dopesick, a million times more danerous then after i used.
Click to expand...
But these tests just determine if the drug is in your system. She used it very recently, so she would definately come off as positive. Except she aint high. She aint a risk, she aint intoxicated, she aint in any way impaired.
Click to expand...
Qft.


The main problem is that drugs stay in your system beyond the point that you're intoxicated. These tests aren't similar to a breathalyzer, that can detect active intoxication. The fact that this detects drugs at a lower levels than other tests, presumably normal saliva/urine tests, is troublesome when you take into account false positives or positives due to poppy seeds. Also, don't forget that people do take opiates legally.

A positive result would mean officers would no longer have to wait for permission from a doctor before a blood test could be taken to be used as evidence in court.
Click to expand...
This is the interesting part. What happens if you test positive for the saliva test but negative for the blood test?

And, does testing positive for the saliva test validate a search?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top