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

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS: The Age 15 Sep 03: Random driver drug tests are on the way (Latest guess Dec 1)

Suprised no-one's posted this yet.

What the cops have to say.

A few points of interest from this:

5. What drugs will be detected with saliva tests?

Random roadside saliva tests will detect the presence of THC (the active component in cannabis) and methamphetamine (speed) that is also known as ice or crystal meth.
Click to expand...

Wondering if this means it wont detect MDMA or Amphetamine...

17. How much time will it take to conduct a drug test?

Random roadside saliva testing for illicit drugs will take longer than random breath tests for alcohol. For drivers who have not recently consumed illicit drugs, only one saliva test will be required and this will take approximately five minutes. For drivers who return a positive result to the initial saliva test the total time to complete the process could be up to approximately 30 minutes.
Click to expand...

19. How long after consuming drugs do I need to wait before driving?

The consumption of THC (the active component in cannabis) will be detected for several hours after use. The actual time after consumption that THC will be detected depends on the THC strength of the cannabis used and on the driver’s metabolism and smoking technique. Drivers who may have inactive THC residue in their bodies from use in previous days/weeks will not be detected.

Methamphetamines (speed) may be detected for approximately 24 hours after use. These drugs can affect the ability of a driver to safely control his or her car for at least this period of time. Extremely large doses, other drugs taken at the same time, and differences in individual metabolism may affect the duration of the effects of these drugs.
Click to expand...

21. Can drivers charged for drug driving also be charged for offences relating to drug possession and use?

The drug driving campaign is about increasing road safety – not drug detection. Legislation prevents the evidence of saliva tests being used in court proceedings for non-road safety offences.

22. Does this mean that drivers who test positive to roadside drug tests will not be searched, or have their vehicles or property searched?

Police will carry out further investigations for drug offences, which may include searches, only when there is sufficient information to suggest that a serious drug offence is being committed.
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what sufficient information is and what a serious drug offence is. I know if I get stopped and they want to search my car I'll be asking exactly what serious offence it is that they believe is being committed. (I'd do this anyways when cops want to search anything of mine, they aren't allowed to just randomly search things.)



In addition I rang the police info line (1300 360 745) and spoke to a lovely chap by the name of Tony this afternoon who informed me that they were not testing yet as they were still working out the system, and that they expected to begin sometime between mid august - november. However, I don't know if it'd hold up in court as an excuse :)
 
That is indeed interesting, cheers for the link anfalicious :)

I don't know about you but I've never had a breath test keep me any more than 30 seconds. Drive up, breathe, ok on your way. 5 minutes is quite a delay, especially if they stop a queue of cars.

Good to know the THC detection period is only hours and previous day’s usage will not be shown. This puts it alongside blood alcohol testing and you only getting fined/charged when you’re actually impaired. I have no problem with that at all.

I do have a problem with the detection period for amphetamines though. In 24 hours I will have had a few meals and a good sleep. There is no way my driving will still be impaired at this point. I can understand maybe if you've been awake for 24 hours, however if the last time I had a line was 24 hours ago I know I would have slept before then.
 
First offence
(Traffic Infringement Notice)

$300 fine
3 demerit points.

First offence
(Court penalty)

Up to $600 fine
Up to three months’ licence cancellation* where conviction recorded.
Click to expand...

I assume you get both of these on a first offence? The traffic infringement and court penalty?

What will drivers who return positive saliva test results for illicit drugs be charged with?

Driving whilst exceeding the prescribed concentration of a prescribed illicit drug.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting way to describe it...
 
Is it just me or is the above a little unclear? Which is it? Or is all of the penalties? Sounds like a conviction is not neccessarily recorded. If a conviction is recorded is it the variety of conviction that would stop someone say practicing as a lawyer or gaining registration as a teacher? Seems a little confusing to me.


Beech out
 
herald sun article 08/08 - drug drive testing in by december... article inc.

read the following article in todays (sunday 08/08/04) herald sun melbourne...

thought it may b of interest..

check this....

Cops to blitz drug-drivers
By IAN HABERFIELD
08aug04

RANDOM drug-driving tests will be introduced in Victoria in a pre-Christmas road blitz.

Truck drivers travelling to and from Melbourne's docks as well as late-night partygoers are expected to be among the first tested.
Inspector Martin Boorman, of the police Traffic Alcohol section, said a new drug-testing device allowing police to check for cannabis and methamphetamines (known as speed) in motorists' saliva would be in use state-wide by December.

He said police would focus on roadside drug testing of people leaving rave and dance parties and heavy vehicle drivers on highways and at ports.

The crackdown will start in the early hours as revellers leave parties.

Insp Boorman warned: "We have a target date of December 1 and if people are going to take drugs and drive, they will be caught.

"We are currently examining eight drug-testing machines and we expect to make a decision soon on which will best meet our needs."

Motorists pulled over would first face a 30-second breath test.

They would then have to give a saliva sample for on-the-spot analysis in a process taking about four minutes in all.

Insp Boorman went on: "If the result is positive, the motorist will be taken to the drug bus for further testing, which will take another 15 minutes."

A second positive result would see the sample sent for laboratory analysis. A positive finding there could see it used as evidence in court.

A first offence carries a $600 fine and licence suspension for up to three months.

Cannabis can stay in a user's system for up to eight hours and methamphetamines for up to 16 hours. Insp Boorman said the drug testing regime would mainly target heavy vehicles and dance and rave parties, and be used in conjunction with random alcohol testing.

"But they will be used everywhere . . . in the suburbs and country towns."

Police will continue to check for other drugs - such as heroin and GHB -- through existing processes, which let officers take urine or blood samples from drivers who fail impairment assessments.

Drugs were detected in almost a third of Victorian drivers killed in road accidents last year.

In the past three years, 450 motorists have been prosecuted for driving while on drugs.

About 9000 motorists are expected to be tested under the state's world-first drug-testing regime.

As with random breath testing for alcohol, police will not need reasonable suspicion to drug-test drivers -- unlike officers in Europe.

taken from www.heraldsun.news.com.au


blutonium out.
 
Last edited:
I guess its a good idea, save lives and all that. But fucking hell, how many people are going to get busted and have their car searched and recreational drugs taken from them, including convictions for posession.Including these so called party goers being targeted, I am sure if the driver is tested positive everyone in the whole car will be searched (in my opinion, feel free to quote me on that one, I am not excactly sure of the law). And what about tolerences? Its ok to drive with blood alcohol limit of 0 to 0.049, I know for a fact I drive ok after having one or two cones, if I was to have more then that, fair enough. And what if I smoke a few cones and 6 hours later when the effects have worn off I get pulled over in my car and tested positive because there is still traces of THC?
 
Cannabis can stay in a user's system for up to eight hours and methamphetamines for up to 16 hours
Click to expand...

I wonder what time frame will be in the next article published - it's been different every time. I've said this before, but my entire opinion on this practice is that it's a good idea as long as there are no positive results when a person is no longer impaired. Thanks to all this vagueness, I fear that the solution some people will find will be to make sure to only drive when there will be plenty of cars on the road. The tests take so long to do that there's less chance of them testing during heavy traffic than there is at 4:00am - 6:00am.
 
I've often driven home after a big night on speed and pills, mainly because I am far more alert and aware than I would be if I'd been drinking.
This also poses another major problem....with no car at the venue, and with so many club toilets being patrolled by security & police....where the hell am I going to go when I need a pick me up??

:)
 
Hmmmm...this is all news to me...I was under the impression that there was no reliable way to test for cannabis traces except to teh affect that somebody had smoked it in the last month or so...Even if that can detect cannabis consumption in teh last 8 hours that is the biggest load of shit I have ever read of in my entire life. Literally. When I get stoned, I drive better and safer full stop. This is totally disputable and will vary from person to person, but for me, Im more paranoid at gettign pulled or having a crash so I drive slower and think twice b4 i do anything. EIGHT hours after smoking pot...OMFG...I dont think I could get any straighter than that...I mean...that is utterly ludicrous...You poor, poor bastards in Victoria...you have my sincere sympathies...

No comment on the speed testing though...I know a lot of people that have died in P related crashes...
 
Heres something interesting I found in relation to Cannabis + detection (time)

10. Can the drug be detected in body fluids? There is considerable debate about not only which body fluid to use (blood, urine, sweat, saliva), but also which cannabinoid to detect. There is also variation in the recommended methods of detection and the minimum detection level. These issues may be resolved differently depending on the particular application. For example, one set of recommendations may be applied to accommodate the practical considerations of road side testing, while another set may be applied to the legal demands of accident investigation. The most promising measures, pragmatically and pharmacologically, are saliva and sweat. However, multiple sampling of metabolites may be required for ratio calculations to determine recency of consumption. Also, legal corroborative measures necessary will imply that research specifies suitable storage and reanalysis protocols. Standard methods and reporting formats should be proposed and verified for the range of relevant applications.

11. How often is the drug detected? Drugs are detected at a high rate amongst drivers stopped by police for impaired driving. However, these rates are elevated by the exclusion of cases testing positive for alcohol and attest to the skill of the police in detecting impairment (Burns & Alder, 1995; Fell, 1995) rather than to the incident rate in the general population. Incident rates amongst hospitalised or fatally injured drivers ranges between 4-12%. Higher rates tend to relate to high risk driver groups (e.g., under 35 years) or high use regions. There are few valid indications of the detection rate in the general (non-accident) driving population (0.6-4%). Research is needed to provide relevant data for these different areas of detection. The form of research should be specific to the needs of informing and supporting transport policy (rather than be surmised from other sources). The research should be ongoing to monitor trends over time and by region (including analysis of demographic groups). Here, the method and threshold level for detection is critical to calculation of prevalence.

12. Is there reliable information linking the blood concentration of a drug with the expected degree of impairment? There is only inconsistent (and weak) evidence that detected levels of cannabis correlate with impairment. There have been no attempts to relate detection level to accident risk. Thus, at present there may be limited practical significance of using detection levels to indicate impairment and accident risk. Moreover, there is no agreement on which cannabinoid to detect. Indeed, THC-COOH which is rapidly detectable, is not psychoactive. Since different cannabinoids may have different relation to impairment over time, it is not possible to specify a single reliable model to link blood concentrations and impairment. Given that impairment is a function of time and dose, a valid model must consider both the time and dose functions. Moreover, it may also be necessary to include parameters reflecting the influence of relevant physiological, demographic and psychosocial variables. However, in the absence of a reliable and valid measure of 'impairment', no practical model can be specified. Research is needed to provide standardised impairment tests with which validated models of impairment can be formalised.
Click to expand...

from http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_504567-11.hcsp
 
hmmm at least this makes more sense the the driving curfew, wtf is next...? :\
hmmm i wonder how the driving curfew is going to help crime, "yeah lets get trashed instead of drive home sober".
 
I still think that there is far too much ambiguity surrounding this subject particularly with regards to defining impairment, prescribed levels of illcits and the like!
Another fear i also have is the what all the conjecture about the subject will boils down to on the operational level, that is to say with the police. I am suspecious enough of the police to simply prosecute people for having drugs in their system regardless of the actual levels present or impairment. What police say they do and what they actually do are sometimes two very different things! Any criminologist could tell you that
 
I was just told by my girlfriend that she knows of someone involved in amphetamine/driving tests. I asume this is to determine levels of impairment. They are being paid $400 and given pharamacutical amphetamine (Im sure its a blind test so placebo as well) and using driving simulators. To be involved you had to be off your P's. This is being conducted in Melbourne. This may have been mentioned in early pages I dont know.
 
a mate told me about this months and months ago he have me a number its 9214 4361, i would do it but im still on my Ps
 
Hehehehe... they're so gunna be swamped with calls tomorrow... ;)

"Uhhhh, hi... like, can I have some, uh, speed?"
 
its the parties and raves that effect us...im not condoning driving whilst under the influence...but.....

SCENARIO: melbourne park is hosting a rave!
- to target this area obviously drug-buses will need to be set up reltively close to the event
- id assume, and correct me if im wrong, that random drug-tests, ie police cars roaming the back streets for suspicious car loads of party goers can't be done? that is that they need the bus for that secondary saliva test.

so wats stopping ppl from parking there car at a car park that is only a short taxi trip from the event? yes its inconvenient, but if u lack other options its easily pulled off!


OR: are random police cars allowed to pull u over, do the initial saliva test, and then if ur positive...take u too the drug-bus situated up the road or back to the cop station?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top