While I can understand the frustration that some people are expressing in this thread, I cannot condone for a second the idea that the principle of civil disobedience gives us the right to subvert a law we don't believe in by teaching people how to get around the roadside drug tests.
Firstly, I do not believe that the impairment levels as described by Victoria Police on the Arrive Alive website are that unfair.
17. How long after consuming illicit drugs can they be detected?
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. 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.
Arrive Alive, Drug Driving: FAQ
THC: several hours, meth/ecstasy: 24 hours... I mean we're not talking a few days or a week here. Is it really that hard to stay off the road for twenty-four hours?
Remember also that a 0.05 BAC is not always fair to every motorist who is caught drink driving. There are many people who would argue that had they not been breathalyzed by police at 0.05 they would have made it home safely.
0.05 BAC is not a strict rule that means every individual driving over it will stack. It's a guide based on an average police believe can be applied as a general rule, so it is for drug driving.
Different people will metabolise drugs differently and if the rules police apply are not based on conclusive and overwhelming research into drug driving,
this is something that should be taken up with the legal system, not used as an excuse to undermine the entire process.
By trying to do so, we're simply validating the view of the majority that drug users are selfish, careless, morons who are mindless zombies to their chosen poison and that we don't care about being responsible citizens, our own safety or the safety of others that we share the road with.
Secondly, let's be honest here and try and recognise just why these laws and the drug testing technology now exist as they do. They exist because for far too long, drug users as a community have been more than happy to get behind the wheel, or accepted lifts from those who should not have been driving.
While the figures Victoria Police claim (some 31% of fatal accidents involving drugs) are a gross exaggeration, there's no doubt that the number of accidents where drugs are involved has increased over the last decade and every single one of us knows why.
I'm not saying all drug users do it, but I would say that if you have never driven under the influence, have never been a passenger in a car where the driver was, and none of your friends have ever driven in an altered state that you're probably in the small minority of people reading this thread.
Thirdly, please try and remember just what this website is about. There is no point advocating people test their pills when they're just going to take them, drive around googed off their head and wrap their car, with their two mates in the back, around a tree at some point in the night.
From what I've seen, I doubt there is an obvious way to fool the saliva test (i.e. vinegar, mouthwash, etc etc.) but even if there was, and you discovered it, you cannot assume we will allow you to post it here. The Bluelight User Agreement clearly states that you must not...
...use Bluelight in any way, shape or form for unlawful purposes, including, without limitation:
...
2. posting or exchanging any information on ongoing or future criminal activity, or any information which can be construed as discussing such activity;
3. actively encouraging others to engage in criminal activities;
Before you point out that there's an entire forum (now closed) dedicated to beating drug tests, I think the context of this particular drug test is different. I do not imagine the owners of this website would be all that happy with the Victorian Police Minister waving around a copy of the Herald Sun in State Parliament with an article about Bluelight on the front page with a headline like, "DRUG SITE CHEATS SALIVA TEST".
Finally, don't presume based on what I've said that I am trying to argue that roadside drug testing is completely fair and that we should all bend over and accept it as a given.
As a drug user and a road user I am partial to both sides of the argument here.
As a drug user I'm disturbed by further attempts by law enforcement to punish and malign drug users under the guise of road safety. I have no doubt that governments are giving into the temptation to use roadside drug testing as another avenue to fight the war on drugs. Attempts in Queensland to catalogue DNA recovered from mouth swabs are an example of this.
As a road user, who is also a non-drinker, my girlfriend and I were almost killed a couple of years ago by a drunk tosser who ran a red light and T-boned us at an intersection at 60 km/h. As you can imagine, I'd be the first to support stronger sentences for drink driving, but of course, that's because I don't drink.
I think the lesson I'm trying to impart here is the importance of thinking about how your actions, as a drug user and driver ultimately reflect upon all drug users. If more of that had been going on over the last few years, it's unlikely we would have ended up with the situation we have now.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
I apologise in advance for my rambles, smidge coming down and scatty...
