Driving stoned

[Usarka]

...aka labour strikes again...

It will soon be illegal to drive stoned on illegal drugs if a new law is passed. Most of us probably think this is a reasonably law (dammit).

But the rocket surgeons have specifically excluded prescription medicine! so load up on the valium temazapam sleeping pills and various uppers and downers from your freindly GP and go for a drive because evidently thats acceptable.

Sorry dude i didnt see your bike i was too wasted but its ok its legal shit man

much like its ok to be a crap driver as long as you dont faster than 100kph


:lol: otherwise :cry: bahahahahaahaha

[jrandom]

Toking up on the motorway while steering my 4WD with my knees is my favourite way to wind down after a stressful day at the advertising agency.

It'll be a sad day when they make it illegal.

What do they think I pay my taxes for, anyway?

[Swoop]

Surprise, surprise. The green party isn't supporting it (at the moment).

[007XX]

:brick: :thud:

It'll be interesting to see what comes out of that one...

[Usarka]

Surprise, surprise. The green party isn't supporting it (at the moment).

Yeah for once i actually agree with the greens. if a wasted driver is dangerous it shouldnt matter what they're wasted on - surely?

hi im helen :wacko:

[tri boy]

Stopped at a stop sign while on Gold Tops last week.
Didn't move for six hours.:shutup:

[Tank]

if you are found guilty of driving on illegal drugs - do you get a drug conviction as well as the driving one?

[jrandom]

do you get a drug conviction as well as the driving one?

As far as I'm aware, you can't get a drug conviction for testing positive to illegal substances. The only available offences relate to possession or distribution.

I could be wrong.

[peasea]

Toking up on the motorway while steering my 4WD with my knees is my favourite way to wind down after a stressful day at the advertising agency.

It'll be a sad day when they make it illegal.

What do they think I pay my taxes for, anyway?

That's probably part of the issue; they don't get a tax take on pot.

[onearmedbandit]

Yeah that's my understanding as well. There was talk of changing the law so they could hit you on both counts.

[yod]

Stopped at a stop sign while on Gold Tops last week.
Didn't move for six hours.:shutup:

bloody hell...that brings back a few memories

lake pukaki at 6am....road was made of lego...and the hills were grooving

[jrandom]

There was talk of changing the law so they could hit you on both counts.

Is it very politically incorrect of me to observe that cannabis does not seem to cause the same level of impairment as alcohol?

I'm unconvinced as to whether the cost/benefit ratio of an enforcement effort targeted at drugs other than alcohol would be worthwhile in road safety terms.

[onearmedbandit]

Agreed on both points.

[mstriumph]

Is it very politically incorrect of me to observe that cannabis does not seem to cause the same level of impairment as alcohol?

I'm unconvinced as to whether the cost/benefit ratio of an enforcement effort targeted at drugs other than alcohol would be worthwhile in road safety terms.

prolly get a lot less road-rage if they outlawed booze and made cannabis compulsary?

[davereid]

Interestingly we have a standard for alcohol or a level of impairment threshold.

Aside from all debate about the validity of that level, there doesn't appear to be any impairment threshold in the new test - they only need to detect usage.

(Anybody have any better info ?)

So if you smoke a joint, quite legally in the Netherlands, Spain, Colorado or Alaska, and then get stopped in New Zeaalnd a week later you may in trouble.

While you are not impaired (unless it was a very good smoke) THC is detectable for months as it is fat soluble.

[Tank]

Is it very politically incorrect of me to observe that cannabis does not seem to cause the same level of impairment as alcohol?

You could be talking shit - but in the interest of this being an informed forum, I will indevor to conduct come controlled testing and will report back. after stopping for some munchies.

All testing will be conducted in my man-cave on the xbox360. lap times will be recorded and crossed referenced against alcohol content and off-facediness.

[Ewan Oozarmy]

Is it very politically incorrect of me to observe that cannabis does not seem to cause the same level of impairment as alcohol?

I remember an episode of 5th Gear did a test and proved exactly that.

[caesius]

Oddly enough I can't for the life of me drive stoned. Not even backing a car up.

[007XX]

You could be talking shit - but in the interest of this being an informed forum, I will indevor to conduct come controlled testing and will report back. after stopping for some munchies.

All testing will be conducted in my man-cave on the xbox360. lap times will be recorded and crossed referenced against alcohol content and off-facediness.

Fark! Now there is a plan! :2thumbsup, not that I would ever partake in such abuse of my bodily temple! :innocent: :lol:

However, I know Master Jrandom to be a very accurate source of information.

it don't mean i would trust him though...:dodge: Just kiddin'! :laugh:

[Ewan Oozarmy]

Oddly enough I can't for the life of me drive stoned. Not even backing a car up.

Practise makes perfect....

[peasea]

Oddly enough I can't for the life of me drive stoned. Not even backing a car up.

Yeah, I get a bit un-co after a smoke and riding is just not on the agenda. I don't smoke much these days so it's not an issue but when I did I know for a fact that I drove slower.

[007XX]

Yeah, I get a bit un-co after a smoke and riding is just not on the agenda. I don't smoke much these days so it's not an issue but when I did I know for a fact that I drove slower.

And you can get very paranoid too...apparently...

Especially when going on the Harbour Bridge and they are altering the lanes with that big machine. The single lane looks so very tight, and it almost feels like the sides are coming closer :wacko: :crazy:

[Ewan Oozarmy]

And you can get very paranoid too...apparently...

Especially when going on the Harbour Bridge and they are altering the lanes with that big machine. The single lane looks so very tight, and it almost feels like the sides are coming closer :wacko: :crazy:

The moral here then is don't drive stoned so close to rush hour :)

[Ewan Oozarmy]

I don't smoke much these days so it's not an issue but when I did I know for a fact that I drove slower.

Especially as all the headlights in the rear view mirror appear to be cops flashing you to pull over....apparently.....

[007XX]

The moral here then is don't drive stoned so close to rush hour :)

I'll tell my friend to whom it happened!

So is it only at rush hour that they alter the lines on the bridge?

And all kidding aside, the real moral here should be: "Only drive SOBER", don't you think?

[Ewan Oozarmy]

And all kidding aside, the real moral here should be: "Only drive SOBER", don't you think?

Absolutely! ;)

[Skyryder]

Ya gota be be able to walk in a straight line, stand on one leg and touch your nose. All in movement.:Pokey: So ya gota know some yoga, be in two places at once and know where ya nose is. Yea fuckin' simple if ya stoned. It's doing it when sober that's that's the hard part. :spanking:

Skyryder

[007XX]

Absolutely! ;)

:shit: Incredible! A Londoner agreeing on this!!!! :dodge: :laugh:


Ya gota be be able to walk in a straight line, stand on one leg and touch your nose. All in movement.:Pokey: So ya gota know some yoga, be in two places at once and know where ya nose is. Yea fuckin' simple if ya stoned. It's doing it when sober that's that's the hard part. :spanking:

Skyryder

:rofl:

[canarlee]

So if you smoke a joint, quite legally in the Netherlands, Spain,

bullshit!



spain it is very definately illegal to have dope!


in the netherlands it still aint legal either, de-criminlized yes but legal no. (what the difference is im not quite sure, but im sure there are others on here who do know and will explain........?)

[onearmedbandit]

Even Homer drives stoned.

[canarlee]

:shit: Incredible! A Londoner agreeing on this!!!! :dodge: :laugh:



:rofl:

oi, im a londoner and i agree wiv ya too!:Pokey:



methinks 007XX needs a little :spanking: lol

[Ewan Oozarmy]

:shit: Incredible! A Londoner agreeing on this!!!! :dodge: :laugh:



:rofl:

We're not all gun-toting, coke-snorting football hooligans you know :)

.....apparently.....

[fireball]

Ya gota be be able to walk in a straight line, stand on one leg and touch your nose. All in movement.:Pokey: So ya gota know some yoga, be in two places at once and know where ya nose is. Yea fuckin' simple if ya stoned. It's doing it when sober that's that's the hard part. :spanking:

Skyryder

i have no hope in hell doing that impaired or not... (the whole i have one eye therefore no balance) stand on one leg?! yeah i will fail that test every time!
:(

[peasea]

We're not all gun-toting, coke-snorting football hooligans you know :)

.....apparently.....

Quite right; Some of us don't like football.

[Ewan Oozarmy]

bullshit!



spain it is very definately illegal to have dope!


in the netherlands it still aint legal either, de-criminlized yes but legal no. (what the difference is im not quite sure, but im sure there are others on here who do know and will explain........?)

I must admit I thought in Spain you can legally possess a personal amount but it's illegal to sell. My folks live in Spain and my Mum grows her own and believes this also. I'd better tell her she that she may be breaking the law - not that she'll give a f*ck :)

I think de-criminlized means there's no penalty other than a warning if caught. Amsterdam obviously has it's own law, god bless 'em.

[007XX]

We're not all gun-toting, coke-snorting football hooligans you know :)

.....apparently.....

Really?!? What a shame...that's what Im like most about them! :whistle:

[007XX]

oi, im a londoner and i agree wiv ya too!:Pokey:
methinks 007XX needs a little :spanking: lol

Bwahahahah...Oh that's right, I forgot! You london boys bite real easy too...:Pokey:

[canarlee]

thats what makes the law odd in spain, every house hold is allowed one marijuana plant,but they aint allowed to cultivate it???

[deanohit]

God I haven't had a trip in years. We used to have some bloody good fishing trips (all the fish look so much cooler depending what you're on) but I'll say this, thank god I had an aluminium boat as it had a few dents in it by the time I was finished with it. Some people may be fine, but I was certainly impaired with just pot, let alone mushies and things. Me, I'd rather see stoners off the road along with drink drivers.:Police:

[canarlee]

Bwahahahah...Oh that's right, I forgot! You london boys bite real easy too...:Pokey:

yebbut i only nibble in the right places...........

[007XX]

yebbut i only nibble in the right places...........

No more :doobey: for you young man...them Munchies are pushing you to cannibalism! :crazy::lol:

[canarlee]

No more :doobey: for you young man...them Munchies are pushing you to cannibalism! :crazy::lol:

so you aint refusing the spanking then?

[007XX]

so you aint refusing the spanking then?

*cough, cough...ahem* eerrr, let's stay on topic shall we? :whistle:

So, how about that driving huh? :rofl:
I heard that cough mixture could influence someone too...:shit:

[Ewan Oozarmy]

Quite right; Some of us don't like football.

And I don't have a gun :)

[idleidolidyll]

We're not all gun-toting, coke-snorting football hooligans you know :)

.....apparently.....

that's true; some of you prefer heroin

[Ewan Oozarmy]

that's true; some of you prefer heroin

You're confusing London with Glasgow, mate.

[davereid]

How the hell did an entirely sensible thread get hijacked into this crap ?

[candor]

Aside from all debate about the validity of that level, there doesn't appear to be any impairment threshold in the new test - they only need to detect usage.

(Anybody have any better info ?)

So if you smoke a joint, quite legally in the Netherlands, Spain, Colorado or Alaska, and then get stopped in New Zeaalnd a week later you may in trouble.

While you are not impaired (unless it was a very good smoke) THC is detectable for months as it is fat soluble.

Yep have info - skip to bottom of Herald article -
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=179&objectid=10467634

No need for paranoia other than that NORML might tell you porkies -

Drug driving blood evidence safe (scoop)

Comments by lawyer Mark Edgar regarding drug blood court evidence as recently reported by the news media are somewhat misleading, say Candor Trust.

He claimed that a joint smoked the day before could produce high blood readings for the drug in their system the next day, despite the user by then being unimpaired.

Mr Edgar along with NORML (per alarmist nonsense in their Press Release) fails to understand that our highly skilled scientists at the ESR do not test for the cannabis metabolite that shows up at high concentrations such as 45ng/ml 12 hours after use.

The Department of Environmental and Scientific Research confirmed to Candor Trust today that it would not be testing for THC-COOH under the new drug driving law. That would be senseless.

It would instead continue to test for the impairing substance Delta 9 THC which it currently tests driver blood samples for. The comments of Mr Edgar are therefore irrelevant.

Delta 9 THC has usually dropped to a level below 5ng (the cut off level regarded as significantly impairing in Europe) within 3 hours of heavy use.

Research also shows that the people Mr Edgar has concerns for ie those driving a day after use who have high levels of THC COOH still in their blood would show a test result of under 1ng/ml of impairing delta 9 THC.

No prosecutor in any country having impairment based legislation that uses blood as evidence of impaired driving would dream of filing criminal charges against a person with such low Delta 9 THC levels.

The following INCORRECT claims made by NORML NZ today are also ill informed red herrings;

"Drug tests do not even measure THC, the active ingredient in cannabis. Instead, they test for the presence of THC-COOH, a non-psychoactive metabolite of THC that remains in the body up to 3 months after a person has straightened up."

"We would be less concerned if the blood test actually measured impairment, but it doesn't. Instead, all it shows is that a person has at some point come into contact with cannabis, which could be up to three months ago."

Mr Edgar was at least correct in advising that a cut off level in blood samples would be an important component for the life saving new legislation.

Only by setting a level where driving would become off limits can drug users be enabled to begin modifying their behaviour with some confidence they are not driving impaired.

Only by setting an evidence based level such as 5ng (delta 9)will drivers not be rendered so paranoid they will be scared off the road for an eternity, after just one good night out - without cause.

A limit enables educational efforts to proceed. And would enable responsible smokers to buy technology such as saliva tests, which will help them to find out if they are in the normal time-frames for metabolising pot ie are able to drive safely within a few hours of a joint.

Or to drive in many cases after a much shorter duration - if only a cone has been consumed. As with alcohol, a persons driving impairment and duration of impairment is dose related.

[Usarka]

have they actually set a limit?
why arent other drugs not included
and why is the co-ordination test not enough?

[candor]

Bill is not published on parliament website yet but sounds like no limit set - one needs to be, so people need to nag govt about that by making submissions.

It seems the "licit" drugs are included per one news report - if people are abusing medical drugs - shown by no script or excess pills down the hatch as shown in blood. This is going to catch 90% of the problem as those taking risk drugs as per script are not over represented in crashes. Drug abusers tho are.

The co-ordination test is not enough because some people will pass it tho they will have SOME obvious signs of being wasted. P users have a high pass rate tho they will be unfit to drive and may be obviously not dealing the full deck. And with no blood test some could fail but its not drugs the reason why. Also some ppl can't do field tests eg handicapped, eg people getting medical care after causing a fatal crash (not very convenient to do one leg stand). So in this situation some body fluid is needed evidence.

The blood test is required to confirm the person is actually impaired by drugs - legally for a criminal conviction you need a good amount of evidence. A defence lawyer could say a coordination test on its own gives say a 20% margin of error (same as alcohol breathalyser in fact).

Or that a blood test on its own doesn't prove it beyond reasonable doubt as people can be affected differently (as with alcohol). Put the 2 forms of evidence together and the proof is not twice as strong but like the odds are 5x stronger no mistake has been made. IF the "symptoms" noticed during the field test happen to match known effects of the drugs found in blood.

Field and blood tests will likely only be used for a couple years - as smarter tech is just round the corner. It's called RITA (road side imp[airment testing apparatus) and has a computer reactions test etc and a saliva test built in. Fast, convenient, highly holeproof.

[peasea]

How the hell did an entirely sensible thread get hijacked into this crap ?

Going off on tangents is the kb way.

[canarlee]

Going off on tangents is the kb way.

and why change it?





oh feck here comes another infraction......

[davereid]

Thanks Candor, good research.

So it seems the law will be that any detectable level of drugs is a "fail - go straiht to jail."

But the people currently doing the testing say they are only going to test for levels of the drug associated with impairment.

So actually, we don't know what will happen !

Once again I thank my lucky stars that my drug of choice is alcohol !