Stoned drivers

[sr71]

Kiwis did a TV ad for this a while back. 3 kids imitating their dad's driving while under the influence. Here's a YouTube clip of Blazed:
https://youtu.be/P8KAaf45g5U

[arronm]

Drivers using their mobile phones and texting I would say now is the major cause of most accidents. People just arnt paying attention on the road and driving. To busy being distracted with things that seem important at the time but arnt really. Speed and other things less.

[sr71]

It might have been a Driving Offence for a while.
I know a guy(arrogant ***** too)who lost his NSW licence back 1993-95. He was pulling into Kentucky, with the Munchies as police drove past. Next thing he's being asked to do an RBT in the drive in. But because his eyes were so red, they took him back to the station for blood. He lost his licence for 3 months, DUIHASH.
He was driving a bright orange,350 Chev,look at me, '73 Ute.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by NTF6

Yes but can also exaggerate any paranoia or psychosis if the user is predisposed to those conditions which when behind the wheel of a car isn't good.

Umm...that's kinda my point, it isn't the drug that causes the adverse reaction, its the underlying issues in conjunction with them, which is why people who have underlying issues shouldn't mix the two.

[Express]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

I just an interesting thought. If they are trialing medicinal marijuana does that mean people using it for treatment can't drive? I know the thc's get removed from the medicinal stuff and i have no idea how the test works. At the end of the day (my view of the matter) if it's illegal to smoke the stuff, then there is no reason you should be allowed to drive if they can prove you have been smoking the stuff. To a degree I agree that the most cautious drivers are those that either don't have a licence or are doing something wrong but know they are doing it and what they have to lose (not those ****ed as a fart or high as a kite). The worst ones on the road are those ones who aren't doing anything wrong, and think it's their right to drive because they passed a test once, who flat out cannot drive. Almost got unstuck by ignorance and entitlement yesterday on the drive home. I was on the bluetooth and cut my boss off mid sentence with f..F..F!!!!!. I'll leave it at that. It was close.

I don’t know anything about medical marijuana but some cannabis based medication has the THC removed which means the effect of being stoned is also removed.

Last year I was sitting at a bus stop on Sunset Boulevard when an African American sat down beside me and asked if it was OK to light up and I said no problem.

He heard my accent and ask was I an Aussie and I said yep and when he lit up I said I thought you meant a cigarette as the smell was distinctively cannabis.

I ask are you allowed to smoke that on the street and he said yes he has approval to use medical marijuana and from the smell of it you definitely wouldn’t have wanted to drive for the next few hours.

Which brings me to the subject of legal prescription medication and my father in law.

In the morning when he’d take out his pill box for breakfast he’d spend the next couple of hours off with the fairies and yet at times when he had things to do he’d hop into his car and drive off.

If he’d got pulled over for a random test he'd pass with flying colours but in my opinion he was just as dangerous as an alcohol or illegal drug effected driver.

He always said he felt good to drive but thankfully eventually at our persistence he saw sense and gave his licence up.

Imagine how many drivers would be removed from the road if random testing for legal drugs was introduced.

Even more, imagine the uproar it would cause.



.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by Express

I don’t know anything about medical marijuana but some cannabis based medication has the THC removed which means the effect of being stoned is also removed.

Last year I was sitting at a bus stop on Sunset Boulevard when an African American sat down beside me and asked if it was OK to light up and I said no problem.

He heard my accent and ask was I an Aussie and I said yep and when he lit up I said I thought you meant a cigarette as the smell was distinctively cannabis.

I ask are you allowed to smoke that on the street and he said yes he has approval to use medical marijuana and from the smell of it you definitely wouldn’t have wanted to drive for the next few hours.

Which brings me to the subject of legal prescription medication and my father in law.

In the morning when he’d take out his pill box for breakfast he’d spend the next couple of hours off with the fairies and yet at times when he had things to do he’d hop into his car and drive off.

If he’d got pulled over for a random test he'd pass with flying colours but in my opinion he was just as dangerous as an alcohol or illegal drug effected driver.

He always said he felt good to drive but thankfully eventually at our persistence he saw sense and gave his licence up.

Imagine how many drivers would be removed from the road if random testing for legal drugs was introduced.

Even more, imagine the uproar it would cause.



.

I kind of understand. But prescription meds you need a prescription for. Most (?) Doctors don't just hand prescriptions out. I completely understand why codine is now prescription only. I do know of a person who overdosed on panadol. They got left with tunnel vision after eating 14 to try to end things. If shops pulled panadol it would leave a lot of people who use it properly with a headache.

[superyob]

Sometime I get a little high when I practise the black art of extreme poetry, but I am usually OK to drive...

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by superyob

Sometime I get a little high when I practise the black art of extreme poetry, but I am usually OK to drive...

Thats your sense of self satisfaction kicking in, not something from procter and gamble

[Express]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

I kind of understand. But prescription meds you need a prescription for. Most (?) Doctors don't just hand prescriptions out. I completely understand why codine is now prescription only. I do know of a person who overdosed on panadol. They got left with tunnel vision after eating 14 to try to end things. If shops pulled panadol it would leave a lot of people who use it properly with a headache.

I’m not just talking about low level addictive pain suppressants, my comment is in regard to how detrimental in general some prescription only medication and in particular a cocktail of pills is to safe driving.

Sadly many doctors are not as bright as you may think when it comes to handing out medication and the effects they have.

Ambulances officers will always ask for a list of medication plus if available all the boxed medication to be placed in a bag before transporting a patient to hospital and the hospitals then check it and on a number of occasions over the years we have encountered unintentional problems with medication working against each other.

I’m not advocating the suspension of licences based on prescription medication I’m just saying there are many people getting around with unchecked substances in their bodies that can be as equally affecting their ability to drive as some of the illegal ones.

Personally I believe in keeping the roads as safe as possible but I also understand the difficulties of a blanket ban.

Some medication is safe at the prescribed dosage level and as you’ve pointed out, when the human factor comes into play they’re not so good when the dosage rate is exceeded.

There is also people out there that shop around to accumulate medication.





.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by Express

I’m not just talking about low level addictive pain suppressants, my comment is in regard to how detrimental in general some prescription only medication and in particular a cocktail of pills is to safe driving.

Sadly many doctors are not as bright as you may think when it comes to handing out medication and the effects they have.

Ambulances officers will always ask for a list of medication plus if available all the boxed medication to be placed in a bag before transporting a patient to hospital and the hospitals then check it and on a number of occasions over the years we have encountered unintentional problems with medication working against each other.

I’m not advocating the suspension of licences based on prescription medication I’m just saying there are many people getting around with unchecked substances in their bodies that can be as equally affecting their ability to drive as some of the illegal ones.

Personally I believe in keeping the roads as safe as possible but I also understand the difficulties of a blanket ban.

Some medication is safe at the prescribed dosage level and as you’ve pointed out, when the human factor comes into play they’re not so good when the dosage rate is exceeded.

There is also people out there that shop around to accumulate medication.





.

No ill speak intended, and I never intended to speak ill in the first reply. The wrong meds prescribed by the docs can often affect judgement. Doctors who most of us rely on for help sometimes make mistakes. It's human nature. Everyone makes mistakes on the odd occasion. Prescription drugs can be just as bad as illicit ones, but unless you know a chemist to get prescriptions without a prescription, it's unregulated. Kind of like rocking up to the dealers meeting point off your face.

[ford71V8]

"Back in the day" it appeared quite accepted that smoking dope was what the designated driver did.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by ford71V8

"Back in the day" it appeared quite accepted that smoking dope was what the designated driver did.

You hit the nail on the head with that statement. Problem is that was a different time. Times are changing.

[arronm]

Times are sure changing. Now we have ********* with mobile phones.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by arronm

Times are sure changing. Now we have ********* with mobile phones.

Ive seen a guy read the newspaper (as in an actual newspaper) while driving. Too many people wanna do something else rather then drive.....and you can see it.

[russellw]

Driving in modern high density traffic situations, requires all of our concentration and care so to suggest that any impairment is acceptable is to fly in the face of global research.

Alcohol
What is unfortunate, is that of the 223 Nations with some form of drink driving law, there is no agreement on what constitutes an acceptable level of alcohol in the blood with 40 countries (17.9%) applying zero tolerance and a further 22 (9.9%) applying limits below ours while, conversely, 87 countries (39.0%) impose higher limits than ours including 14 (6.3%) with NO LIMIT.

Even amid the mainstream countries, there is no consensus over which of the two most popular limits is acceptable with 74 countries (33.2%) adopting our 0.05 level while 67 countries (30.0%) adopt our formerly acceptable limit of 0.08.

The more recent studies seem to suggest that some impairment is detectable at levels as low as 0.02 but that would hardly sit well in the Australian landscape or indeed from the alcohol tax revenue position either.

The CDC, after conducing extensive clinical trials, recently concluded:

.. in a 160-pound (72 kg) man, two alcoholic beverages can bring about some loss of judgement, decreased ability to rapidly track a moving target and result in decreased ability to multi-task. Women generally weighing less than men, would see a higher BAC per drink.

Three alcoholic drinks will bring a person’s blood alcohol level to a level of approximately 0.05 percent, which can impair the ability to rapidly focus vision, lower alertness, and decrease coordination to the point that steering becomes difficult and response to driving emergencies becomes blunted.

After approximately four alcoholic drinks, balance, vision and reaction time are often affected. It becomes harder to detect roadway dangers. Reasoning and information processing are often measurably impaired. This corresponds most closely to a BAC of 0.08 percent, the limit set by most states for legal operation of a vehicle.

Studies going back to the 1960s have demonstrated the correlation between BAC and accident risk. The relative risk of being in a crash is 1.38 times higher at a BAC of 0.05 than 0.00 while at 0.08, the risk is 2.69 times higher.

Conclusion: We have accepted that alcohol increases the risk of accident and that levels somewhere between 0.02 and 0.05 introduce sufficient impairment in our driving capabilities that we shouldn't be doing it. Where those levels should be set is about the only remaining debatable point.

Cannabis
There isn't anywhere near as much definitive research yet on the effect of cannabis use as it relates to driving, however a recent study in the USA (where 23 States either condone or have decriminalised cannabis use) concluded:

Experts agree, however, that the combination of cannabis and alcohol raises the chance of crashing more than either substance by itself. In a study of 1,882 motor vehicle deaths, the U.S. Department of Transportation found an increased accident risk of 0.7 for cannabis use, 7.4 for alcohol use, and 8.4 for cannabis and alcohol use combined.

What that study also identified was that:

..the simultaneous use of alcohol and cannabis produces significantly higher blood concentrations of cannabis's main psychoactive constituent, THC, as well as THC's primary active metabolite, 11-hydroxy-THC than cannabis use alone.

A number of US States have set limits for THC detected at 5 ug/Land a recent Iowa University study found that:

Drivers with blood concentrations of 13.1 ug/L THC, showed impairment that was similar to those with a .08 breath alcohol concentration....

.. while another study concluded:

Attentiveness, vigilance, perception of time and speed, and use of acquired knowledge are all affected by marijuana; in fact, a meta-analysis of 60 studies concluded that marijuana causes impairment in every performance area that can reasonably be connected with safe driving of a vehicle, such as tracking, motor coordination, visual functions, and particularly complex tasks that require divided attention, although studies on marijuana’s effects on reaction time have been contradictory.

Perhaps the most definitive current view comes from the research conducted by one of the States that set an actual limit for the concentration of THC, which concluded:

In summary, laboratory tests and driving studies show that cannabis may acutely impair several driving-related skills in a dose-related fashion, but that the effects between individuals vary more than they do with alcohol because of tolerance, differences in smoking technique, and different absorptions of THC. Driving and simulator studies show that detrimental effects vary in a dose-related fashion, and are more pronounced with highly automatic driving functions, but more complex tasks that require conscious control are less affected, which is the opposite pattern from that seen with alcohol. Because of both this and an increased awareness that they are impaired, marijuana smokers tend to compensate effectively for their impairment by utilizing a variety of behavioral strategies such as driving more slowly, passing less, and leaving more space between themselves and cars in front of them. Combining marijuana with alcohol eliminates the ability to use such strategies effectively, however, and results in impairment even at doses that would be insignificant were they of either drug alone. Case-control studies are inconsistent, but suggest that while low concentrations of THC do not increase the rate of accidents, and may even decrease them, serum concentrations of THC higher than 5 ng/mL are associated with an increased risk of accidents. Similar disagreement has never existed in the literature on alcohol use and crash risk.


Other Substances
Someone raised the question about Cocaine earlier and apart from the absence of a reliable roadside test (as yet), the current research is inconclusive as to whether it has a negative impact.

Some researchers have found no effect of cocaine on thinking or psychomotor performance. However, others have found cocaine to enhance attention, learning, and psychomotor performance.

Amphetamine (Methethamphetamine / Ecstacy

Amphetamine is a powerful central system stimulant. While some effects can improve driving skills other effects of amphetamine can reduce safe driving. It can cause tunnel vision, poor impulse control, agitation, irritability, and paranoia. It can lead to aggressiveness, greater self-confidence, grandiosity, and strong feelings of power and superiority.

Diphenhydramine

Diphenhydramine is a central nervous system depressant. The drug is used medicinally to relieve allergy symptoms, to relieve coughs, to promote sleep, and to prevents motion sickness.

Diphenhydramine reduces alertness, causes drowsiness, impairs concentration, reduces vigilance, slows reaction time, reduces working memory, reduces divided attention, impairs the estimation of time, decreases learning ability, and reduces psycho-motor performance.
In on-the-road driving tests, diphenhydramine has proven to impair ability to avoid letting the vehicle weave or drift, reduce or slow reaction time, and reduce overall driving performance. A single dose of diphenhydramine for medical purposes can dramatically impair psycho-motor skills for four hours. It has been found to reduce driving performance more than the consumption of alcohol at a level over the maximum legal BAC limit.

Cheers
Russ

[blackf6]

Withdrawn.

[Mercury Bullet]

Deleted.

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by Express

I’m not just talking about low level addictive pain suppressants, my comment is in regard to how detrimental in general some prescription only medication and in particular a cocktail of pills is to safe driving.

Sadly many doctors are not as bright as you may think when it comes to handing out medication and the effects they have.

Ambulances officers will always ask for a list of medication plus if available all the boxed medication to be placed in a bag before transporting a patient to hospital and the hospitals then check it and on a number of occasions over the years we have encountered unintentional problems with medication working against each other.

I’m not advocating the suspension of licences based on prescription medication I’m just saying there are many people getting around with unchecked substances in their bodies that can be as equally affecting their ability to drive as some of the illegal ones.

Personally I believe in keeping the roads as safe as possible but I also understand the difficulties of a blanket ban.

Some medication is safe at the prescribed dosage level and as you’ve pointed out, when the human factor comes into play they’re not so good when the dosage rate is exceeded.

There is also people out there that shop around to accumulate medication.

You're stepping around a very big problem.

Hundreds of thousands of people are driving with opiates in their system.
And the medical system actively allows it.

[BENT_8]

Thanks for posting the findings from the associated studies Russ, it certainly puts things in greater perspective.

From the results its easy to see that Alcohol is a far greater contributor to dangerous driving and increases the likelihood of accidents considerably (10x)as opposed to Marijuana.
Interesting that the findings continually refer to the effects of both alcohol and marijuana in conjunction as though one doesn't occur without the other where the alcohol becomes the kicker which drags the marijuana down with it.

What really stands out is that the use of Marijuana alone can actually reduce the likelihood of accidents which doesn't surprise me one bit.

The study also suggests that regular users become immune to the effects of the THC and don't get the extreme 'high' that so many believe is caused from its use, in fact regular users become much more cautious of their surroundings and become less aggressive.

Now consider the effects of marijuana, alcohol and mobile phones on driving habits and accident likelihood and see where the real danger is.

Then consider that 2 of the above, alcohol and mobile phones, are accepted in society..

[2011G6E]

1: Is it a mind altering substance?
2: THEN DON'T FRICKING DRIVE A CAR WHILE YOU'RE ON IT.

There, plain and simple.

How would these sensitive petals who simply must get on the weed or booze and think they should be able to drive be able to cope with a job like mine? We're breath tested before every shift when signing on, and if you're not zero, you're gone for at least three days off the rails. If you go off for secondary testing after blowing positive and you're over...well...
You have to [i]think/i] while going out and having a drink...how much to drink? How long until my next shift? How long will it take for the alcohol to leave my system completely? Will I still be even 0.01 tomorrow when I sign on?

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by xr8cam

I am interested in what people think of the drug testing in relation to marijuana only.

They test for a multitude of drugs.

Originally Posted by xr8cam

The bulk of people getting caught are over 50yo

Who cares how old they are?

Originally Posted by xr8cam

and only testing to marijuana, not illicit drugs.

See above

Originally Posted by xr8cam

Do you think driving with marijuana in your system is dangerous?

Yes, definitely.

Originally Posted by xr8cam

Do you think it is fair that it is a criminal conviction if found guilty?

Yes, definitely, hopefully also get their licence suspended.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by arronm

If I got stoned today , I am probably OK to drive to work on Monday morning. Rules and testing for Mull are stupid.

Probably??

I don't like probably if you are coming the other way and me and my family are driving down the road.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Vortex-98

Just another way to raise revenue....people are probably more careful driving when there stoned ..

Another probably.

Pretty sure their reactions would be shot, ever tried talking to someone who has smoked pot?? Most can't even string a sentence together without getting confused.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by xr8cam

So, one person pulled over for random test has had 2 beers, blows .05 and is on his way.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, blow 0.05 and you wont be on your way, 0.05 is low range drink driving and you will be on your way to Court to speak to the Magistrate.

0.049 you will be on your way.

[.:4:.]

I'm waiting for the time when they can test for lack of awareness to surroundings and genuine incompetence. After 2 close calls and 1 break down (after a mechanical 'repair') it's been a hell of a day. I'd much rather a stoner slowly pull into my lane then a twit gas it into my lane when I'm halfway beside them. Locked brakes and horn mean nothing apparently. Point proven when it happened again.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

I'm waiting for the time when they can test for lack of awareness to surroundings and genuine incompetence. After 2 close calls and 1 break down (after a mechanical 'repair') it's been a hell of a day. I'd much rather a stoner slowly pull into my lane then a twit gas it into my lane when I'm halfway beside them. Locked brakes and horn mean nothing apparently. Point proven when it happened again.

How do you know the driver was not on some ilicid substance that caused his erratic driving??

Guess we will never know.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

How do you know the driver was not on some ilicid substance that caused his erratic driving??

Guess we will never know.

Fair call. But the first one was a blue camry, no indicator and punched it. Camry tells me it's not cocaine. Mirrors would to a normal person show loaded fridge white ute stacked with things on the roof so brakes don't work so well. It was wet, so some just forget how to drive. I was left almost sideways on the wrong side of the road. Abs worked, but I didn't want to try out the airbags.

[PG2]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

Fair call. But the first one was a blue camry, no indicator and punched it. Camry tells me it's not cocaine. Mirrors would to a normal person show loaded fridge white ute stacked with things on the roof so brakes don't work so well. It was wet, so some just forget how to drive. I was left almost sideways on the wrong side of the road. Abs worked, but I didn't want to try out the airbags.

I think that you are confusing impaired drivers to bad drivers - two different issues.

While I agree that there should be some sort of test for distracted drivers there isn't one at the moment. There is however one for drug affected drivers and police are using it to get these idiots off the road.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by PG2

I think that you are confusing impaired drivers to bad drivers - two different issues.

While I agree that there should be some sort of test for distracted drivers there isn't one at the moment. There is however one for drug affected drivers and police are using it to get these idiots off the road.

I agree totally. Being impared by drugs is totally unacceptable on the roads. I'm just blowing up because complete lack of judgement that nearly got me unstuck today doing the right thing did a number on my brakes and had I got unstuck their only punishment would be their excess.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

Another probably.

Pretty sure their reactions would be shot, ever tried talking to someone who has smoked pot?? Most can't even string a sentence together without getting confused.

You should probably read Russel's post where findings have shown a reduction in the likelihood of contributing to an accident as a result of smoking pot.
You'll probably find that alcohol increases your likelihood of an accident by over 7.4x whereas Marijuana use only increases it by 0.7x times and alcohol is legal to buy and consume.

Neither is acceptable, one is legal.