|
 veggie
Registered: 07/25/04
Posts: 13,985
Loc: 
|
 Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash  1
#15785174 - 02/09/12 05:39 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash
February 9, 2012 - scientificamerican.com
Booze is behind an estimated 2.1 million car accidents each year in the U.S.—which cause almost 11,000 traffic fatalities annually. But many drug users have claimed that a few puffs of pot before getting behind the wheel are perfectly harmless. A new study, however, shows that drivers who smoke marijuana within a few hours of hitting the road are almost twice as likely as stone-sober motorists to be in a crash that results in serious injury or death.
Authors of the new paper, published online Thursday in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), sifted through nine previous studies to develop a clearer picture of the risks to users who light up before revving up. Previous studies have left the effects of marijuana on its own—when not combined with alcohol or other drugs—a little hazy.
But the researchers’ findings make sense to others in the field. “Their results are consistent with experimental evidence that cannabis use leads to dose related impairments in simulated driving, psychomotor skills and on-road driving,” Wayne Hall, of the University of Queensland’s Center for Clinical Research who was not involved in the new research, wrote in a related essay in BMJ.
In addition to the finding that drivers who had recently smoked pot were substantially more likely to be involved in a serious accident, the researchers found that those who had died in these crashes had higher amounts of the drug’s compound tetrahydrocannabinol than those who survived. But there was not enough data to link concentrations of the compound to various outcomes in order to suggest a threshold for dangerous intoxication, noted the researchers, who were led by Mark Asbridge, of Dalhousie University’s Department of Community Health and Epidemiology.
Driving while stoned has become a hot topic as more states allow for medical use of marijuana. The 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that more than 10 million people admitted to having driven while on at least one illegal drug—with pot being the most common. More than a dozen states currently have roadside drug tests for cannabis that sample drivers’ saliva for traces of tetrahydrocannabinol. But, as Hall noted, ascertaining a dangerous level—as is currently used in a breath-based test for alcohol (0.05 percent)—is less clear cut. So far many governments are using a zero-tolerance rule, but, as Hall pointed out, “researchers have proposed a concentration of tetrahydrocannabinol below which driving is not impaired.”
Assessing the definitive risk for actually being in a car crash because of marijuana use is also tricky because studies haven’t always looked at drivers who were not determined to be “at fault”—or passengers of vehicles or people involved in minor accidents.
Nevertheless, Asbridge and his colleagues noted, “This information could be used as the basis for campaigns against drug impaired driving.” But the roadside testing has not been as widely publicized as rapid alcohol breath tests have been, so the chance of getting “caught” with pot in one’s system doesn’t seem to have scared very many people into not smoking before driving. As Hall wrote, the idea that roadside tests for pot will reduce traffic fatalities as drastically and as rapidly as breathalyzers did for alcohol “is probably too optimistic.” But that doesn’t mean that attempts to stub out the dangerous habit should be written off just yet. “Better evidence is essential,” Hall said of the attempts to fight pot-impaired driving with more roadside testing.
|
 atomicshaman
mushroom symbiote
 
Registered: 02/01/11
Posts: 966
Loc: edge of reality
Last seen: 16 hours, 52 minutes
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: veggie]
#15785202 - 02/09/12 05:47 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
i can only speak for myself , i have driven stoned thousands of times {and ridden motorcycles stoned} . and have never had an accident stoned , so from my point of view its crap.
riding motorcycles stoned works for me.
stoned or not , if you are awake and aware bad shit shouldnt happen.
--------------------
 everything i post is a fantasy for entertainment purposes .
   [url
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: veggie] 2
#15785239 - 02/09/12 05:56 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
The headline is complete misleading statistical horse shit, of course. Notice that the article never actually quotes the numbers? Well "Almost twice as much!" is actually an absolute change is one from about .3% to .58% - a whole .28% increase. Big. Fucking. Whoop. This is just one research, too. Other research has concluded no, or even a negative, correlation to cannabis use. None have shown big changes either way. This is a case of "A little bit more of not much is not much more."
Sure, cannabis does impair driving. But compared to almost any other legal or illegal drug (alcohol increases your chances by closer to 100, than 2), cannabis is one of the least dangerous.
And don't forget, unlike just about any pharma or other drug or alcohol, cannabis is completely non-toxic. That puts it in a drug safety class all it's own. The drug war kills people; the drug itself does not. That, alone, is reason enough to end cannabis prohibition.
Legalize it, regulate it, tax it if you must. But for God's sake, please stop violently attacking and depriving people of their liberty for producing, distributing, or using such a mild, reasonably safe, non-toxic drug.
|
dudeman05
Stranger
Registered: 02/09/12
Posts: 2
Last seen: 3 months, 17 days
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: h4x354x0r] 2
#15785253 - 02/09/12 05:59 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Sleep deprivation is more impairing than driving stoned..
I've driven high hundreds of times.. actually drive safer high cause I feel like I have to compensate.
|
aiyobro
Good Looking Bitch
Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 9,088
Loc: Outer Space
Last seen: 11 hours, 46 minutes
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: dudeman05]
#15785832 - 02/09/12 08:07 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
people who drive stoned spend more time on the road too usually
|
trophycase
Dickface
Registered: 03/23/11
Posts: 924
Last seen: 2 days, 15 hours
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: atomicshaman]
#15785849 - 02/09/12 08:13 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
atomicshaman said:
i can only speak for myself , i have driven stoned thousands of times {and ridden motorcycles stoned} . and have never had an accident stoned , so from my point of view its crap.
riding motorcycles stoned works for me.
stoned or not , if you are awake and aware bad shit shouldnt happen.
I've driven high thousands of times, and also been in 3 car accidents... Only one was my fault and I was sober for all 3. 
--------------------
All of the cultivation photos uploaded by this account were taken in an area of the globe where such practices are legal and uninhibited.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15785894 - 02/09/12 08:24 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
I'm all for the ending of prohibition, but that doesn't mean I condone driving high or under the influence of any intoxicant for that matter. Ya I'm sure plenty of people have driven while high and not killed or injured anyone, but there are people who have and no one should have to be injured or killed cause someone had to smoke so bad they couldn't wait until they didn't have anywhere to go.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced 
|
aiyobro
Good Looking Bitch
Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 9,088
Loc: Outer Space
Last seen: 11 hours, 46 minutes
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: The Influence] 2
#15785913 - 02/09/12 08:28 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm old.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: The Influence] 2
#15786047 - 02/09/12 09:09 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm all for the ending of prohibition, but that doesn't mean I condone driving high or under the influence of any intoxicant for that matter. Ya I'm sure plenty of people have driven while high and not killed or injured anyone, but there are people who have and no one should have to be injured or killed cause someone had to smoke so bad they couldn't wait until they didn't have anywhere to go.
Many people drive more safely after smoking marijuana. They speed less, leave more following distance and do not perform aggressive driving maneuvers.
Do you think it should be illegal for this segment of the population to drive without smoking weed first?
The level of chemicals in a persons body is a poor indicator of how they will react on the road. I think we should test for impairment, not for specific drugs.
Reaction time is easy to measure. The officer can drop a yardstick, and the driver grabs it as soon as they can. The distance it fell is measured. This is a quantitative measure of how quickly people can react to dangerous situations on the road.
If a test like this was implemented, millions of sober elderly people would be arrested for DUI, and the younger stoners would go free. Drunk drivers of all ages would be fucked, but only if they were actually impaired.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Quote:
aiyobro said:
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm old.
Ya man I'm real old at the age of 25 cause I don't believe in endangering other peoples lives.
Quote:
aiyobro said:I like poop
Now I feel kool like you.Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm all for the ending of prohibition, but that doesn't mean I condone driving high or under the influence of any intoxicant for that matter. Ya I'm sure plenty of people have driven while high and not killed or injured anyone, but there are people who have and no one should have to be injured or killed cause someone had to smoke so bad they couldn't wait until they didn't have anywhere to go.
Many people drive more safely after smoking marijuana. They speed less, leave more following distance and do not perform aggressive driving maneuvers.
Do you think it should be illegal for this segment of the population to drive without smoking weed first?
The level of chemicals in a persons body is a poor indicator of how they will react on the road. I think we should test for impairment, not for specific drugs.
Reaction time is easy to measure. The officer can drop a yardstick, and the driver grabs it as soon as they can. The distance it fell is measured. This is a quantitative measure of how quickly people can react to dangerous situations on the road.
If a test like this was implemented, millions of sober elderly people would be arrested for DUI, and the younger stoners would go free. Drunk drivers of all ages would be fucked, but only if they were actually impaired.
I don't know what the quality of weed you smoke is, but to say that it does not effect peoples reaction time and judgment is bolonga. Yes as I said I am sure there are people who drive stoned and not crash, as there are people that drive drunk that don't crash. But there are people that do so it's safer to make it illegal to operate a vehicle under the influence. If people are really going to argue that they should have the right to drive under the influence they need rehab. I really don't get whats so hard about waiting to smoke when you don't have to drive in the immediate future.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm all for the ending of prohibition, but that doesn't mean I condone driving high or under the influence of any intoxicant for that matter. Ya I'm sure plenty of people have driven while high and not killed or injured anyone, but there are people who have and no one should have to be injured or killed cause someone had to smoke so bad they couldn't wait until they didn't have anywhere to go.
In my opinion, you are buying into the propaganda. I too, have driven a thousand or more times in a car or on a motorcycle high as a kite, and have not been in any accidents. I will agree, there certainly has to be scientific evidence of a change in one's driving awareness while under the influence of marijuana, but it has not been proven to be a negative influence. There are even studies out there that suggest it has a positive effect on the driver!
So in conclusion I think your statements are surely bold ones, but not ones of complete truth.
|
 vinnymontana21
new wool socks
Registered: 01/22/11
Posts: 281
Loc: the gaza strip, metro
Last seen: 6 minutes, 6 seconds
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: veggie]
#15786223 - 02/09/12 09:56 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
.
Assessing the definitive risk for actually being in a car crash because of marijuana use is also tricky because studies haven’t always looked at drivers who were not determined to be “at fault”—or passengers of vehicles or people involved in minor accidents.
“
what do the passengers of the vehicle have to do with this.
there dosnt seem to be any research done here. there just saying they need more data to make there title true. and they still dont realize that drugs effect every one differently and when i say differently i also mean every time its different for the same person. i could blow a point .1 one day and be buzzed a little and the next day i feel wasted off of 2 beers. poor article article. id rather die high any day than live statistically.
--------------------
some things have to be believed to be seen.
catch our vapors
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Quote:
DebuteMachine said:
Quote:
The Influence said:
I'm all for the ending of prohibition, but that doesn't mean I condone driving high or under the influence of any intoxicant for that matter. Ya I'm sure plenty of people have driven while high and not killed or injured anyone, but there are people who have and no one should have to be injured or killed cause someone had to smoke so bad they couldn't wait until they didn't have anywhere to go.
In my opinion, you are buying into the propaganda. I too, have driven a thousand or more times in a car or on a motorcycle high as a kite, and have not been in any accidents. I will agree, there certainly has to be scientific evidence of a change in one's driving awareness while under the influence of marijuana, but it has not been proven to be a negative influence. There are even studies out there that suggest it has a positive effect on the driver!
So in conclusion I think your statements are surely bold ones, but not ones of complete truth.
It's not buying into propaganda, I know how marijuana effects myself and many many other people that I have smoked with. I have been so high I completely blocked out people trying to have a conversation with me. Thats the state of mind people should be driving in? I could link to dozens of peoples posts saying they get mind-fucked high. Can you please link me to the studies that say smoking marijuana makes a driver safer?
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
I don't know what the quality of weed you smoke is
It varies greatly over the years, but currently 3.5 grams lasts me about 30 days.
Edit: Oh, you said quality, not quantity. I live in California and here it is impossible to find anything other than the very best.
Quote:
but to say that it does not effect peoples reaction time and judgment is bolonga.
I believe that marijuana has a small effect on reaction time, and it improves judgment while driving, in most users.
It would be interesting and easy to test this. If my friend drops a ruler, how many inches does it fall before I can react and grab it? How many inches if I smoke first? How many inches if I smoke a whole lot? And how many if I smoke and also eat some strong hash brownies? How far does it fall if I drink 2 beers? I clearly need to invest in a ruler.
I base this belief on empirical evidence. I have been driving for 17 years. I drive a lot. It is fair to say that 50% of the times I have driven, I smoked weed first. Often in the car.
I have been involved in 6 car accidents, half were my fault. I was stoned in 0 of these accidents.
When I drive stoned, I drive differently. I drive slower; I am in no hurry to get there. I don't cut people off or perform dangerous maneuvers.
When I drive sober, I do some dumb things occasionally. I get impatient for no good reason. I speed. I pass people when I really shouldn't. I am not always polite on the road.
When I consider my behavior and its effects on other drivers, I come to the conclusion that marijuana should be mandatory for people operating automobiles. Or at least, it should be mandatory for me. If I always smoked before I drove, it would have kept me out of several accidents.
Some people drive worse after smoking; those people should not smoke and drive. Everyone is different in this regard.
However, I firmly believe that for the majority of heavy smokers, they drive better stoned. Light smokers should not hit the pipe until they get to their destination.
Quote:
I have been so high I completely blocked out people trying to have a conversation with me. Thats the state of mind people should be driving in?
No. Even experienced stoners can get too high to drive. But 99% of the time they are aware of this and wait a while before they go anywhere.
The current drug driving laws have very low cutoffs - A medical marijuana patient can be sober for 24 hours or more, and still be arrested for DUI.
|
vinnymontana21
new wool socks
Registered: 01/22/11
Posts: 281
Loc: the gaza strip, metro
Last seen: 6 minutes, 6 seconds
|
|
and every marijuana plant is different chemically, and has different effects. and damn an eigher lasts you a month. are we talkin bho? ha
--------------------
some things have to be believed to be seen.
catch our vapors
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
and damn an eigher lasts you a month. are we talkin bho?
No, just very good weed. And 90% of the time I am too lazy to smoke it.
Also, I smoke hitters, not joints, so I don't use very much at a time.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Ok and I'm not saying it impairs your ability, but I truly believe it impairs enough peoples ability that it's safer to apply the same laws to it as drinking and driving. If you were to do a real study and get the results to say that marijuana makes drivers more attentive and react faster then you might change my opinion. But I know a lot of smokers that I won't get in a car with again, and others I really wouldn't want on the road.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
aiyobro
Good Looking Bitch
Registered: 06/30/07
Posts: 9,088
Loc: Outer Space
Last seen: 11 hours, 46 minutes
|
|
well stop getting into peoples cars and you might not have that problem
|
sk8ordude
Stranger
Registered: 07/12/11
Posts: 632
Last seen: 28 days, 6 hours
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: vinnymontana21]
#15786335 - 02/09/12 10:25 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
I'd like to take part in a study about how cannabis effects your ability to drive or coordination in general.
Also how are they going to test this, do they have breathalizers for weed?
I skateboard so I know weed doesn't impair me at dosages I use, you just cant perceive yourself to be better then you really are on a skateboard for long, because thats when pain happens. With driving you can over estimate yourself because its extremely easy most of the time.
|
starfire_xes
Living colors,,,,
Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 7,764
Loc: Southwest US
Last seen: 2 hours, 9 minutes
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: aiyobro]
#15786338 - 02/09/12 10:26 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Didn't the Royal Anti-Drug people in england commission a study, and the results came back that pot smokers were safer than even straight people driving? I guess they are butt-hurt because they didn't get the results they wanted.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
But I know a lot of smokers that I won't get in a car with again, and others I really wouldn't want on the road.
I know a lot of people I won't get in a car with, if they are driving. But none of them drive drunk or stoned.
Quote:
Ok and I'm not saying it impairs your ability, but I truly believe it impairs enough peoples ability that it's safer to apply the same laws to it as drinking and driving.
And that is really the big question - What percentage of people does it mess up? Is it ok to arrest and prosecute some people for driving stoned just because someone else can't handle it? How many arrests and convictions of safe stoned drivers are ok, to get a few bad ones off the road? Isn't there some way to measure actual impairment and driving ability - Perhaps some kind of video game?
With alcohol, the relationship between BAC and accidents is very clear. More alcohol causes more crashes, every time, very consistently.
With other drugs it is not a clear line, and there is no consistent dose response curve. What should the limit be? Should I be allowed to drive if I smoked a week ago? 10 hours ago? 5 hours ago? How is someone to know if they can drive?
Alcohol metabolizes at a very consistent rate, so the cop can use a breathylizer and tell how messed up you are. But other drugs have much more subjective effects. Everyone knows that vicodin and xanax impair driving, but it is legal to drive on these drugs, if you have a prescription, in most cases.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
Quote:
But I know a lot of smokers that I won't get in a car with again, and others I really wouldn't want on the road.
I know a lot of people I won't get in a car with, if they are driving. But none of them drive drunk or stoned.
Quote:
Ok and I'm not saying it impairs your ability, but I truly believe it impairs enough peoples ability that it's safer to apply the same laws to it as drinking and driving.
And that is really the big question - What percentage of people does it mess up? Is it ok to arrest and prosecute some people for driving stoned just because someone else can't handle it? How many arrests and convictions of safe stoned drivers are ok, to get a few bad ones off the road? Isn't there some way to measure actual impairment and driving ability - Perhaps some kind of video game?
With alcohol, the relationship between BAC and accidents is very clear. More alcohol causes more crashes, every time, very consistently.
With other drugs it is not a clear line, and there is no consistent dose response curve. What should the limit be? Should I be allowed to drive if I smoked a week ago? 10 hours ago? 5 hours ago? How is someone to know if they can drive?
Alcohol metabolizes at a very consistent rate, so the cop can use a breathylizer and tell how messed up you are. But other drugs have much more subjective effects. Everyone knows that vicodin and xanax impair driving, but it is legal to drive on these drugs, if you have a prescription, in most cases.
I would say field sobriety tests would be a good way to tell if a person is to impaired to drive, along the same lines as a drunk driver would be subjected to. The more marijuana a person consumes the more they will be impaired. If they can pass a field sobriety test then they should be allowed to carry on.
And at least in my state if your prescription drug has a warning to not operate heavy machinery or operate a vehicle and you are doing so while taking that medication, you will be charged with a DUI. My best friend was revoked off probation and sentenced to prison (prison sentence was for the probation case) for driving while on his prescribed xanax.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
I would say field sobriety tests would be a good way to tell if a person is to impaired to drive, along the same lines as a drunk driver would be subjected to. The more marijuana a person consumes the more they will be impaired. If they can pass a field sobriety test then they should be allowed to carry on.
The only problem with field sobriety tests is that many elderly people would fail due to their age.
Also, retarded and just plain slow people would fail. Should these people be driving? No. Should they get a DUI? Maybe.
Quote:
And at least in my state if your prescription drug has a warning to not operate heavy machinery or operate a vehicle and you are doing so while taking that medication, you will be charged with a DUI. My best friend was revoked off probation and sentenced to prison (prison sentence was for the probation case) for driving while on his prescribed xanax.
The label on most prescription narcotics and benzos says not to drive until you are familiar with the effects of the medication. The state can still charge you and try to build a case. Most cases are won due to the ill advised statements of the accused.
|
mrspirit2
Registered: 08/07/08
Posts: 1,647
Loc:
Last seen: 14 hours, 40 minutes
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: veggie]
#15786526 - 02/09/12 11:18 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
The herb itself really is not the issue.
There are far too many circumstances that go into driving and car accidents to simply hang cannabis.
But, that doesn't mean I can trust every individual to be responsible of their dosage, timing of dosage, and overall awareness when stoned.
Accidents are gonna happen blazed up or not.
Drive aware!
|
bloodsheen
ChemChaplin
Registered: 09/24/08
Posts: 1,076
Last seen: 16 hours, 15 minutes
|
Re: Driving While on Marijuana Doubles One’s Chances of a Serious Car Crash [Re: mrspirit2]
#15786578 - 02/09/12 11:35 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
There is no way that if weed ever got legalized they would just let you drive stoned out of your mind. Im glad this kind of thing is happening so the zero tolerance policy can be lifted.
However they need to do studies proving the test can't be beaten. If a quick mouthwash kills it then its all BS and they have to start from square one
--------------------
A cautious young fellow named Lodge / Had seat belts installed in his Dodge. / When his date was strapped in / He committed a sin / Without even leaving the garage. That's clever, isn't it?-A boy and his dog
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: The Influence] 1
#15786608 - 02/09/12 11:44 PM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
I would say field sobriety tests would be a good way to tell if a person is to impaired to drive, along the same lines as a drunk driver would be subjected to. The more marijuana a person consumes the more they will be impaired. If they can pass a field sobriety test then they should be allowed to carry on.
And at least in my state if your prescription drug has a warning to not operate heavy machinery or operate a vehicle and you are doing so while taking that medication, you will be charged with a DUI. My best friend was revoked off probation and sentenced to prison (prison sentence was for the probation case) for driving while on his prescribed xanax.
With all the grey area this topic has, I am all down for that compared to other things.
Bro, some of you posts just imply being high is like being on heroine, that state of total incoherence. As a driver in a city esque area, aggressive driving is mostly the problem. MJ just kinda smooths people out so the car ride isn't as frustrating. Stop and go traffic can be a bitch, toke one for the team, and just go with the flow (albeit slow as hell).
Here are some articles disproving this article, take it as you will. http://members.iowatelecom.net/sharkhaus/driving.html
Quote:
The Influence said:
It's not buying into propaganda, I know how marijuana effects myself and many many other people that I have smoked with. I have been so high I completely blocked out people trying to have a conversation with me. Thats the state of mind people should be driving in? I could link to dozens of peoples posts saying they get mind-fucked high. Can you please link me to the studies that say smoking marijuana makes a driver safer?
Here; let me save you from yourself, because I don't trust you... Posting can't be done while driving, I do believe. Your heart is in the right spot, but you need to worry about people on their cell phones, not pot heads.
Who actually drives and smokes at the same time? I know I do.
|
acim2
Stranger
Registered: 04/04/07
Posts: 134
Last seen: 5 days, 6 hours
|
|
|
digitalemu
Stranger
Registered: 09/01/10
Posts: 273
Last seen: 5 hours, 47 minutes
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: acim2] 2
#15787665 - 02/10/12 07:41 AM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Getting a blow job while driving will also increase your chances of having an accident by 50%
|
BigPharma
Myco-Rising
Registered: 07/22/11
Posts: 111
Last seen: 25 minutes, 52 seconds
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: digitalemu]
#15787789 - 02/10/12 08:21 AM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
I'm curious how the variance in ability attributed to cannabis compares to the normal variance in the population. For instance, me driving stoned I may still be a far safer driver than many other sober people who just have naturally slow reaction speeds, or high cognitive load, or are just simply pissed off and in a hurry. I'd also like to see a number, like others have said, that gives this same figure for various amounts of sleep-deprivation.
What I'm getting at, is that I strongly suspect that even though cannabis does affect reaction, attention, etc, it likely does not more significantly adversely affect driving ability outside the normal range of variance of the population. BUT I think this would likely only apply to experienced cannabis users who are conditioned to its effects.
I'm willing to bet that at the end of the day, cannabis alone does not increase the accident rate above the normal background level.
--------------------
Cultures I have:
Pearl Oyster, King Oyster, Golden Oyster, Black Poplar, Lion's Mane, Reishi, Turkey Tail, Shaggy Mane, and King Stropharia
Cultures I'd Like:
Pink Oyster, Elm Oyster, Morels (any except Black), Chick-of-the-Woods, and Cauliflower, Bear's Head.
"Prohibition didn't work in the Garden of Eden. Adam ate the apple."
- Vicente Fox, Former President of Mexico
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: digitalemu]
#15787802 - 02/10/12 08:24 AM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Here you go the Influence, I just realized how much I hated your name, lol. This is you:
|
detest86
Psychonaut
Registered: 03/08/11
Posts: 571
Last seen: 5 days, 19 hours
|
|
I feel as if weed makes me drive better cus it causes me to be more aware
|
badchad
Mad Scientist
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 7,905
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: veggie]
#15788204 - 02/10/12 10:20 AM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
The problem with driving tests is that there isn't a clear model or laboratory test for driving ability. Within the professional literature there are all differnt types of simulators, and its unclear how standard laboratory tests translate to real world driving ability.
--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.
Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.
...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.
Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: badchad]
#15788293 - 02/10/12 10:48 AM (3 months, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
badchad said:
The problem with driving tests is that there isn't a clear model or laboratory test for driving ability. Within the professional literature there are all differnt types of simulators, and its unclear how standard laboratory tests translate to real world driving ability.
If the impairment is real, how could it not be measurable?
|
badchad
Mad Scientist
Registered: 03/02/05
Posts: 7,905
|
|
Experts will tell you that driving is an INCREDIBLY complex task, involving all the senses and constant recalculations.
Typically, in human research studies, a variety of tests can be used to measure "impairment". Things like cognitive tests, hand-eye coordination tasks, balance, digit recall etc. However, we don't know how these tasks translate into "driving ability" and usually they measure one or two aspects of cognition. They aren't nearly as complex as operating a vehicle.
Perhaps more importantly, we don't know the "threshold" levels for when a real increase in accidents would occur. To get a bit more complex, things like behavioral tolerance, or state-dependent learning are unknown (at least with respect to driving).
Even with simulators, there are TONS of different types all collecting much different sets of data, and we really don't know how these data translate into "real world" driving ability.
So yes, you can measure "impairment", but we don't know if laboratory impairment is equal to dirving impairment, and we don't know how much impairment equals a real change in driving safety.
--------------------
...the whole experience is (and is as) a profound piece of knowledge. It is an indellible experience; it is forever known. I have known myself in a way I doubt I would have ever occurred except as it did.
Smith, P. Bull. Menninger Clinic (1959) 23:20-27; p. 27.
...most subjects find the experience valuable, some find it frightening, and many say that is it uniquely lovely.
Osmond, H. Annals, NY Acad Science (1957) 66:418-434; p.436
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
How does that video make you think it has anything to do with me? It mentions nothing about driving impaired. Where in any of my statements do I say anything even remotely close to me "feeling bad" about smoking weed? Or any drug for that matter? I simply don't think it's right for people to drive impaired and possibly risk someone elses life or safety. I don't have a problem with any drug, nor do I agree with prohibition. There are a lot of things I don't do while driving i.e. eating, using a phone, drugs or alcohol etc. if you don't agree with my opinion then thats fine, I get it let it go man or at least make a relative post.
BTW I got the nickname The Influence when I was in highschool for influencing my friends into doing things that usually resulted in getting us in trouble, since then I have matured a bit but the name stuck. Either way it has nothing to do with anti-drug campaigns.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist
Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 24,722
Last seen: 4 days, 19 hours
|
|
Quote:
I simply don't think it's right for people to drive impaired and possibly risk someone elses life or safety.
Sober drivers risk other peoples life and safety too - In fact, most accidents involve sober drivers. If it is unacceptable to risk other peoples lives, should take all drivers off the road?
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
Quote:
I simply don't think it's right for people to drive impaired and possibly risk someone elses life or safety.
Sober drivers risk other peoples life and safety too - In fact, most accidents involve sober drivers. If it is unacceptable to risk other peoples lives, should take all drivers off the road?
People need to drive in todays society, but that doesn't mean they have to increase the chances of bringing harm to someone else by driving impaired. Also how many of them sober drivers where distracted by something else like eating or using a cell phone? How many people that drive use drugs or alcohol? I'm sure there are more sober drivers than impaired drivers so of course statistically there will be more sober accidents.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
LongStrangeTrip
Deadhead
Registered: 09/19/09
Posts: 3,373
|
|
Quote:
Authors of the new paper, published online Thursday in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), sifted through nine previous studies to develop a clearer picture of the risks to users who light up before revving up. Previous studies have left the effects of marijuana on its own—when not combined with alcohol or other drugs—a little hazy.
What a bunch of bullshit, I am surprised no one has called this out yet.
Their findings are not based on them PREFORMING any actual "tests" or "studies"; it is them looking at the finds of OTHER studies, in aggregate, and then coming up with their own opinion. This is something that happens in the academic world; it is like it is an excuse so a researcher can find something to publish without doing a whole lot of anything on their own.
Their findings are bullshit, and all opinion. Fuck them, this is nothing more than academic dick-stroking. They knew what conclusion they were coming to before they sat down and wrote a thing.
--------------------
Nothing I say or do is factual; every single thing I write is a work of fiction. Got no idea what I'm talking about here~
"Once in awhile, you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right"~ (Grateful Dead)
"o puer, qui omnia nomini debes"; "You, boy, who owe's everything to a name"~ Mark Anthony
"Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum."; "Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system."~ Cicero
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
|
For the record, here's a compendium of research on cannabis use and driving impairment:
Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence
At least one of those cited studies showed a negative (but statistically insignificant) correlation between cannabis use and traffic accidents. The vast majority show a small, but again statistically insignificant, increase.
There's broad consensus that cannabis does, indeed, mildly impair some aspects of driving skill. There's also broad consensus that the impairment is very self-regulating; i.e. impaired drivers adequately compensate for the impairment by slowing down and driving more cautiously. This should be no surprise, because the human body's extensive cannabinoid receptor system plays a large role in the regulation of biological functions of the body.
One important take-away from all the driving statistics is this: The risk you assume just by operating a motor vehicle at all, perfectly straight, much bigger (50% more!) than the additional risk you assume by driving stoned. This statistic is derived from the exact same research data that created this bullshit "Almost twice as much!" headline.
Think about that the next time you get in your car. Speed kills, and cannabis use does not significantly change the statistical risk of that.
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15788753 - 02/10/12 02:05 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Speed kills. Driving is dangerous. There are lots of risk factors involved in driving activity.
But... what are the relative risks, and punishments?
Speeding: excessive speed carries a greater relative risk than cannabis use. Enforcement/punishment: monetary fine.
Other moving violations (disregard traffic controls): these too, carry a greater relative risk than cannabis use. Enforcement/punishment: monetary fine.
Alcohol use: by far the single most dangerous driving activity. Enforcement/punishment: arrest, loss of license, big monetary fine, maybe some jail time for repeat offenders.
Cannabis use: the least relative risk of almost all activities. Enforcement/punishment: arrest, felony charges, avg. 5 yrs prison sentence, debilitating financial penalties, and more.
Even the Constitution of the United States, which is the supreme law of this country, specifically states that punishments should fit the crime. Penalties for cannabis use are so ridiculously severe and out of proportion compared to the actual risk of use, it clearly violates Constitutional rights.
If the punishment really fit the relative risk of the crime, if you were caught driving high, the cop would do little more than stub out your joint, call you an idiot, and send you on your way. Maybe a small fine. That's it.
Furthermore, off the roadways cannabis prohibition kills infinitely (yes, this is an absolutely valid and accurate statistic) more people than cannabis itself.
Legalize it, regulate it, tax it if you must. But for God's sake, please stop violently attacking and depriving US citizens of their liberty for producing, distributing, or using such a mild, completely non-toxic drug.
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
|
Quote:
LongStrangeTrip said:
Quote:
...this is nothing more than academic dick-stroking.
Thank you for posting that. It needed said.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15788813 - 02/10/12 02:17 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
h4x354x0r said:
Cannabis use: the least relative risk of almost all activities. Enforcement/punishment: arrest, felony charges, avg. 5 yrs prison sentence, debilitating financial penalties, and more.
Do you have any links to back that up? In WI you get in the same trouble for driving under the influence cannabis as you do for alcohol or other drugs. The severity of the penalties dependent on how many prior DUIs you have on your record. Your also pretty inaccurate with your ideas of what happens to a drunk driver charged with a DUI. In quite a few states I know for a fact the penalty includes jail after the first offense. Come on man lets stick to facts instead of obscuring the facts to fit your argument.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
Edited by The Influence (02/10/12 02:27 PM)
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15789568 - 02/10/12 05:02 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
Quote:
h4x354x0r said:
Cannabis use: the least relative risk of almost all activities. Enforcement/punishment: arrest, felony charges, avg. 5 yrs prison sentence, debilitating financial penalties, and more.
Do you have any links to back that up? In WI you get in the same trouble for driving under the influence cannabis as you do for alcohol or other drugs. The severity of the penalties dependent on how many prior DUIs you have on your record. Your also pretty inaccurate with your ideas of what happens to a drunk driver charged with a DUI. In quite a few states I know for a fact the penalty includes jail after the first offense. Come on man lets stick to facts instead of obscuring the facts to fit your argument.
That Above The Influence crack was about your name, in which I just had a feeling you got the name from it. Now as for your statement...
http://norml.org/laws/item/virginia-penalties-2?category_id=892
These are for Virginia. You can click "Drugged Driving" to check those out. I'm still too caught up on your name to have been following exactly what you were talking about, but there's the information you need, lol. What H4x said though is generally a true statement. Using marijuana has repercussions on your life that are permanent. Just search google for all the reports of losing jobs, court costs, ect. It's horrible bro, you seem to be out of the loop or something.
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15789591 - 02/10/12 05:07 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
Do you have any links to back that up?
Please, stop playing dumb with questions like that. I already provided a link that allows you to access the research, in the post just above the one you responded to. Heck, links are cheap, here it is again: Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence
Everything on that web page is properly referenced to the actual research publications. Others have chimed in and posted additional links, as well. Review the research for yourself, and crunch the numbers for yourself. Extra points if you can manage not to skew your own math with your own apparent prejudice.
I live in Missouri, home of Anheuser-Busch Brewing. Alcohol laws and enforcement are very lax in my state, while cannabis laws are enforced with violent SWAT team home invasions, and 1st time offense penalties averaging 3-5 years in prison. Even if I were grossly exaggerating (which I'm not, at least for my state), the relative punishments would still be egregiously disproportional.
I posted: "...maybe some jail time for repeat offenders."
You replied: "...the penalty includes jail after the first offense."
And those two statements are fundamentally different, how? Or did you actually mean to say ON the first offense?
The rub here is, that for first offenses, at least in my state, charges are often bargained down to something besides an actual DUI/BAC, as long as the person pays hundreds of dollars to attend one of those "driver education" classes. Sometimes people wind up with several alcohol offenses before they are charged with their first true DUI or BAC violation, before they end up seeing any jail time. But I concede this does vary from state to state.
Finally, until you post at least as many links as I have (just one!), to prove *your* point, I've already one-upped you on "proof." Considering that my one link actually references 13 research studies, I've actually 13-upped you on "Proof."
Time for you to "prove" your own assertions, I think.
|
akira_akuma
Recalcitrant
Registered: 08/27/09
Posts: 18,264
Loc: current position: in Cana...
Last seen: 3 minutes, 29 seconds
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15789615 - 02/10/12 05:14 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
*checks to see if thread includes article from British research*
LOL! bingo!
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15789678 - 02/10/12 05:34 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
h4x354x0r said:
Quote:
The Influence said:
Do you have any links to back that up?
Please, stop playing dumb with questions like that. I already provided a link that allows you to access the research, in the post just above the one you responded to. Heck, links are cheap, here it is again: Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence
Everything on that web page is properly referenced to the actual research publications. Others have chimed in and posted additional links, as well. Review the research for yourself, and crunch the numbers for yourself. Extra points if you can manage not to skew your own math with your own apparent prejudice.
I live in Missouri, home of Anheuser-Busch Brewing. Alcohol laws and enforcement are very lax in my state, while cannabis laws are enforced with violent SWAT team home invasions, and 1st time offense penalties averaging 3-5 years in prison. Even if I were grossly exaggerating (which I'm not, at least for my state), the relative punishments would still be egregiously disproportional.
I posted: "...maybe some jail time for repeat offenders."
You replied: "...the penalty includes jail after the first offense."
And those two statements are fundamentally different, how? Or did you actually mean to say ON the first offense?
The rub here is, that for first offenses, at least in my state, charges are often bargained down to something besides an actual DUI/BAC, as long as the person pays hundreds of dollars to attend one of those "driver education" classes. Sometimes people wind up with several alcohol offenses before they are charged with their first true DUI or BAC violation, before they end up seeing any jail time. But I concede this does vary from state to state.
Finally, until you post at least as many links as I have (just one!), to prove *your* point, I've already one-upped you on "proof." Considering that my one link actually references 13 research studies, I've actually 13-upped you on "Proof."
Time for you to "prove" your own assertions, I think.
Where talking about penalties for driving under the influence not swat teams raiding houses, of fucking course the penalties are worse for maintaining a drug trafficing place (and if your going to tell me that the swat team comes in for simple possesion don't bother replying) than just being under the influence while driving. I asked for proof on the penalties. I know that marijuana impairs motor skills, I SMOKE MARIJUANA DAILY ALONG WITH MANY OF MY FRIENDS.
" A 2002 review of seven separate studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, “Crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes.” "
I pulled that out of your link. Notice how they said drivers with cannabinoids in the blood? How long can marijuana remain in the average marijuana consumers system? For 30 days easy, it does not state that these paticipants were directly under the influence of marijuana. It also says that it does cause impairment, but not to the extent alcohol does. I never claimed that it did impair someone as much as alcohol, but that I don't agree with any kind of impaired driving.
And debutemachine you seem to think that I am against drug use in general. What statement of mine leads you to think that? I have simply stated that I don't agree with driving impaired. Out of the loop? Weed is illegal of course it has consequences that are worse than alcohol (which is legal) but we are not discussing possesion, or prohibition for that matter. The topic is being under the influence while driving, so all of what you just said means nothing on this topic. I got out of the joint two years ago for selling pills, you think I support prohibition? Fuck to the no.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15789724 - 02/10/12 05:46 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Look, me and a few other posters have posted links disproving the "smoking gun theory" that MJ impairs your ability to drive. The truth is there also seems to be evidence that MJ makes you drive better. So there's that; inconclusive.
As far as the prohibition thing goes, I really feel MJ could be (and should be) used all the time. Sure it can helps chemo-therapy, AIDs and HIV sufferers, ect. No one mentions that it can help you fall asleep, or help you gain some weight! I'm against prohibition, but I'm also in the train of thought that MJ should be used by everyone. Yes, even kids through baked goods if they so desire. Smoking is not for children...
This is where our differences come in. You still seem to think MJ is stigmatic or something, just by the way you are acting over this whole driving thing. And to be fair, I would submit to a field test if I was asked to, I thought that was a great idea.
"Walk in a straight line? Sure officer, watch I can even do it with my eyes closed!"
So anyways, props for that idea. I think it's legit.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: DebuteMachine]
#15789764 - 02/10/12 05:56 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DebuteMachine said:
Look, me and a few other posters have posted links disproving the "smoking gun theory" that MJ impairs your ability to drive. The truth is there also seems to be evidence that MJ makes you drive better. So there's that; inconclusive.
No you haven't the links say that it does impair reaction time and causes distraction. Just not as much as alcohol. My claim was never that weed impaired someone as much as alcohol, just that it does impair one.
"3.It is not possible to exclude the possibility that the use of cannabis (with or without alcohol) leads to an increased risk of road traffic crashes causing less serious injuries and vehicle damage.” "
Another quote directly from the link. There are many more along that lines. Most of them studies claim nothing conclusive when it comes to "making someone drive better". Also you never addressed the other point I made with a pulled quote from the link.
Quote:
The Influence said:" A 2002 review of seven separate studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, “Crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes.” "
I pulled that out of your link. Notice how they said drivers with cannabinoids in the blood? How long can marijuana remain in the average marijuana consumers system? For 30 days easy, it does not state that these paticipants were directly under the influence of marijuana. It also says that it does cause impairment, but not to the extent alcohol does. I never claimed that it did impair someone as much as alcohol, but that I don't agree with any kind of impaired driving.
Quote:
DebuteMachine said:
As far as the prohibition thing goes, I really feel MJ could be (and should be) used all the time. Sure it can helps chemo-therapy, AIDs and HIV sufferers, ect. No one mentions that it can help you fall asleep, or help you gain some weight! I'm against prohibition, but I'm also in the train of thought that MJ should be used by everyone. Yes, even kids through baked goods if they so desire. Smoking is not for children...
This is where our differences come in. You still seem to think MJ is stigmatic or something, just by the way you are acting over this whole driving thing. And to be fair, I would submit to a field test if I was asked to, I thought that was a great idea.
"Walk in a straight line? Sure officer, watch I can even do it with my eyes closed!"
So anyways, props for that idea. I think it's legit.
Again man this has nothing to do with prohibition, so why you keep bringing that up is beyond me. As I said I have just got out of the joint two years ago for selling pills. I in no way shape or form support prohibition. But I will not support people increasing the chances of hurting someone else even if it's a little increase or a huge one. So lets not continue to bring up prohibition, stick on topic.
And lastly, I would have no problem with someone that can pass a field sobriety test (as I have stated before) just like with alcohol, if you can't pass one you don't belong on the road. I really don't see you logically arguing that?
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15789781 - 02/10/12 06:00 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
If you want to end prohibition why is it okay to make it illegal to smoke and drive? Like I've said, using your cell phone is worse than being high, and that's probably something you do even though you claim to be morally above smoking and driving. 
"DRIVERS ON CELL PHONES ARE AS BAD AS DRUNKS
UTAH PSYCHOLOGISTS WARN AGAINST CELL PHONE USE WHILE DRIVING"
http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: DebuteMachine]
#15789791 - 02/10/12 06:02 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DebuteMachine said:
If you want to end prohibition why is it okay to make it illegal to smoke and drive? Like I've said, using your cell phone is worse than being high, and that's probably something you do even though you claim to be morally above smoking and driving.
"DRIVERS ON CELL PHONES ARE AS BAD AS DRUNKS
UTAH PSYCHOLOGISTS WARN AGAINST CELL PHONE USE WHILE DRIVING"
http://unews.utah.edu/old/p/062206-1.html
 I like to enjoy a few beers but I don't agree with drunk driving. You sure like to assume alot. I absolutely don't drive and use my phone. Matter of fact I don't barley use my cell phone anyways. Did you not read the above post? I said and I quote "And lastly, I would have no problem with someone that can pass a field sobriety test (as I have stated before) just like with alcohol, if you can't pass one you don't belong on the road. I really don't see you logically arguing that? "
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15789805 - 02/10/12 06:07 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
To me it's just a non issue, but I see that it would bother some other people more. But if we are both on a general consensus a field test would be the route of action, then there's not much else to say. Word up man.
|
akira_akuma
Recalcitrant
Registered: 08/27/09
Posts: 18,264
Loc: current position: in Cana...
Last seen: 3 minutes, 29 seconds
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: DebuteMachine]
#15789814 - 02/10/12 06:09 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
research paper morality. 
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: DebuteMachine]
#15789822 - 02/10/12 06:11 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DebuteMachine said:
To me it's just a non issue, but I see that it would bother some other people more. But if we are both on a general consensus a field test would be the route of action, then there's not much else to say. Word up man.
I said in the begining of the thread I think the same laws should apply to driving high as driving drunk. If you can prove your not impaired then carry on down the road.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: The Influence]
#15790279 - 02/10/12 08:13 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Influence said:
If you can prove your not impaired then carry on down the road
Which should bring this argument full circle. You share roadways with stoned drivers all the time. You have for years. It creates very, very few problems. Billions of stoned driving miles do indeed prove: the impairment is minimal and virtually everyone carries on down the road.
I am not advocating getting high and driving. I agree in principle that cannabis regulation should be similar to alcohol regulation. But cannabis is so incredibly much safer overall - both directly in terms of ingestion, and causally from impairment - that penalties and regulations should be substantially less than those for alcohol.
What I am doing rationally assessing the risk, and concluding that cannabis impairment in drivers is the least of my worries. And, I ride a bicycle for my primary transportation; I have a lot to lose by being wrong.
What I am doing is weighing the small additional risk and the damage that stoned driving presents, against the immense violence and damage that cannabis prohibition causes. The "ZOMG! Stoned Driver are SOOOO dangerous!" lies and propaganda are repeatedly used to justify the prohibition. The original article was clearly bullshit propaganda with misleading statistical mumbo-jumbo to justify continuing cannabis prohibition, and I'm still calling it out as such.
Sorry, I'm not a purist. This is the real world. I'm perfectly willing to choose the "evil" of stoned driving OVER the evil of cannabis prohibition.
I guess you just want your weed to stay illegal?
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15790684 - 02/10/12 10:16 PM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
I am willing to open this debate to scientific evidence that driving stoned increases your driving skills 
People always say "impairment" when some sort of shift occurs in your brain. Why do we always assume it's a bad shift?
But for the time being, walk the line test would be awesome. Officers could find out first hand that stoned drivers aren't a danger (this is me assuming such, like I said scientific evidence would be needed).
Here's also to hoping they wouldn't abuse the power. Hah, yea right...
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
Re: Risk factors and enforcement in driving [Re: h4x354x0r]
#15792548 - 02/11/12 11:45 AM (3 months, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
h4x354x0r said:
Quote:
The Influence said:
If you can prove your not impaired then carry on down the road
Which should bring this argument full circle. You share roadways with stoned drivers all the time. You have for years. It creates very, very few problems. Billions of stoned driving miles do indeed prove: the impairment is minimal and virtually everyone carries on down the road.
I am not advocating getting high and driving. I agree in principle that cannabis regulation should be similar to alcohol regulation. But cannabis is so incredibly much safer overall - both directly in terms of ingestion, and causally from impairment - that penalties and regulations should be substantially less than those for alcohol.
What I am doing rationally assessing the risk, and concluding that cannabis impairment in drivers is the least of my worries. And, I ride a bicycle for my primary transportation; I have a lot to lose by being wrong.
What I am doing is weighing the small additional risk and the damage that stoned driving presents, against the immense violence and damage that cannabis prohibition causes. The "ZOMG! Stoned Driver are SOOOO dangerous!" lies and propaganda are repeatedly used to justify the prohibition. The original article was clearly bullshit propaganda with misleading statistical mumbo-jumbo to justify continuing cannabis prohibition, and I'm still calling it out as such.
Sorry, I'm not a purist. This is the real world. I'm perfectly willing to choose the "evil" of stoned driving OVER the evil of cannabis prohibition.
I guess you just want your weed to stay illegal?
Your obviously not reading what I am posting so just stop replying to me. I get your point, you don't get mine. Nothing there is going to change so let it be. I said in the begining that I think they should treat marijuana the same as alcohol. Nothing about keeping it illegal, or about it being the worst possible thing a driver can do etc. etc.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 52,515
|
|
Quote:
Alan Rockefeller said:
The level of chemicals in a persons body is a poor indicator of how they will react on the road. I think we should test for impairment, not for specific drugs.
Reaction time is easy to measure. The officer can drop a yardstick, and the driver grabs it as soon as they can. The distance it fell is measured. This is a quantitative measure of how quickly people can react to dangerous situations on the road.
If a test like this was implemented, millions of sober elderly people would be arrested for DUI, and the younger stoners would go free. Drunk drivers of all ages would be fucked, but only if they were actually impaired.
This.
Also just speaking from personal experience, I've found that I'm a better driver when I'm stoned, mostly because I'm aware of my condition and can compensate for it, and partly because I'm paranoid that I'll get pulled over for performing a traffic violation so I obey more rules of the road, don't speed, etcetera. On the other hand, my memory gets shot when I'm fairly high so I always forget how to get to my destination.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
  
Edited by deCypher (02/11/12 09:35 PM)
|
h4x354x0r
Hack Man
Registered: 05/24/10
Posts: 20
Last seen: 1 month, 1 day
|
Re: Misleading statistical bullshit [Re: deCypher] 1
#15798207 - 02/12/12 02:10 PM (3 months, 14 days ago) |
|
|
I'm glad The Influence gets my point, and I'm sorry I don't quite seem to get his.
I've gone back and reviewed the posts, and it seems the only place we differ is that The Influence seems to advocate a zero tolerance policy for cannabis-impaired driving, while I don't.
There seems to have been some shift on The Influence's part during the debate, from "you shouldn't drive at all if you're high" - a zero USE tolerance - to a "you shouldn't drive if you're impaired" - a zero IMPAIRMENT tolerance.
Which brings us back to the problem of measuring impairment. I can play Hacky Sack on a professional level when I'm "impaired," and if given any kind of balance / coordination test, I'd fucking blow it away no matter how stoned I was. That doesn't mean I'm OK to drive.
My personal experience was that being high while driving around town seemed mildly distracting, but for long-distance highway driving, it (with a little music) really helped me focus, concentrate, and enjoy what would have otherwise been a rather boring task. So, for me, there wasn't even a single answer about "impairment." It depends.
We've had MMJ long enough that we've actually got some fairly good data on actual accident statistics. 4 of 7 states saw a statistically significant decrease in traffic accidents compared to non-MMJ states; the other 3 showed no increase. This is not because cannabis makes people better drivers; it's because cannabis displaces more risky behaviors (mostly alcohol use).
A zero-tolerance mindset is one of the primary tools of prohibition propaganda, and does absolutely nothing to forward an agenda of safety. A more tolerant mindset for cannabis, OTOH, has a real, positive, measurable effect on safety because it allows people to freely choose far less risky behaviors. I believe we need to gravitate towards leniency and tolerance until all risk displacement benefits have been realized.
|
The Influence
I make it do what it do
Registered: 03/30/11
Posts: 4,249
Loc: Not Wisconsin
Last seen: 1 hour, 9 minutes
|
|
Quote:
h4x354x0r said:
I'm glad The Influence gets my point, and I'm sorry I don't quite seem to get his.
I've gone back and reviewed the posts, and it seems the only place we differ is that The Influence seems to advocate a zero tolerance policy for cannabis-impaired driving, while I don't.
There seems to have been some shift on The Influence's part during the debate, from "you shouldn't drive at all if you're high" - a zero USE tolerance - to a "you shouldn't drive if you're impaired" - a zero IMPAIRMENT tolerance.
Which brings us back to the problem of measuring impairment. I can play Hacky Sack on a professional level when I'm "impaired," and if given any kind of balance / coordination test, I'd fucking blow it away no matter how stoned I was. That doesn't mean I'm OK to drive.
My personal experience was that being high while driving around town seemed mildly distracting, but for long-distance highway driving, it (with a little music) really helped me focus, concentrate, and enjoy what would have otherwise been a rather boring task. So, for me, there wasn't even a single answer about "impairment." It depends.
We've had MMJ long enough that we've actually got some fairly good data on actual accident statistics. 4 of 7 states saw a statistically significant decrease in traffic accidents compared to non-MMJ states; the other 3 showed no increase. This is not because cannabis makes people better drivers; it's because cannabis displaces more risky behaviors (mostly alcohol use).
A zero-tolerance mindset is one of the primary tools of prohibition propaganda, and does absolutely nothing to forward an agenda of safety. A more tolerant mindset for cannabis, OTOH, has a real, positive, measurable effect on safety because it allows people to freely choose far less risky behaviors. I believe we need to gravitate towards leniency and tolerance until all risk displacement benefits have been realized.
Quote:
The Influence said:
Ok and I'm not saying it impairs your ability, but I truly believe it impairs enough peoples ability that it's safer to apply the same laws to it as drinking and driving. If you were to do a real study and get the results to say that marijuana makes drivers more attentive and react faster then you might change my opinion. But I know a lot of smokers that I won't get in a car with again, and others I really wouldn't want on the road.
This is one of my first posts in this thread. One I made before you decided to come in here to argue. I tried saying this a couple times yet you keep arguing for the sake of arguing. So really dude let it the go. No where did I say I believe in a zero tolerance policy and while I didn't clarify this in my first two posts I did right away in the one above. You can keep putting words in my mouth but it really is getting old.
--------------------
Bad: Waking up to find a penis has been drawn on your face. Worse: Finding out it was traced
|
DebuteMachine
Psychonaut
Registered: 09/29/06
Posts: 1,670
Last seen: 2 months, 12 days
|
|
Yea, it's not worth arguing over the small details. I am still one to believe driving stoned can potentially improve driving, but the science needs real time to be proven.
Sobriety tests should be used instead of blood measurement, that's just unfair and inconclusive. I'd be down to walk the line, or even do my ABC's backwards even as hard as it is.
That's what we need to move to first, before we start talking zero tolerance versus acceptance.
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
