Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Science and Technology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked.
    #10804652 -

http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/23111/

"The test takes less than 90 seconds and can detect drugs at concentrations measured in parts-per-billion using a single microliter of saliva. The sensor is capable of even greater sensitivity--it has been used to detect cardiac troponin, a commonly used indicator of heart attack, at concentrations 1,000 times lower."

scary stuff.


--------------------
"I'm gonna clear the air, with the metal that's known to divide the whole atmosphere, and I love to share, them bullets come dime a dozen I kept 2 so I could have spare."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10804819 -

i don't think this is a bad thing. i think that 1 of the reasons it cant be legal is unlike alcohol they cant test if you are high when driving and not high last week and driving today.


--------------------
IF A CAT AND DOG CAN GET ALONG WHY CANT EVERYONE ELSE?
If the sky is falling, don't look up!  :abduction:

Feel Family Founder. :pm: me if you are tired of hearing, "Use the search function".

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: feelfunny]
    #10805694 -

Ive been fighting a marijuana DUI now for over 16 months! They keep rescheduling it. I already have a civil rights attorney lined up waiting to sue the pants off the common wealth if they reschedule again. That would bring them over the allowed limit of right to a speedy trial thus violating my rights.

The cop says I was high and he found a half smoked blunt in my car.

Moron hands me the joint and tells me to put it in my pocket. I ate it :shrug:
Didnt give them a blood test either. So basically its his word against mine but...

- He said my car was black and its white
- He said I was a certain age at the time of the arrest but I was really 2 years older. This was after he looked at my state issued ID
- I was first wrote up for possession but those charges were mysteriously dropped.

and with no blood they have ZERO evidence of anything. I'm going to make that cop look like a fucking idiot tomorrow morning in front of the judge. :smile:


I wish I had time to type everything.

Basically... cops are morons and you and I can outsmart them all


--------------------
MY TRADE LIST!!!

FULLY AUTOMATIC!! 12-Pot Multi Grow Hydroponic System for Trade.


Download PSX ISOs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #10806702 -

I have no problem with Law Enforcement enforcing DUI.  I have seen alot of knuckleheads driving cars under the infuence that were putting other people at great risk.

Are they going to have allowable limits?  Can they test for different concentrations?  What if you did opiates the day before and you test positive that day?  Theres a big difference then someone being impaired and under the influence.  Like alchohol for example we have certain thresholds of alchohol content in your body that is allowed. 

I think they will need to work that out before this becomes reasonable.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #10807453 -

legallyhomeless said:
Moron hands me the joint and tells me to put it in my pocket. I ate it :shrug:
Didnt give them a blood test either. So basically its his word against mine but...



lol, good job.  :thumbup:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #10807903 -

Shit man, that's pretty awesome.  Let us know how it goes.  I hope you win it.  :royalrainbow:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Minstrel]
    #10808568 -

Minstrel said:
Shit man, that's pretty awesome.  Let us know how it goes.  I hope you win it.  :royalrainbow:



--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10809758 -

> Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked

Roadside drug testing... good news for those of us that don't like to risk their lives driving on the road with irresponsible drug users.  I have no problem with people that use drugs, but irresponsible drug users, such as those that use drugs and then drive while intoxicated, are one of the main reasons why drugs remain illegal.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Seuss]
    #10810321 -

There are going to be serious problems of finding and setting minimums. I would be seriously concerned if I had to be worried about driving just because I was partying the night before, or the week before, depending on the substance.


--------------------
"I'm gonna clear the air, with the metal that's known to divide the whole atmosphere, and I love to share, them bullets come dime a dozen I kept 2 so I could have spare."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Seuss]
    #10810747 -

Seuss said:
> Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked

Roadside drug testing... good news for those of us that don't like to risk their lives driving on the road with irresponsible drug users.  I have no problem with people that use drugs, but irresponsible drug users, such as those that use drugs and then drive while intoxicated, are one of the main reasons why drugs remain illegal.



i've driven over 40,000 miles in the last two years, all over the south, mid-west, and west; 95% of the interstate/highway driving was high on cannabis, and 90% of the town driving was high on cannabis.

i've never had an accident (thus far), and no speeding ticket since i was 16 (didn't even smoke then).


some of us are responsible driving stoned, and i often feel more comfortable and safe driving while "under the influence"




now i agree not everyone should, and there have been times where i've refused to drive because i know i'm too high.  it's about knowing your limits.  unfortunately there's no way to bring that factor into legislation


--------------------
channel your inner Larry David

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: demiu5]
    #10810779 -

demius said:
i've driven over 40,000 miles in the last two years, all over the south, mid-west, and west; 95% of the interstate/highway driving was high on cannabis, and 90% of the town driving was high on cannabis.




I drive with a hit or two in me about 90% of the time as well. No accidents, no tickets, no stops. Driving the SPEED LIMIT is what's important if you want to talk about safety.

But, there is a line. After an extended vaporizer session, I don't just run out and drive... I wait, just like I do after drinking a barleywine. :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: RoosterCogburn] * 1
    #10811228 -

The claim that you can drive whilst stoned is moot.  Just like there are people who claim they can drive better when they've had a few drinks.  The problem is there are a lot of people who probably cannot drive as safely when they are stoned as when they are sober.

But like you said, there is a line.  Ideally, there should be a "limit" to how stoned you can be, but the idea of that is ridiculous.  There is no test to tell how "stoned" a person is, everyone handles their shit different.  If there is any hope of ever federally decriminalizing marijuana, it should not be permissible for people to drive under the influence of it, and for that, we need a test to tell if people have been using.


--------------------

Signature (up to 750 characters).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: cortex] * 1
    #10812193 -

> Ideally, there should be a "limit" to how stoned you can be

Personally, I believe "limits" should be done away with and replaced with filmed, standardized, road side tests.  If you fail the road side test, even if you are only tired or taking prescription meds, you get a DUI (or equiv).  If you blow a .3 but can still pass the road side test, then off you go.

Regardless, people that drive "stoned" that do get into accidents, even if they are not at fault, give the establishment ammunition to decry all drug users as irresponsible losers.  Be responsible with your drug use and stay off the roads when under the influence.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Seuss]
    #10812373 -

well I was found guilty. Im going to fight it further. Just goes to show its worth the money to just pay a lawyer rather then a free public defender.

There was NO evidence other then my pupils were dilated. Clearly sufficient ground for a conviction. :thumbup:


$1000 fine
3 days in jail
1 year parole


--------------------
MY TRADE LIST!!!

FULLY AUTOMATIC!! 12-Pot Multi Grow Hydroponic System for Trade.


Download PSX ISOs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Seuss]
    #10812411 -

Quote:
Be responsible with your drug use and stay off the roads when under the influence.


:yesnod:


--------------------

Signature (up to 750 characters).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Seuss]
    #10812765 -

Seuss said:
> Ideally, there should be a "limit" to how stoned you can be

Personally, I believe "limits" should be done away with and replaced with filmed, standardized, road side tests.  If you fail the road side test, even if you are only tired or taking prescription meds, you get a DUI (or equiv).  If you blow a .3 but can still pass the road side test, then off you go.

Regardless, people that drive "stoned" that do get into accidents, even if they are not at fault, give the establishment ammunition to decry all drug users as irresponsible losers.  Be responsible with your drug use and stay off the roads when under the influence.




Yep, I totally agree with this and your previous test.



An alcoholic with a huge tolerance will be dangerous (going into DT's) if sober, and will be "sober" with a high BAC and yet no impairment.


I can be quite drunk at well under the legal limit, and I know people who aren't (so it appears) at quite high above the limit.


I think we should have a standard impairment test- ideally one with objective criteria for failure.


This way people can a) test themselves; b) not drive if they are impaired; c) not be convicted if they aren't impaired; d) not be convicted because they smoked a joint three days ago and such was detected;


I see no reason why tired driving, old people with crap sight and reaction times, and stoned driving should be treated at all differently as far as the offense (though the sentence may well be deservedly different).


Lets standardize this with real, relevant, and scientifically backed data, and stop injecting politics into what should be an objective determination of whether a person is criminally unfit to drive.


Does it really matter why they are unfit?  Not so far as I can see- they should not be driving if they are impaired sufficiently.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #10812789 -

legallyhomeless said:
well I was found guilty. Im going to fight it further. Just goes to show its worth the money to just pay a lawyer rather then a free public defender.

There was NO evidence other then my pupils were dilated. Clearly sufficient ground for a conviction. :thumbup:


$1000 fine
3 days in jail
1 year parole




I'm almost certain you are incorrect and that there was indeed much more evidence- such as the way the officer said you looked, smelled, reacted, talked, stood, walked, et cet.


For whatever reason, people always seem to think that they need the drug to be convicted of drug possesion, or that they need lab results to be convicted of having so much drugs in your blood.


If the law punishes impairment by a controlled substance, then you can be convicted when they find such- regardless of the evidence.  I'm guessing though, that the law was actually stricter than that... What was the actual offense and the defining elements?  Impairment or just under the influence?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: johnm214]
    #10813348 -

The availability of road-side testing will only make things easier for people in some states.  For example, in Nevada they can already forcibly blood test you for controlled substances basically at the officer's discretion.  And they don't do that on the road-side--they arrest you for DUI off the bat, drag you to a hospital, extract blood, then throw your ass in jail until you post jail or go to court.

The limit for driving under the influence of marijuana in Nevada is 2ng/mL in blood and the supreme court of the state has ruled that there is no need to prove that this in any way indicates actual impairment.  There have supposedly been cases of people smoking marijuana up to 4 days before the blood was drawn being convicted of DUI marijuana for having levels above this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #10813373 -

Now that I actually read the article though....

I used to work for a small company that was developing technology very similar to this, but for medical diagnostics rather than law enforcement purposes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #10816108 -

ChuangTzu said:
The availability of road-side testing will only make things easier for people in some states.  For example, in Nevada they can already forcibly blood test you for controlled substances basically at the officer's discretion.  And they don't do that on the road-side--they arrest you for DUI off the bat, drag you to a hospital, extract blood, then throw your ass in jail until you post jail or go to court.

The limit for driving under the influence of marijuana in Nevada is 2ng/mL in blood and the supreme court of the state has ruled that there is no need to prove that this in any way indicates actual impairment.  There have supposedly been cases of people smoking marijuana up to 4 days before the blood was drawn being convicted of DUI marijuana for having levels above this.



Yep, in michigain its any amount of a controlled substance or metabolite/analogue (I forget which).


You can be completely sober, have no controlled substance in your body, and be guilty of DUI.


Not only don't they not have to prove impairment, they don't even have to prove that you had a physiologically active substance in your body.  Its ridiculous.


In any case, the procedures you reference do indeed suck, but that's kind of a side issue.  The problem is what shoudl be prohibited, and I think its clear that impairment shoudl be prohibited and that such should be defined objectively such that either reaction times, concentration, et cet are the deciding factors- barring obvious inability to pass the test if it were administered (unconciousness et cet)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: johnm214]
    #10816460 -

johnm214 said:
In any case, the procedures you reference do indeed suck, but that's kind of a side issue.  The problem is what shoudl be prohibited, and I think its clear that impairment shoudl be prohibited and that such should be defined objectively such that either reaction times, concentration, et cet are the deciding factors- barring obvious inability to pass the test if it were administered (unconciousness et cet)


Agreed.  But, such a test has to be completely designed from scratch.  Most elements of current roadside impairment measures are complete bullshit.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #10816487 -

lol, yep


They seem utterly unscientific and completely arbitrary.  The patchwork of laws based on legislative prejudice and misconceptions and the arbitrary tests need to go out the window.


Impairment is the issue.  Lets ban, punish, and test for impairment, and get some scientific basis for our increasingly draconian laws.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: johnm214]
    #10839099 -

How would you design this impairment test? I think it would be very close to impossible to make it unbiased and effective. The current roadside testing is a joke, walking the line and touching your nose and all that crap doesn't make much sense when used to determine if you are too fucked to drive a car.
substance tests are all we have.


--------------------
"I'm gonna clear the air, with the metal that's known to divide the whole atmosphere, and I love to share, them bullets come dime a dozen I kept 2 so I could have spare."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10839128 -

If the police got free reign to design their test, it'd probably involve a taser.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10841779 -

abetterlie said:
How would you design this impairment test? I think it would be very close to impossible to make it unbiased and effective. The current roadside testing is a joke, walking the line and touching your nose and all that crap doesn't make much sense when used to determine if you are too fucked to drive a car.
substance tests are all we have.


If impairment is a real thing then it is measurable.  If it is measurable then there is a method which can be used to measure it.  I see no a priori reason that such a method could not be in the form of a test which is administered on the side of the road or anywhere else.

Substance level tests would be useful if they actually correlated reliably with impairment.  Instead all we have are indirect measurements (of, for example, breath alcohol percentage) of something (blood alcohol percentage) which is an unreliable indirect measurement of what we really care about which is actual impairment.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #10841848 -

I realize that. The level of impairment is almost certainly directly coordinated with the amount of substance consumed, just not in a known relation. I'm just curious about how a test could be developed that would accurately measure the variable that we care about, when it is so difficult even for one's self to quantify.


--------------------
"I'm gonna clear the air, with the metal that's known to divide the whole atmosphere, and I love to share, them bullets come dime a dozen I kept 2 so I could have spare."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10841943 -

abetterlie said:
How would you design this impairment test? I think it would be very close to impossible to make it unbiased and effective. The current roadside testing is a joke, walking the line and touching your nose and all that crap doesn't make much sense when used to determine if you are too fucked to drive a car.
substance tests are all we have.




Like changtzu said, why is this so difficult?


What we measure will depend on what the legislature decides constitutes impairment, but I would think it would be: the reaction time increasing between recieving visual stimulous and taking mechanical action in response; loss of ability to maintain concentration/control over time; perhaps loss of short term memory and inpercision in mechanical movements.  These would certainly be better things to test than the presence or absence of controlled substances and analogues, or the level of an intoxicant with no requirement that the person be impaired before being subjected to harsh penalties.


An example could be a pair of galsses with a screen in them and a control for your hands.  A person could be instructed to indicate a response to a stimulous and the accuracy and reaction time could be measured.  Further, short term memory could be tested via obvious methods.


A very good test would seem to be a device such as this with a lifelike steering wheel and pedals.  The person could be required to demonstrate ability to react quickly in a driving simulator, and make appropriate corrections in response to visual stimuli.


But a simple test could just be reaction time and concentration with the subject responding with a joystick or something.


But all of this is unnecessary conjecture.  What is obvious is that if impairment is actually bad then it will produce results which can be tested.  Decide what level of awareness and capability is required and then test that instead of worthless blood levels and we'll all be better off.

My grandfather can't see worth shit, can barely drive due to very bad reaction times and lack of concentration, and is destined to kill someone.  He has a license in better shape then most people simply because he seldom drives when the family can prevent it.  If he took an adequate test he would likely be found unfit and have his license withdrawn, which would benefit society far more than a test that determines him sober, and lets him carry on running over geese he doesn't see and driving over lanes he didn't know where there, while making turns without looking in his blind spots.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #10841992 -

abetterlie said:
I realize that. The level of impairment is almost certainly directly coordinated with the amount of substance consumed, just not in a known relation. I'm just curious about how a test could be developed that would accurately measure the variable that we care about, when it is so difficult even for one's self to quantify.



What difference does the relationship between consumption and impairment make?


I thought the whole goal was to accurately test impairment since this is the evil?


The legislature or science community would find what generall is accepted as the lowest level of skills needed to safely drive a car (perhaps by measuring my incredibly hazardous grandfather's skills or maybe upping the base line from these if we've decided even currently licensed individuals are impaired- as I urge) and then test for these.



However they are defined, we would simply need to have tests which seem to measure them and then preform experiments to validate the relationship.


Then institute the tests.  To give a decent example (unlike my previous post which is just conjecture) I'd need to figure out what the negative effects of intoxication are in the legislature's opinion, but if they exist they can be tested, and then we just need to validate the relationships between the test and the impairment through experiments.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: johnm214]
    #10844208 -

We have roadside drug testing here, have for about 4 years now.

Haven't gone through one myself, but mates have.

I'm all for having intoxicated drivers off the road, but i don't want to test positive if i had smoked weed 8 hours earlier, which does happen here.

:frown:

Cops argument to that is "it shouldn't be in your system to begin with".


--------------------


"Those who dance are considered insane by those who cannot hear the music." - George Carlin

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: DepthToTheCore]
    #10844649 -

Seriously, if I wanted to, I could be baked out of my mind, and it would not be visibly detectable.  Visine and mouthwash:  win.

Any effect it might have would likely be negligible on my driving skills, but I still wouldn't be one to take the risk.  Always before any substance taking (pot/alcohol/whatever), you always gotta analyze "what is the worst that can happen?", and whether the risk/benefit is worth it.  Behind the wheel of a car, just consider the worst: that's a bad fucking trip.  Who wants that?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: DepthToTheCore]
    #10844672 -

DepthToTheCore said:
We have roadside drug testing here, have for about 4 years now.

Haven't gone through one myself, but mates have.

I'm all for having intoxicated drivers off the road, but i don't want to test positive if i had smoked weed 8 hours earlier, which does happen here.

:frown:

Cops argument to that is "it shouldn't be in your system to begin with".



When ever I went to court last week they had a drug recognition expert (DRE)

He stated that the initial effects of marijuana lasts only 3 to 4 hours (if you have some killer chronic :tongue:) but there are other long term effects the user may not know about that can last up to 24 hours. :whatever:


--------------------
MY TRADE LIST!!!

FULLY AUTOMATIC!! 12-Pot Multi Grow Hydroponic System for Trade.


Download PSX ISOs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: Minstrel]
    #10847677 -

Minstrel said:
Seriously, if I wanted to, I could be baked out of my mind, and it would not be visibly detectable.  Visine and mouthwash:  win.



I wouldn't rely on mouthwash, its failed here more than once. They take a pretty good swab from the inside of your cheek, the mouthwash can't wash away all the saliva.


--------------------


"Those who dance are considered insane by those who cannot hear the music." - George Carlin

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: DepthToTheCore]
    #10847811 -

Oh of course that wouldn't work against a hardcore swab test, but the whole point of the subterfuge is to not let it get that far.  :wink:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #10851310 -

Quote:
He stated that the initial effects of marijuana lasts only 3 to 4 hours (if you have some killer chronic :tongue:) but there are other long term effects the user may not know about that can last up to 24 hours. :whatever:


I think that the effects of smoking pot last longer than 24 hours. I don't think this is bullshit at all. I definitely feel dumber the day after I blaze. It is far more noticeable if you don't smoke that often.

Quote:
The legislature or science community would find what generall is accepted as the lowest level of skills needed to safely drive a car (perhaps by measuring my incredibly hazardous grandfather's skills or maybe upping the base line from these if we've decided even currently licensed individuals are impaired- as I urge) and then test for these.



I didn't really think of this. You are absolutely right that it should be illegal to drive a car if you cannot see or react quickly enough to avoid accidents. This comment made me think of the motorcycle safety test, which you need to take to get your license. It's actually pretty difficult, and involves taking evasive action, and they measure your reaction time by making you go a minimum speed and giving you a short distance to swerve out of the way of an imaginary oncoming bus.

I think it would make a lot of sense to make drivers re take the drivers test every few years to make sure they are still safe and capable drivers. It would really suck though to have to go through the nonsense of scheduling that shit with the dmv, and getting the time off work to go do it, but it probably would make roads safer.


--------------------
"I'm gonna clear the air, with the metal that's known to divide the whole atmosphere, and I love to share, them bullets come dime a dozen I kept 2 so I could have spare."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: abetterlie]
    #15117499 -

I bet there are ways to circumvent this. For example you could carry a drink around with you that contains a compound that will destroy the metabolites of your drug of choice. Some chemists need to get on the case to come up with suitable compounds for this kinda thing.


--------------------
…...,~__________________, ,.
….../ `—___________—-___]Give a man a gun
…../_==o;;;;;;;;_______.:/he can rob a bank.
…..), —.(_(__) /
….// (..)),````
…//__/Give a man a bank,he can rob the world!
.//__/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: CrimpJiggler]
    #15121821 -

If you can't drive stoned, you probably shouldn't be driving sober either. I've seen old fucks pull more dumb shit than any stoner. Matter of fact I've never seen a stoner pulling the silly shit I see old people do on a daily basis. Driving and poking smot make you slow down and be more cautious, THINK OF TEH CHILDREN!

Just deny the test and you won't get a DUI, least here in FL it works that way.


And I just relized this thread is 2 years old when I saw legallyhomeless  :feelsbadman:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: scifipirate]
    #15122113 -

scifipirate said:
Just deny the test and you won't get a DUI, least here in FL it works that way.


Except Florida has an implied consent law and by refusing the test you lose your license for 1 year.

b.  Any person who accepts the privilege extended by the laws of this state of operating a motor vehicle within this state is, by so operating such vehicle, deemed to have given his or her consent to submit to a urine test for the purpose of detecting the presence of chemical substances as set forth in s. 877.111 or controlled substances if the person is lawfully arrested for any offense allegedly committed while the person was driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of chemical substances or controlled substances. The urine test must be incidental to a lawful arrest and administered at a detention facility or any other facility, mobile or otherwise, which is equipped to administer such tests at the request of a law enforcement officer who has reasonable cause to believe such person was driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle within this state while under the influence of chemical substances or controlled substances. The urine test shall be administered at a detention facility or any other facility, mobile or otherwise, which is equipped to administer such test in a reasonable manner that will ensure the accuracy of the specimen and maintain the privacy of the individual involved. The administration of a urine test does not preclude the administration of another type of test. The person shall be told that his or her failure to submit to any lawful test of his or her urine will result in the suspension of the person's privilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of 1 year for the first refusal, or for a period of 18 months if the driving privilege of such person has been previously suspended as a result of a refusal to submit to such a test or tests, and shall also be told that if he or she refuses to submit to a lawful test of his or her urine and his or her driving privilege has been previously suspended for a prior refusal to submit to a lawful test of his or her breath, urine, or blood, he or she commits a misdemeanor in addition to any other penalties. The refusal to submit to a urine test upon the request of a law enforcement officer as provided in this section is admissible into evidence in any criminal proceeding.

See it here.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #15124193 -

luvdemshrooms said:
scifipirate said:
Just deny the test and you won't get a DUI, least here in FL it works that way.


Except Florida has an implied consent law and by refusing the test you lose your license for 1 year.



Yeah you would lose it if you got a DUI as well. Either way you lose it for a year, but one comes without a DUI.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: scifipirate]
    #15124496 -

ok when i first started reading this post i thought i was a test to see if you were high right then. but then i read the artical and its just a drug test period right? f that im gona buy some of this mouth was stuff around here that suposed to mask a five panel


--------------------
HEAVEN AND HELL ARE BUT A BREATH AWAY! - ANDY WARHOL

http://coolgifs.tripod.com/cry.gif

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: legallyhomeless]
    #15152243 -

legallyhomeless said:
The cop says I was high and he found a half smoked blunt in my car.

Moron hands me the joint and tells me to put it in my pocket. I ate it :shrug:



Somebody resurrected this old-ass thread, so now I feel like I can finally laugh at this publicly :ilold::lol:


--------------------


Use these substances wisely, they have the ability to cause life altering realizations.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Roadside drug testing... bad news for those of us who like to drive baked. [Re: johnm214]
    #15154957 -

johnm214 said:
Like changtzu said, why is this so difficult?



Because driving is actually an extremely complex task where an individual is processing hundreds of different stimuli simultaneously.

From a laboratory-based standpoint, there are (literally) hundreds of different cognitive tasks, and (at least) dozens of different types of "driving simulators".  These simulators are all different and all produce different types of data.

Finally, once you did collect the data, its exceptionally difficult to correlate it to real-world driving performance, under real conditions.

This is precisely why there is no defined "standard" for measuring driving performance.


--------------------
...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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale

General Interest > Science and Technology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* drug testing DR.BSYDE 1,730 5 10/26/01 05:31 AM
by DarkCoyote
* Hair Tests vs. Shrooms ChickChanga 9,188 7 11/22/01 07:43 PM
by DarK_SavioR
* Probation and passing piss tests HarveyWalbanger 1,198 6 12/26/02 01:17 PM
by isam
* Scary new blow to PC Privacy.... Fd3000 4,841 19 09/30/02 09:28 AM
by Abudiwa
* drug dogs and shrooms pj541 1,978 5 10/22/02 07:10 PM
by Seuss
* Drugs in mail
( 1 2 3 all )		 astrobrite 9,063 47 07/16/03 10:49 AM
by Madtowntripper
* CD drive doesn't work the universe 1,283 8 03/20/03 11:08 AM
by Anno
* Woohoo! I am Getting a New Computer! Earth_Droid 913 7 02/17/03 03:58 PM
by Fed911

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
3,485 topic views. 0 members, 25 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.052 seconds spending 0.011 seconds on 16 queries.