Concerns raised about first device set to be approved for roadside drug detection

[Hashmasta-Kut]

Many people get high every day, all day. Radishes won't help.

Drive well, and don't smell like pot when you do. If they don't think you are impaired they won't want to test you.

 

[blastfrompast]

Curious if hydrogen peroxide mouth wash would do it...


Really wish i could spend a few hours testing the mofo lol

 

[troutman]

Curious if hydrogen peroxide mouth wash would do it...


Really wish i could spend a few hours testing the mofo lol

I also though of hydrogen peroxide.

Maybe fill your mouth with activated charcoal when you get pulled over and hope it neutralizes everything.

Somebody needs to steal or buy a testing thing so they can figure how to beat it 1st hand.

 

[Limeygreen]

Many people get high every day, all day. Radishes won't help.

Drive well, and don't smell like pot when you do. If they don't think you are impaired they won't want to test you.

Someone would make a mint if they opened an impaired driving school.

 

[Hashmasta-Kut]

I don't even know what that means.

 

[Rocky Mtn Squid]

RMS

 

[Limeygreen]

Open a school teaching people how to drive while high, I thought it was a good joke and I stand by it.

 

[Gmack]

Open a school teaching people how to drive while high, I thought it was a good joke and I stand by it.

Discovery channel should do a show called Canada's highest driver where they run stoned drivers the same test as Canada's worst drivers and show the results. It takes a couple of dabs in a row to get me to a place where driving whouid be unsafe in my own opinion and even then the intense high goes away very quickly. It would be interesting to know how fast and safe/unsafe we really are behind the wheel while stoned.

 

[Hashishh]

Discovery channel should do a show called Canada's highest driver where they run stoned drivers the same test as Canada's worst drivers and show the results. It takes a couple of dabs in a row to get me to a place where driving whouid be unsafe in my own opinion and even then the intense high goes away very quickly. It would be interesting to know how fast and safe/unsafe we really are behind the wheel while stoned.

 

[moose eater]

Hitching out of Edmonton, I gave a driver a hit of acid, Late June/early July of 1978.

We were at a construction zone up near Grand Prairie, and one of the predictable construction zone flagger sweeties in her halter top was holding the 'stop' sign, and we were at the head of the line.

The driver, L., in a royal blue Mustang, was talking up a storm with her, and tripping pretty good.

He turned to me and asked, in the middle of his conversation with the flag woman, "Are we moving?" I said, "Yeah man, that chick's just running really fast."

Anyway, if you're interested in looking at some older driving studies, a professor in Holland, last name 'Robbe,' conducted some studies (ironically on U.S. DOT grant money), published by the NHTSB (but rarely boasted about by them); 'Marijuana & Actual Driving Performance,' & 'Marijuana, Alcohol, & Actual Driving Performance.' Both are early 1990s if I recall correctly.

My remaining copies are buried in my policy reform archives in the basement.

If you can help it, don't read the synopsis online, but get a hard-copy of the actual studies in soft-cover. The on-line synopses don't seem to desire to fairly convey the real totality of the outcomes. ;^>) Source bias??? ;^>)

The outcomes are enlightening.

I also believe that Professor Mitch Earlywine wrote some docs on the same topic, also in 'our' favor.

 

[Bjorn to farm.]

I used to drink and drive so I know what “impairment” is. 10 joints =3 beers.

 

[clearheaded]

yes the police are in a tizzy and need more money to implement bs..they are unfairly targeting cannabis smokers as no study equuates impairment and dose like booze... simply should be same has been if impaired on rx drugs if cant react as fast as determinedto be safe then get "impaired" its gunna get challenged and gunna cost ALOT of tax money to determine what we know.. most folks are fine some are not and its not dosage related. its tollerance related and personal chemistry. and only way to know if impaired is a physical testing of hand eye which anyone with money will be able to get off of and unfairly target minorities. when breathalizers first came out they never held any water in court for a long time however booze and pot cant be compared or have similar cold hard metric for impairment.

 

[clearheaded]

I am a long time Cannabis user...I smoked my 1st joint at age 13 and my 1st bag of weed was a "Lid"...both were back in the 70's. I just turned 60 years old and have been medically retired for 5 years. I don't have the money to fight either DUI...Cannabis or Alcohol.

I suggest to everyone of all ages to do as I've done for years... don't drive impaired, its easy, take cabs. Its a bit pricey...but a whole lot cheaper than a DUI. I stopped driving impaired(with drugs, weed, alcohol...everything) 10 years ago, after I seen the shit show my apprentice went through by getting a DUI. The device you pay to have installed in your car, that you pay to maintain and pay to remove once your done. The forced drug and alcohol counseling you have to attend with no excuse policy on being late or absent. A complete and total nightmare from every angle.

Just an overall bad year of complete inconvenience and total disruption of his life was enough for me to smarten up and change my ways about driving impaired on anything...period.

I suggest if you don't have the money to 100% fight it...its a simple process to avoid all the problems that come with DUI's...Take a $20 cab ride.
Leave the changing of the law challenges to those that can afford it and those stupid enough to drive while impaired(usually the same group).

You can drive impaired your entire life and not get busted, but it only takes that one time for you to be out thousands of $$...not to mention all the other bullshit that comes along with it.

Just my 2 cents...

Peace...B

agree however the issue is when u smoke before bed, sleep eat have coffee and later the next afternoon u get pulled over and get false positive pull ur blood and have too high thc cause u may be a little more fat or smoke dabs.... may happen even several days later... so how do they prove this 2 hr ago bs from blood?

also unfortunetly i think this may caue more teenage drink and drivers, as if going to get in same trouble when smoking weed might aswell just booze.. instead of smoking at a party and few hrs later drive ur drunk friends home.. or just eat edibles which are 10times worse but wont get busted. or smoke thc acetate or some soluble salt of thc..

 

[billy_big_bud!]

just curious if anyone knows how cbd factors into the equation? because if it doesnt then couldnt you theoretically get pulled over puffing on some no thc strain and they couldnt do anything about it?

 

[Switcher56]

just curious if anyone knows how cbd factors into the equation? because if it doesnt then couldnt you theoretically get pulled over puffing on some no thc strain and they couldnt do anything about it?

Outside of CBDs coming from Hemp, CBD strains do contain THC as minute as the % is. How will it test? If we are looking at "their" numbers, I believe one would be SOL That being said, residual fat stored THC might not show up on a blood test. Most are concerned with how impaired is the brain? Straight CBDs are felt on the body. I guess the ? would be. How impaired are your motor skills? Still feeling the effects of my NL sleeping pill I took 12 hrs ago. My head is clear but, the body sensation is still very much there. I take 3 "mari pills" a day. Although the residual is nowhere close to the effects within 2 hrs of ingestion. They are still present and I have yet to medicate today.


One thing for sure as we have seen discussed here. One size does not fit all

 

[troutman]

The test is faulty at best.

Perhaps the biggest limitation of the device, though, is that it cannot detect for impairment.

How the Draeger Drugtest 5000, Canada’s new roadside testing device, falls short

 

[moose eater]

There is current expert witness testimony re. residual thc in blood not equating the same as blood alcohol content/levels. Apples and oranges, due to the way each is metabolized.

For those with per se' laws, that doesn't matter; any amount = guilty.

For those who live with the luxury of 'impairment' actually needing to mean 'impairment,' the various documents and testimony available re. the differences in metabolizing matters greatly.

For what ever reasons, the System (and some folks prone toward voyeurism) seem hung up on 'what,' 'how much,' 'when' etc.

Stats show that relationship discord, sleep deprivation, eating, phones, etc., are as likely suspects in accidents on the road as any intoxicants. Same for having kids arguing in the back-seat.. Or folks who insist on maintaining eye-contact when communicating, even when driving.

Maybe 25 years ago, a company (I think they went by 'EIN' and I have their blurb also in my archives) produced what was equivalent to a 'pong game' (for anyone who wants to date themselves, they'll know what that is; early video game that was fairly simple, like slow-motion tennis of ping pong, but on a t.v. or other screen).

One proposal was that such a game could be played as part of a permanent operators' file/record with the licensing entity, perhaps adjusted for those with specific disabilities, and re-played on the side of the road in contrast to the original file, to assess reaction time, hand-eye coordination, etc.

It wouldn't have appeased the obsessive compulsive voyeurs, but had the capacity to determine whether a driver was too impaired to be driving, WITHOUT differentiating WHY the person was impaired.

In my opinion, back then and now, lethal is lethal, risky is risky, why should it matter WHAT put the person in that place of ability or disability? Either you belong on the road, or you don't. Joint? Drink? Anger? Sleepless? Who cares? You're a risk or you're not.

 

[clearheaded]

yes I agree need a reaction time test, thats really the only way, while the baseline seems like a good idea you could fudge that.

 

[Rider420]

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/09/06/bad-marijuana-second-hand-smoke/

Just 10 minutes of moderate exposure to marijuana smoke is enough for blood levels to exceed the legal driving limit, according to research out of the University of Calgary.

Dr. Fiona Clement, the lead author of the Canadian Medical Association Journal Open study, said she was surprised by the results.

“People who are passively exposed, so not smoking themselves, can test positive in their blood or urine for THC levels above 5 nanograms per mililitre, which is being put out as the legal limit, with relatively modest exposure conditions,” she said.

“So think about something, an enclosed space maybe the size of a regular kitchen, all of the windows closed, relatively poor ventilation, and a joint being passed around while you’re having a conversation.”

Clement said biologically, there’s no way to prove it was secondhand exposure versus active consumption. On top of that, no roadside tests are available yet, and police are relying on subjective tests.

“It will be contentious I think, because different people will show different kinds of impairment at different levels,” said Clement. “Not all bodies store or process THC the same. So not everybody would present with the same kinds of impairment at that same level.”

On top of legal consequences, the Ontario Lung Association is sounding the alarm on the health effects of secondhand pot.

“We know they share a lot of the same chemicals, metals, particulate matter, as tobacco smoke,” said Sarah Butson with the Ontario Lung Association. “33 of those are known carcinogens, which means they’re cancer-causing agents.”

Researchers point to the hard lessons already learned as a good indicator of the potential effects of pot.

“The devastating health effects of tobacco are well-documented and generally well-accepted by the public,” said Butson. “So if you’re going to use cannabis, don’t smoke it, look for those alternative modes of consumption.”

“We’ve learned some hard lessons from tobacco,” said Clement. “Where if we reflect back to – not too long ago actually – you could smoke inside, you could smoke on airplanes, and all those areas which are very poorly ventilated. We do know exposure of that kind is bad and can lead to serious health outcomes for people.”

Researchers also note: there are lots of unknowns about the longer term effects of passive exposure to marijuana.

Public consumption laws are set at the municipal level and at this point different cities are adopting different rules to mediate that exposure.

“People who are passively exposed, so not smoking themselves, can test positive in their blood or urine for THC levels above 5 nanograms per mililitre, which is being put out as the legal limit, with relatively modest exposure conditions,” she said."

FYI two facts people bill C-46 does not become law until "52 Sections 12 to 50 of this Act come into force on the 180th day after the day on which this Act receives royal assent." "Bill C-46
(Royal Assent)
June 21, 2018"
http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-46/royal-assent#enH2052

One we don't have to worry about this bill until December. Two Judges will be making huge changes to all these new laws setting new precedents. Relax smoke a joint the sky is not falling.

 

[Klompen]

Wow the rate of false positives from blood tests is even higher than I realized!