Impaired to drive STONED???
- Thread starter Doer
- Start date
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
The government should not regulate against what might happen. It is a restriction in liberties.
If you propel your car into people or objects there is a legal penalty as there should be.
However, trying to arbitrarily determine who is impared and/or not impared by marijuana is pointless. You can drink yourself into a stupor and be physically unable to walk much less operate a motor vehicle. Nobody I know has ever been so stoned they couldnt get up and walk around.
20% of the people I drive next to are seriously impared and it is usually by attempting to read and text while driving. Most of the swerving, weaving and slow driving that drunks usually did has been adopted by a much larger segment of the population.
We will have cars that drive themselves soon and then people can go back to being totally preoccupied with their lives and our safety levels will rise dramatically. In fact, I think this new generation of cars that automatically stop is going to seriously decrease traffic fatalities.
We are getting safer all the time, I dont like laws that restrict our liberties. One of the foundations against legal marijuana is that it will make it easier for kids to get. That is an example of a fallacy as it is easy for them to get now and also legislating against what MIGHT happen. The government does far too much of that already.
If you propel your car into people or objects there is a legal penalty as there should be.
However, trying to arbitrarily determine who is impared and/or not impared by marijuana is pointless. You can drink yourself into a stupor and be physically unable to walk much less operate a motor vehicle. Nobody I know has ever been so stoned they couldnt get up and walk around.
20% of the people I drive next to are seriously impared and it is usually by attempting to read and text while driving. Most of the swerving, weaving and slow driving that drunks usually did has been adopted by a much larger segment of the population.
We will have cars that drive themselves soon and then people can go back to being totally preoccupied with their lives and our safety levels will rise dramatically. In fact, I think this new generation of cars that automatically stop is going to seriously decrease traffic fatalities.
We are getting safer all the time, I dont like laws that restrict our liberties. One of the foundations against legal marijuana is that it will make it easier for kids to get. That is an example of a fallacy as it is easy for them to get now and also legislating against what MIGHT happen. The government does far too much of that already.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Some people can drive high better than some people that are not high.
Driving drunk and driving high are not the same thing.
sheskunk
Well-Known Member
Then why do they call it "couchlock"?
Remember people, of all these fatal car crashes, there was MJ constituents found in the victims, but none of the studies noted how much or how little MJ was in their system. So basically you could smoke a joint and then 3 weeks later get killed in a car crash and when they test you you will show positive. Those people who are against MMJ and MJ legalization will point to that and say "MJ smoking killed that poor 19 year old!!" Even though we all know that 2-6 hours is the length of time the drug actually might affect your motor skills. For the advanced smoker, it is doubtful MJ would affect their motor skills much at all, but perhaps attention span.
Getting stoned out of your mind is less harmful to your driving skills than being extremely drunk, by a huge amount. You don't see too many people calling for the prohibition of alcohol, even though it is a major factor in just about every foul thing that happens in this USA of ours.
Please don't be a ridiculous twit and equate the two as being the same.
Getting stoned out of your mind is less harmful to your driving skills than being extremely drunk, by a huge amount. You don't see too many people calling for the prohibition of alcohol, even though it is a major factor in just about every foul thing that happens in this USA of ours.
Please don't be a ridiculous twit and equate the two as being the same.
Screw cars that can be made to stop without the owners permission, I am in charge here, not some black box.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
That car stopping without the owners permission might be saving your life. Remember, there is only one of you but billions of other bad drivers
Cant wait for recalls to these systems, when they start failing in 10yrs and brakes locking up randomly from soldier joints melting or whatever case may be.... its way to new technology to be installing in every new car. People are insane to trust this crap...
Think about carsnow. Mainly dealership fixes cause all exspensive tech. So your going to be stuck fixong for 2k at dealership or having o option to drive the car.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Any law that attempts to set a limit on THC blood levels and vehicles will need to be verified by scientific analysis. Otherwise, the first court case will turn it over.Alcohol is easy to test. There was a great Mythbusters. They ran a cones course sober and then after every drink. It doesn't take much to do in the cones.
Maybe we need a MB on ganja like that.
Thundercat
Well-Known Member
I like that in that video the smokers knew and said that they had reached a point that they were to high to drive. Most often that is not the case with drinkers. It seems to me that the 5 nanograms is pretty low. I also think they should need some good probable cause to even think about testing you. Like your car being full of smoke or a used bowl sitting there. Cops need to get out of the militant state of mind, and recognize our rights.
SmokeyDan
Well-Known Member
I wasn't saying that being stoned and drunk were equal in their debilitation.
But impairment is impairment.
How much of your ability to safely operate your car should you be allowed to hurry voluntarily when other people and their children are on the road?
You don't have a right to make my commute less safe, even a fraction of one percent less safe.
It's my right to have you at 100% where my safety is concerned.
It's your right to get fucked up in your living room, but not the highway.
But impairment is impairment.
How much of your ability to safely operate your car should you be allowed to hurry voluntarily when other people and their children are on the road?
You don't have a right to make my commute less safe, even a fraction of one percent less safe.
It's my right to have you at 100% where my safety is concerned.
It's your right to get fucked up in your living room, but not the highway.
kelly4
Well-Known Member
I agree, we should not allow women or Asians to drive.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Do you listen to music in your car..or do you drive in silence.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Realizing that everyone is impaired to some degree is part of the issue. Once we get past that then how much they are impaired versus how much attention the situation requires involves a judgement call. Legislating for what *might* happen can cause reduction of liberties.
We have laws for when you damage people and/or property.
sheskunk
Well-Known Member
I turn off my radio so I can shoot heroin. That makes it even, right?
SmokeyDan
Well-Known Member
i don't know anyone who drives around stoned other than to go from place to place..everybody i know WANTS to stay home and enjoy..
londonfog
Well-Known Member
dude not paying attention can have an affect on your abilities...late reaction
J0hnnY♣Ch1mp0
Active Member
i try not to drive while stoned
its not that i cant but more that i go very very slow.
looks kinda odd to be going 30 in 50.
