E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAbout one in seven drivers on California roadways may be under the influence of drugs, according to a new survey by the state’s Office of Traffic Safety.
The survey released Monday tested more than a thousand drivers on weekend nights in nine California cities.
Roughly 14 percent of those drivers tested positive for drugs that might impair driving. Half as many of the drivers surveyed by the OTS tested positive for alcohol.
Compared to national statistics, the number of drug-impaired drivers has increased throughout the years. It reinforces officials’ belief that driving under the influence of drugs – in addition to alcohol – is a serious and growing problem, said Christopher J. Murphy with the OTS.
Read the original story on NBCLosAngeles.com
The results highlight the need for more officers who are trained to detect drug-impaired driving. Without blood tests, it’s harder for officers to prove in court that a driver was under the influence of drugs.
“But these folks that have been through the drug enforcement expert training -- if one of them can evaluate a driver accused of being under the influence of drugs, that testimony will normally hold up in court,” said OTS spokesperson Chris Cochran.
The office also plans to increase the numbers of District Attorneys dedicated to drug-impaired driving cases, and purchase better lab equipment.
Of the drugs found in those tested, marijuana was the most prevalent. More than 7 percent of drivers tested positive for the substance.
The survey also found a significant number of drivers under the influence of both drugs and alcohol. About 23 percent of the drivers who were found to have alcohol in their systems also tested positive for some kind of drug, be it prescription or otherwise.
About 1,300 drivers volunteered to provide breath or saliva samples set up at nine different locations in the state. Those who were judged to be too impaired were advised that they should have someone else drive them home, Cochran said.
Leave a Comment:
But being high because you have a "medical condition" is legal right....?? Or at least OK....right?
Brought to you by the same folks who are paying for sex change operations while school "chidren" are being "deprived" and their parents taxed to death........and the non-taxpaying masses are demanding more services and "rights." And let's not forget the fact that it's legal there to wander around San Francisco nude..... yep....
Ahhhhh....... liberalism...
I know a lot of Republicans who smoke pot. You liberalism comment only demonstrates your foolishness.
Well Pig, in all fairness, I think the entire comment demonstrates his/her foolishness. And by "foolishness", I think you're being quite generous.
That number's are similar in states were it is illegal....so there is only half a story here
Ok... so they aren't paying for sex changes while school budgets are being cut.... or running around naked in San Fran? And they aren't a Liberal state?
Must be reading a different NBC NEWS today.....
Never said Conservatives don't.... in fact the way they are going... I bet it's a rule that our "leaders" show up high....
But I did, and will again I am sure.... be called upon to defend your right to blast my thoughts.....but this year... I am home for the holidays...
Have a great Thanksgiving.... and GOD bless the troops! (if that offends you... tough)
What is it with you and sex change operations? And no saying god bless the troops doesn't offend. It just shows how much of an idiot you are for actually believing in one.
wow, you liberals are priceless. Don't you wish we would all be good little sheep and think like you guys?? Funny. I say GOD BLESS the troops and GOD BLESS the USA!! I am proud to believe in GOD! Makes my life complete. You are free to believe what you want and so are we! Have an awesome Thanksgiving everyone, enjoy your families!
Yeah we are a liberal state. And a bunch of lazy, out of work pot head, freeloaders, who line up every day for our handouts. All while living in a STATE with the 7th largest economy in the world. You Texans must be tired of the commute to come here and pull that off!
A little... didn't your Governor send a commission here last year or so to see why we still have such a low unemployment and businesses were flocking here? I discinctly remember reading about it on MSNBC.....
The seventh largest economy in the world doesn't mean a thing when people are taxed to death....eventually, they will leave and go somewhere else..... Same for businesses. Look at detroit....and then Alabama where the right to work, low tax burder, business friendly atmosphere attracted Hyundai, MERCEDES and others........
And actually, I see more California plates here lately.... must be all the jobs, low taxes and gasoline at $3.09/gallon.... and affordable living too.... new neighborhoods.... help wanted signs....
See, this is what I don't understand about the GOP. You want a smaller government influence when it comes to economics, but for some reason you want more government restictions on lifestyle choices. If you want to be consistent, you should be in favor of smaller government across the board. Less taxes, less regulations, and lead the life you want within the confines of basic law. You honestly should not care if San Fran people walk around nude. You should not be in favor of the government telling people what to do.
The southern strategy failed. Time to adapt.
My buddy used to brag that California was the 4th largest economy. It looks like California is headed the wrong direction. I like California, but bragging about how big it's economy is is a little lame. How's your debt situation?
I'm high, driving and texting as we speak ... (wow, that was close, sorry ma'm)
Tell me where in California gas is $3.09 and i'll go fill up! My point is yeah we're a liberal state, yes! But we work just as hard as anybody. Do we have problems...you bet we do. The the infrastructure, the businesses, etc, didn't just fall out of the sky, they were built!
Just like the breathalyzer for alcohol, they should have created a pin prick blood test for THC. Kinda like what diabetic folks use. But it wouldn't matte to me anyways because I don't do drugs.
Well here's my address, swing by, we'll start with a Budweiser, that leads to Marijuana, and within the hour you'll be a Heroin addict!
Of COURSE Californians are high on drugs.
How do you think Nancy Pelosi, Babara Boxer, Maxine Waters, Jerry Brown, Dianne Feinstein, Henry Waxman and Barbara Lee keep getting re-elected???
LOL little
I know plenty of people who smoke MJ and then drive.
Quite frankly it would be more dangerous for these people to NOT smoke and then drive.
MJ might hit you hard the first time you smoke it but the effect becomes very subtle for a long-term smoker. A regular smoker who smokes and then drives is in NO WAY comparable to someone who drives drunk. A regular smoker who abstains on the other hand is probably going to end up having a road-rage incident.
Is there a reason you left Reagan and Schwarzenegger out?
And for all you Cali lovers, its voted in the top ten worst states in America for the 2012. And for that person who said you California people work, thats a load of crap, I moved from VA and had two jobs within two weeks and I still see kids, adults, and the majority of the Cali Population just FU(KING OFF.... They all think they need a Fancy car, to worried about being popular, and trying to be Hollywood before they put the energy into making a Utopia type society or even support themselves!!!!!!
I agree with your comment, but in a specific way.
The effects of getting high with marijuana--the buzz, the euphoria, the munchies--only last for a short period of time (an hour or so, like having a beer) while the THC stays in the body for longer. Since THC is not metabolized by the body like the sugar in alcohol is, it takes a much longer for the body to eliminate the excess. THC will show up in the blood or urine of a user up to 30 days after the last usage, depending upon the amount and regularity of the usage. But it doesn't mean the person is necessarily impaired under the influence of THC a day or even 6 hours after the sensible effects wear off. It must be determined first whether THC causes long-term impairment to vision, reflexes and mental state of a user, and to what degree, before a scale to measure this impairment accurately is adopted.
Because there has not been substantial published research as yet that can prove a person is not continuously affected by THC remaining in the body after the initial effects wear off, one cannot also assume that the opposite is true. Many users will tell you that their experience with marijuana is similar to drinking alcohol or even using OTC pain killers: once the effect of the dosage wears off, they are "sober".
I think this should be a priority in marijuana research, especially since there is the potential for laws to be created in the wake of the legalization of marijuana for recreational use that would require all drivers in an accident to submit to a blood test to determine if a person is indeed DUI/DWI at the time and whether or not said driver exhibited any of the classic signs of marijuana intoxication. Automobile insurance companies would especially find a law to this effect in their interest, giving them the ability to increase their premiums for those who do use marijuana. Also, if it is found that there is significant impairment with specific levels of THC in a persons blood or urine, it would help with the definition of "legally intoxicated" and proper laws could be instituted similar to the ones used for alcohol-impaired drivers.
Well GeorgiPorgi, California's debt is #1 at $618 billion, twice that of the debt for the #2 state of New York.
Little, its funny you mention infrastructure and businesses... they didn't fall out of the sky in Indiana either.
STFU Paul L.-1923570 I'm sick of morons like you who have to create artificial barriers. Liberals do this, conservatives do this blah blah. NEWS FLASH NOBODY GIVES A CRAP ABOUT LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE. Instead of lumping people together in artificial groups maybe you could try realizing that people just have different opinions because they are people...simple right? Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean that "those" people are on another side of some kind of imaginary line created 50 years ago by fear mongers who were even stupider than you are today.
Anyways, if you want to live in the past, frightened of all the "horrifying" changes you see happening in society around you because your mommy raised you to be scared of anything different than what you know then go ahead. When you are dying and realize you never actually lived, and you haven't experienced half as much as you could have out of life due to your inane fears, I hope you experience the regret you have earned. Just remember that through cutting off your possible life experiences by stereotypical labeling of people as liberal, conservative, or otherwise you have effectively limited the scope of your interaction with people who might have ended up playing a special role in your life.
Your loss you sad individual.
Jesus, this reporting is awful. Just because you have a positive blood test for marijuana doesn't mean you are actually high at the time of driving... THC can stay in your blood stream for weeks.
California has the eight largest economy in the world, if it were counted as a country! Somebody there must do something. Consider all the countries that have a much smaller economy and far more problems California is doing OK - in spite of itself!
Texas, I wouldnt brag so much...you're taking in a lot of entitlment dollars you know.
What do you think will happen to that impressive Texas economy if you eliminate entitlement spending there?
oh conservatives, so quick to cut their nose off to spite their face.
The Only people who should be tested are people who there work makes them carry a gun
California population: 37.7 million New York population: 19.5 million
CA has 1.93 times as much population as NY
California land area: 163,700 sq miles New York land area: 54,560 sq miles
CA has 3 times as much land area as NY
Surprised that CA has 2x the debt of NY? Really? What kind of an "engineer" are you? The kind that drives choo choo trains?
In a related story, California has the eighth lowest highway fatality rate in the US. Lower than all red states. I guess driving high on drugs is w a y safer than driving high on the Lord.
"In California, more drivers are high than drunk"
No wonder why they voted to raise taxes on themselves."
It was the entitled that voted to raise taxes on the working folks-if there are any working folks other than government employees and teachers left in Cali. That 47%? It is actually around 57% now-more than those that work, go figure.
wait till they legalize pot. Scarey!
This is a BS press release designed to cast Pot in a bad light. "High" does not mean high on Marijuana. Read the article more carefully. They include prescription drugs? Which drugs are they look at here? Are they only looking at drugs that impair driving ability?
"BobW-3215303
It was the entitled that voted to raise taxes on the working folks-if there are any working folks other than government employees and teachers left in Cali. That 47%? It is actually around 57% now-more than those that work, go figure."
1. your numbers is off and flat out wrong but at least you're a good GOP parrot.
2. Oddly from your post it seems you think your "entitled".
"plsthink90
wait till they legalize pot. Scarey!'
They basically have legalized pot in CA and why aren't you out there lobbing to out law booze if you're that concerned? I wonder how many of those "high" drivers were on legal, doctor prescribed, drugs? And don't forget those crazy drivers that text and drive, I bet they're pretty dangerous.
What's scary is you think that making pot illegal somehow prevents people from smoking and driving
BP--go buy some twinkies while you can and roll a fat one. I am not in favor of drinking and driving or texting while driving. What do you want to argue about now?? Ihave a good friend that sees this stuff first hand, she is a flight nurse. None of it is any good!
How are they testing for pot? Doesn't it stay in the system for 30 days? Are they relying on the cops's opinion for this study?
Texan11 - currently the testing system for pot is still in flux if one is pulled over here in Colorado. If one is pulled over there is no way to test if the pot usage was recent or not. Only that it is there. BTW - it takes 30 days to flush your system of pot ONLY if you are an every day smoker. I would rather be on the road with a 25 mph stoner then a raging drunk.
Not true.
PrecededByNone - Please elaborate because I truly want to know your secret.
Take note of this issue.....Washington State and Colorado.
You GOT what you voted for.
Sure it is. Lipid-soluble drugs such as THC and benzodiazepines take anywhere from 5-28 days to clear the system. Benzos with a long half-life have been known to linger for as long as 48 days. This is dependent on the amount used, your total fat, and your metabolism.
I personally know someone that took a xanax to help cope with stress on Christmas day, was stopped on New Years eve, and later convicted of DUI because of the pill she had taken a week prior even though her BAC on New Years eve was only .04 (half the legal limit in my state)
Drug testing is not to the point we can determine exactly WHEN a drug was taken. Therefore, there will always be a fraction of the population unjustly convicted of DUI based off of urinalysis results.
And all the libbies shout yea!!
@plsthink: You are lost. Your statement that you somehow know the whole picture because you have a friend that is a flight nurse, is beyond naive. You can't even spell the word "scary" properly, so why should anyone believe even a single word you say? Ask any high schooler what is easiest for them to obtain: alcohol, or any illicit drug such as marijuana, heroin, cocaine, or meth. When I was in school in the drunkest state in this nation (NV), it was near impossible to get alcohol, but I could drive 100 feet and get pretty much any drug I wanted. Meth, coke, pot, heroin, ecstassy, acid... you name it. But try to get an adult to buy you liquor, and you would nearly always fail.
Your "go buy some twinkies while you can and roll a fat one" continues to show how stupidly naive you are. That's a very stereotypical comment showing that you don't know a single thing about the reasons and effects of why people smoke pot. Seriously, get a clue and stop being so naive. And next time "please think" before you post such stupid nonsense. You can't even make a 6 word post without a misspelling. English failure.
So marijuana is detectable in the human body for weeks... perhaps months depending how heavy you consumed before you stopped... so someone that smoked a joint is impaired for weeks?
Study takes to much assumption need a better baseline for impaired than detection.
left leaning lisa--So glad you could correct my spelling for the day. You get a gold star. You libbies are sooo smart. Enjoy your pot let me know how that works for ya. I guess, getting high, texting while driving, and drinking and driving is cool with you. You libs are such great citizens! Did I spell everything correct for you?? GOD!! You want to talk about a post making no sense, read yours.
oh and miss Lisa, it is ecstasy not ecstassy.
The study I saw showed that urinalysis results for marijuana only lasted up to 21 days. They've never found anyone who's had detectable levels of cannabinoids (the byproducts of marijuana that the urinalysis actually tests; the actual drug generally drops below useful detection after about 8 hours or so, depending on how much you smoke).
So, we have a system of telling whether the drug is there, but not when it was used. Specifically designed to catch as many people who have used in the recent past, in order to justify firings and layoffs, even if the workers were no more impaired than a guy who went home and had a beer after work every day. And, this is apparently not readily dependent on how much you smoke, or your body type, so much as how often you smoke. At least, according to the study I saw.
As for "drug detection experts," yeah, I'm gonna call horse@!$%# on that. If the @!$%#ing cops who can't resist searching somebody's car on the off chance they might have drugs (and look it up, they don't even need probable cause) is willing to call in a canine unit that has an 85% false detection rate (yeah, 85% of drug dog "alerts" are actually caused by unconscious cues from the handler) are in charge of determining if somebody is high or not, well, you put it together.
Frankly, I'd rather have a stoner on the road out looking for munchies than a reich-wing jebus-freak constantly cutting me off all John Galt style, then whining loudly about it being everybody else's fault when they wrap their beamer around a telephone pole.
AnOzofTruth - Drug testing is not to the point we can determine exactly WHEN a drug was taken. Therefore, there will always be a fraction of the population unjustly convicted of DUI based off of urinalysis results.
This is also true of employment drug tests. Co-worker Steve can have 3-4 martinis on his time off from work and no one blinks an eye while he stumbles into work the next day hungover and stinking of liquor. Hey, it's legal under the eyes of the law, right? This is such BS - if I would rather sit in the comfort of my living room and smoke a bowl, next day show up on time, TOTALLY aware of my senses and not hungover then that is my business. But if big bad corporate America wants to give me a random drug test I am toast.
I wonder about Florida...
"It reinforces officials’ belief that driving under the influence of drugs – in addition to alcohol – ..."
When, JUST WHEN are officials and the PUBLIC ever going to understand the alcohol IS A DRUG?!!! Why in the hell do they seperate the two is beyond me. Perhaps people thinking alcohol is something other then a drug somehow makes drinking more acceptable?
Doesn't Sweden pull your drivers license permenantly if you are convicted of drunk driving?
We, on the other hand... look the other way.... and of course if you have money....you can even kill folks.....and get away with it....
The boy who killed my nephew was driving on a suspended (for drunk driving) license.... when he killed my nephew and crippled his friend..... is living down the street... free as a bird with his wife and 2 kids............ that, my friend... is Justice the American Way............Kill 1, Maim one... 6 months... and freedom, welfare checks... and free medical care....
Paul, I'm not sure I believe you given the context of your other posts. I can tell you that if that were me, the drunk driver would not be living there happily, with a house standing. All in all, I'm calling BS.
Sad... you don't have to believe me...... but it was on the national news.... and I don't have to justify it.
Conroe Texas. Highway 45. May 2004. The cross is on the Northbound side at League Line Road. I tended to it monthly until the new construction blocked it.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=8868414
Take care! And I hope you never lose a 19yr old to a drunk driver and have to listen to the judge explain how the killer deserves a "second chance" because "too many lives are already ruined here."
My husband lost his aunt to a drunk driver...who had been convicted of drunk driving two times prior to the accident.
They test you for pot in California by asking if you would want to live in Texas, if you say yes, you are stoned, and they put you in jail!
Paul - all that tough talk about how awesome Texas is, and here you prove just how backassward TX is.
doesnt tx lead the nation in fatal auto accidents?
i know that in Germany if you foul up driving you are done!!!! but on the other hand,Alot of accidents in Germany are fatal anyways.
Being that marijuana use shows in your system for an extended period of time, how did they know that the people tested had smoked or ingested pot that day or right prior to driving? A person could have smoked it a week (or more) before.
that is the whole problem with legalizing marijuana, if there is no effective test to determine if people are impaired how do you keep people from driving over kids waiting for the school bus when they are high?
@ sleep: You took the words right out of my fingers.
Answer: They don't. And they probably don't account for it. Because, you know, DRUGS!!!!! Studies like this are less than useful.
The didn't mention marijuana (they just implied it by using the work 'high' in the headline, probably for dramatic effect), and most likely that was intentional. The definition of 'drugs that may impair driving' (note it said 'may' not 'do') is extremely broad. That is why they are differentiating from 'alcohol', which is a 'does' impair, not a 'may' impair). There are dozens of OTC medications that warn not to drive while using them, at least until you know how they effect you. All of those are drugs that 'may' cause impairment. And the reference to 'prescription' wasn't a subtle way of targeting MJ either, the other crap they prescribe is much more likely to impair your driving.
Enough -
Maybe if you could concentrate enough to read the entire article instead of just the headline you would have found:
So they stopped random drivers and checked to see if they were under the influence for no reason. Seems rather invasive. Does under the influence mean impaired? If they had smoked pot a week before they might have shown up as under the influence. Seems rather confusing. What they need is a test to tell if they are impaired. A person driving while distracted, such as texting or eating might be more of a hazard.
It will be completely up to the cop who stops you to determine if you are high on whatever. The article says that courts will listen to police that have been through advanced level impairment training. I guess the burden of proof from that point is on you. Good luck with that!!!
dinsmo - "that is the whole problem with legalizing marijuana, if there is no effective test to determine if people are impaired how do you keep people from driving over kids waiting for the school bus when they are high?"
how do you keep people from driving drunk and killing vans full of families?
tests or no tests dont stop this...you understand that right?
so to your other point - it seems to me that cops pull drunks over because their driving suggests impairment.
use the same method for people driving high. if their driving doesnt suggest impairment, even if they are high, why pull them over?
just because you THINK they MIGHT be high?
well this america, and that aint how we roll...
"Of the drugs found in those tested, marijuana was the most prevalent. More than 7 percent of drivers tested positive for the substance."
I had an exchange with a reader (different article) some weeks ago re: the legalization of pot. He insisted that NO ONE has ever died as a result of using it, and that it doesn't impair people enough to make it a hazard when driving, etc. I have no idea where he got his "information", and note that some comments left for THIS article also come from uber pro pot people with similar outlooks, some of whom accuse the author of trying to "scare" people by casting pot in a bad light. I sometimes lean towards legalization, but then balk when people say, "Pot is good for you, it's natural, it won't hurt you or impair motor functions like evil alcohol does...." Bull. Anything can be abused or overdone. We had a housemate a while ago who smoked. He too talked about pot not being harmful. He talked about it all the time, smoked it all the time, sat at his desk playing with it all the time.....no addiction there, by golly. Then he'd get on his bicycle and ride to work.
Blood pressure meds can impair driving, etc, etc.
I read the release, this is worthless without details of the compounds involved and/or a direct link to ingestion and impairment.
so what is your point? Are you saying do one should be allowed to drive ever and we abandon our road system or is everyone allowed to drive regardless of their level of impairment because you have been deceived into thinking blood pressure meds impair driving?
Deceived into thinking blood pressure meds impair driving? If they don't why is there a warning on the label?
Let's put it a different way. Marijuana makes more people high and more severely impaired than blood pressure meds otherwise blood pressure meds would have a much higher rate of abuse than does marijuana. Did that dumb it down enough for you to understand my point?
Any medicine or drug you take can impair your driving. Everyone is affected differently. If you are driving poorly and get pulled over and the officer thinks your high, you are going to jail on the spot.
The relative level of driving impairment is your criteria for whether or not a substance gets abused? Seriously?
How's that medical pot thing working out for you California??
Actually, the death rate on California highways has gone down every year since that measure passed (1998), except for one.
Also, as others have noted, seven percent of the sample tested positive for marijuana, but given marijuana can be detected in one's system for a month after it is used, it is not possible to say they were "under the influence" of the drug at the time they were tested.
dftgdhty httrr yj.e rfrfrg okay, i put the bong down, now what was the debate?
I in no way condone driving high, but CA is doing pretty good. Per capita, CA is the 8th least traffic fatalities of all the states.
Source:
http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/20/15224677-red-state-blue-state-divide-reflected-in-grim-statistic-fatal-traffic-accidents?lite#__utma=238145375.2133231094.1349358994.1353361494.1353423674.106&__utmb=238145375.1.10.1353423674&__utmc=238145375&__utmx=-&__utmz=238145375.1352733169.93.73.utmcsr=nbcnews.com|utmccn=(referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/&__utmv=238145375.|8=Earned%20By=msnbc%7Cus%20news=1^12=Landing%20Content=Mixed=1^13=Landing%20Hostname=www.msnbc.msn.com=1^30=Visit%20Type%20to%20Content=Internal%20to%20Mixed=1&__utmk=164784764
Honestly, who gets high and speeds down the highway? You're more likely to find the high guy going 50 in the slow lane looking for a McDonanlds.
Now drunk people on the other hand....think it's Fast and Furious play time every Friday and Saturday night where I am.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that marijuana stays in your system far longer than alcohol, even after all effects have worn off... right?
And in related news this just in. California is only eighth in the nation for fatal traffic accidents. How do you spell correlation????
ah, whoa dude, i think ya nailed it!
Still shouldn't drive high though...
precisely!
h tt p://blog.norml.org/2011/11/29/want-to-lower-traffic-fatalities-try-legalizing-medical-marijuana/
Remove extra spaces in http
Let us not forget "Legal" drugs like Vicodin and Oxycontin. I'm sure lots of folks combine those with alcohol as well!!
As an advocate for legal marijuana, I also advocate strict penalties for driving while stoned. The first, most basic rule is: If a cop pulls a car over and it smells like burning pot, that is the same as a DUI or open container violation, regardless of whether the driver has any in their system or not.
It will take some time to develop tests and standards to determine if someone is DUI on pot, but as a most basic rule, there's a time and a place to light up, and in a moving vehicle isn't one of them.
We had a story a year or so ago about a local man, old timer, well known... everybody loved him who took a prescribed medication on an empty stomach, in the heat of the day... with a soda of some sort.... got pulled over for erratic driving... he was run up the flagpole, publicly humiliated, insulted, convicted of driving under the influence etc... yet the drunk drivers....and pot smokers get a "boys will be boys" attitude.....
Alcohol is a drug. Pot is a drug. Treat is as such.... impaired driving is impaired driving no matter what the excuse.........
Correct. Some people seems to want to put marijuana on a pedestal...that being stoned is an elevated state of mind of some sort...that its nothing to worry about.
There's always the person who claims to be able to handle it...what about the people who do 5 bong hits and then head out into busy traffic? That's why we need strict DUI laws.
This is hardly a problem unique to CA. Many states are as bad or worse with drivers under the influence of meth, painkillers, etc.
The drivers doing the speed limit are high while the speeders are drunk. It's that easy. Alcohol and prescription narcotics are much worse than marijuana by far.
I think one of the problems is reaction time. If you are stoned and a car stops quickly in front of you or a kid runs out in the street and your reaction time is too slow you run into something/someone and then you are in jail and probably regretting the decision to drive stoned.
I'll drink to that!
dinsmo, you are making the common mistake of thinking that pot, a stimulant, has the same effects as alcohol, a depressant. They are polar opposites. Acohol slows reaction time, a lot. Pot increases reaction time, a little. Anything alcohol does, pot does the reverse.
Problem? How impaired can someone be when they can't tell that they are impaired? Impaired is a condition, not a substance!
Where is the study which shows that marijuana use is a factor in collisions and/or serious traffic offenses? And how does marijuana use compare to alcohol use and distracted driving?
Marijuana stays in your bloodstream for days, even weeks after you smoke it. I can't believe that these people were all high on pot while driving....I mean who drives stoned?? I think that the assertion that one in seven are driving stoned is an inaccurate statement.
so when you were growing up and say, didn't have a place to smoke weed (assuming your parents are responsible and law abiding) did you ever hot box in a car or drive around smoking weed? Most everyone I went to high school with did and weather or not they wanted to admit it they were impaired.
They test for marijuana in your urine....not your blood for a reason!
We live in such a perfect world with such a perfect system they will never get it right and the sheep will be controled
Well actually he had it backwards.
It stays in your urine for days/weeks as it is excreted from your fat cells. Plasma concentrations of THC diminish after about 8 hours of use. To tell if someone is under the influence AT THE TIME, one should use a blood test instead. One of my comments above (2.12) gives a story and a good reason why they need to do this and refine drug testing altogether so people aren't unjustly convicted.
#2.12
More anti-Marijuana "reefer madness" propaganda. Nothing to see here, move along.
Yo, Dude....tells us something we didn't already know. BTW, is my medical (ha ha) MJ paid for by Obamacare? I hope so since getting high is a Constitutional right (in LA LA Land....)
On the contrary, a moving vehicle may be one of the better places to light up. When I'm on the road for a 30 minute commute I generally encounter at least 5-10 drivers who feel the need to cut others off, change lanes erratically, and tailgate. Perhaps there might be less drivers like this if they took it upon themselves to medicate and chill the f- out. It would significantly lower the number of people suffering from road rage as well.
Border Sign entering California
CALIFORNIA-ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK
1. Drunk and High Drivers.
2. Bankrupted Cities
3. Corrupt Politicians
4. Criminal Gang Activity
5. Voted #1 Worst State to do Business in.
Turn around 1 Mile Ahead....If I were you I would take it.
Alan
Corrupt and Politicians is a redundancy.
Every state has everything you have listed except the worst state to do business. I agree it's really hard to own a small business here but you also can't wage war against the land like other places. I'll stay here in CA where it's going to be 70 and sunny today.
@BobW. Well darn. Can I replace it with the following?
earthquakes, wildfires, mudslides, smog, vast slums, horrible traffic and mile after unrelieved mile of cheap tract housing selling for several multiples of what it would cost in the Midwest.
Alan's bunghole, voted the #1 place to do business in!
Alan, I have been to the Midwest many times and I hope to never go back. White picket fences with Bible beaters everywhere is nowhere I want to be. I'll ride out he end of world in paradise. Enjoy the snowfall
Vast slums....have you been to Ohio...LOL!
I live in the midwest. It has it's charms, but I plan on heading back to CA in the next few years. Comparing the two is insane. There is a reason people are willing to pay a premium to live in CA.
@Ganguskhan.
Yes. The weather would be one of the few positives. 100% agree. I used to live there for most of my life in SD. What used to be California many years ago is no longer. The leaders have run the state dry for dozens of reasons (some stated above). If you can stand the state being billions in debt, your roadways in need of repair, cities bankrupt and government catering to Special Interest Groups then that's the place to be. Yeah 70 and sunny would be nice for a November day. Good luck.
One thing for California, you won't die of bore drum , like most the rest of the country !
More fear drumming. Always have to point out Cannabis. You can do Cocaine and it leaves your system in days while Cannabis remains for 30-90 days. If I test positive for driving under the influence when I smoked 10 days ago, the test is a sham. I am much more worried about drunk drivers and terrified of folks driving on prescription pills. When do we go after the big drug companies and the worst drug problem facing our nation.
It does matter WHAT you are high on. Pot head or whiskey drunk...had to choose......? And BTW alcohol IS a drug and should not be considered separately other than being legal.
Everything is 'high' in California.
High cost of living
High cost of fuel
High unemployment
High crime rate
Highways everywhere
High drivers
High-yaiyai-high
You forgot the weather, the high today in San Diego is 78!
The high in Denver is 65. Levity - your comments crack me up.
No way! After all the liberal marijuana laws in California? I would have never guessed.
They didn't say there was higher rate of drugged or drunk driving, compared to other states, so what do you base your comment on?
Look up accident rates, Blue states versus Red states.