I’d say one flaw is the assumption that if marijuana users are safer than drunk drivers they are somehow safe drivers in an absolute sense. Based on my observation of potheads, they still drive in an f’d up manner. It may be their tendency to drive slow while stoned contributes to less damage and carnage when they do get into trouble, but that doesn’t make them safe in an absolute sense.
Despite the title of the thread, the study doesn’t say pot users are “better drivers”, it says they are less likely to *kill *you than a drunk.
There is also the matter of the level of impairment - it may be that the average amount of of pot smoked at one time is less likely to result in severe impairment than the average amount of booze a drunk sucks down before climbing behind the wheel. That doesn’t mean pot has no effect.
The start of the article says there’s a correlation not a causality. The study mainly points at reasons why marijuana usage is less likely to cause traffic related fatalities than alchohol usage. The flaw is in the suppositions formed from the study.
I’ve tried both experiments personally and can confirm that one intoxicant makes me much more cautious than usual, the other tends to make me much more reckless.
YMMV.
Anecdotal and all, but I’m a veeeery safe driver.
Well, driving at 12 mph tends to be safe, yes.
Not on the interstates I frequent, it doesn’t.
No.
From the OP’s cite;
“Marijuana users often say that when they are high, they feel like they are driving 80 miles per hour but actually are only going 30 miles per hour,” 4AutoInsuranceQuote.org CEO James Shaffer says, “when somebody is drunk driving, on the other hand, they often feel like they are driving 30 miles per hour but are actually driving 80 miles per hour. This is what makes alcohol dangerous behind the wheel, and marijuana safe.”
I think it’s pretty clear that a high degree of inaccurate feedback, as described in the paragraph above, can’t be defended as safe by any stretch of the word. Especially so when it relates to operating a motor vehicle.
It might also be the be the case that we more reliably identify the dead drunk drivers at the scene of the accident than the dead, stoned ones…
Yes
And if I use them both, I am the life of the party.
They’ll swear that they are.
I don’t know about the validity of the study, but I have a potsmoking friend(he doesn’t drink or take other drugs) who definitely drives better high than not high. I know this is true because I’ve ridden with him many, many times under both circumstances while I was not under the influence of anything.
Obligatory old joke:
What’s the difference between a drunk driver and a dopehead driver?
A drunk will run a stop sign.
A dopehead will stop and wait for the sign to turn green.
Did they control for the effect of billboards with pix of food on them?
And an acidhead will appear on the other side of the intersection without having crossed it. 
I’m mildly curious whether those joking about OP’s question, or asking that intoxication degrees be compared, have, as I have done, actually done indicated experiments personally.
(Only mildly curious because I suspect I already know the answer.)
Good one!
Old hippies never die-- they just keep flashing back.
I have, though it was not done double blind.
I am a much better driver stoned.
Nevermind