Reading an article recently about states likely to legalize Marijuana use, it occurred to me; is there an fast, cheap, and reliable test to determine if somebody is currently under the effects of weed?
I know that the type of drug testing they do at my work can tell if you’ve used within the last X number of days but is there a test that the police could give, on the spot at the police station, that can say “this person is currently high,” not just “this person has smoked weed recently.”
To the best of my knowledge, the only thing available is the general field sobriety test, do this, count to that, walk the line etc. Last I checked, there’s only a test to check for THC metabolites which is what you were talking about, but nothing to show you’ve ingested THC in, say, the last 2 hours or less or that you’re currently under the influence.
As a proponent of legalization, hopefully they’ll figure out something, I think that’ll put a lot of (or at least some) people’s minds at rest. At the very least, people who use that as a reason to vote against it, will have to move on to the next reason or, logically, not vote against it.
Thanks, Joey P. for the info.
When i read between the lines of your post, I read that a field sobriety test can say that somebody isn’t sober, but the cause isn’t known.
Yes, I could be wrong, but I believe they can also use that test to get you off the road if they suspect that the actual reason you’re swerving is because you’re falling asleep. Of course, you’ll probably wake up before they get to that, but if not, you’ll get arrested, as you probably should.
When my uncle became a cop I remember hearing him say that’s one of the things they watch out for. I bit my tongue to not say ‘Yeah, when I’m high I tend to drive really slow’.
If you want to be an insanely rich person, then you should invent a THC Breathalyzer! Also figure out if THC levels can be correlated to impairment in any kind of generalizable way, like BAL.
I Am Not A Researcher, but I’d recommend that whoever is writing the Grant Request for this research avoid toking up until the GR has been submitted. But yes, some research should be done on this.
But still, it would be problematic finding safe to drive THC levels. Alcohol comes in known strengths and “dosages”, i.e. 12 oz of beer = 6 oz of wine = 1.5 oz of liquor. What sort of quality control can MJ growers or retailers have?
In Vic.AUA they are only using “Standard Impairment Assessment” and saliva tests – but they are taking the view that if they can detect metabolites you are under the influence…
Which begs the question of, if you’re a regular user like a coffee or cigarette user, they’d really rather have you on the road in Withdrawal, rather than under the influence.
Lack of ability to quantify and assess impairment has long been one of the rational arguments against legalization. DUI for alcohol relies far more on the exact BAC number than the trooper’s say-so. For weed, it’s all about his or her judgment.
But use of weed is now legal and simple yes/no testing is of little value. It’s no longer prima facie evidence of a crime or the implicit assumption of impairment.
Levels of THC coordinated with degree of impairment, at least as generally applicable as BAC, and a test that can show a result in no more than an hour are what’s needed.
One interesting thing about marijuana is that unlike alcohol increased amounts don’t seem to increase the high. Once a person gets off in the morning all the other smoking they do just gives them short term reduced highs. I have found smoking more than once a day is a waste of time and money.
Some guys can smoke it all through out the day and not really be impaired while someone who takes a few hits and then stops might be impaired 4 hours later.
Actually, looking at the site, it looks like it can also be used on ‘surfaces’ which, I suppose, would imply that it’s actually testing for THC. But that site doesn’t really give out a whole lot of info.
Also, it can’t be stored below 41F which means that it has to come out of the cop cars when they’re off their shift and they’re supposed to warm it up ‘with their hands’ if it’s that cold outside. Places like CO and WA and most of the northern half of the US get way colder then that. It seems like if someone gets busted with that device the first thing the lawyer is going to ask for is proof that it was stored and used properly.
OTOH, I suppose if they just kept one of them on their belt instead of a box of them in their trunk it would probably be okay.
Not only do they not have a test, they don’t have a standardized definition for exactly what it means to be under the influence of THC. Attempts to come up with both have been forestalled by the fact that acquiring, stockpiling & distributing enough marijuana to your test subjects is somewhat problematical, felony-wise.
It’s not really any different from alcohol… impairment varies with body mass, tolerance, behavioral adjustment, many things. The legal BAC is an arbitrary standard at which some people are staggering, some people are clinically unimpaired but most people are affected enough to call it drunk.
The problem will be the same for weed. Some people, especially legal newcomers, will be hit a lot harder by a joint than some grizzled old toker.
I’m fairly sure at this point (warning: conspiracy theory ahead) that the collective amnesia that saliva tests exist is actually encouraged by anti-marijuana and for-profit prison factions. They want you to forget that it exists so that you can see their “dilemma” with legalizing it d/t a lack of a roadside test. There is no dilemma. There is a test. They’re just not willing to use it; they’d rather use the urine metabolite test and toss more people in jail for smoking weed a month before they got behind the wheel.