Probably not. It’s just linked with increased risk of cancer, heart attacks and psychiatric disorders.
Hmm… twenty-five. And three years’ driving experience.
Wasn’t that easy?
I assume this was a joke, because anyone who’s at all familiar with drug testing knows that “pissing in a cup” is not a test for being high, and that smoking pot three weeks ago doesn’t have any effect on your driving today.
I see no problem with charging people who drive while stoned more for insurance to cover their increased risk of accidents. (Of course, that’s an economic choice for insurance companies to make, not something for the government to decree.)
What’s that? There is no increased risk of accidents? Hmm.
Actually, the answer is “yes.” The ‘meta-study’ that you cite is not a study per se, but rather a study of studies. It is only as accurate as the studies it samples, and most of them don’t seem to be peer-reviewed.
This study for the DOT says:
(“Road Tracking and Car Following” are standard tests for driver impairment, as described in the study.) The introduction goes on to state:
You actually had more of a leg to stand on when you were pointing out the statistically mitigating effect of the added carefulness of pot smokers. However, it is unequivocally clear that smoking pot does make one too impaired to consider driving.
So again, I must ask. How do you explain the accident studies?
Listen up.
I am by no means a regular smoker of weed, although I did my fair share back in my student days. I don’t know if you guys in North America are smoking oregano or something, but how in the hell can a regular smoker of weed come to the conclusion that driving whilst high is somehow a good idea?
Check my location on the left. Perhaps the legally available grass here is a tad stronger than the stuff youse guys can get your hands on, but I doubt the difference is that big.
Smoking weed and driving is a dangerous combination, and I don’t care WHAT the University of Toronto says.
So, in short, Al Gore’s son is a dumbass, Bush’s daughters are naughty little party animals, and both Gore and Bush have given us plenty of reasons to bash them for, besides their offspring.
Airman, say the SDMB still exists in 15 years time, and we’re all still posters here. And say that your son got caught trying to purchase alcohol with a fake ID, at age 16. How would you then like it when another poster used that information (assuming you shared it on the boards) as leverage against you in a debate? Would you consider that a fair debating tactic? Would it have ANY bearing on what kind of father you are, if a 16 year old does what 16 year olds do?
Thought not.
Hey, that’s the smoker’s problem not mine. You want to tear up your body, be my guest.
[broken record] Then why don’t the accident studies reflect that? [/broken record]
Probably by doing it for hours and hours and hours (SPOOFE once did an eight hour driving-while-stoned marathon… no destination, just tootling 'round the valley) and having no problems. I won’t even get started on the 'shrooms…
Trust me, Coldie, the American grass is some of the strongest shit you’ll ever find…
Ultimately, it comes down to experience. 99% of driving is automatic, stoned or sober… it’s that last, crucial 1% that’s important. People who are sober and doing something distracting - like applying makeup, or eating - are not going to be paying attention when that crucial 1% comes up. A stoner, if he’s an experienced stoner, will ALWAYS act as if that crucial 1% is about to come up.
'Course, ya always get the problem of the occasional pothead that acts like an idiot… JUST LIKE YOU GET THE OCCASIONAL SOBIE THAT ACTS LIKE AN IDIOT. You’re taking the exception and applying it to the rule, bucko.
Not at all. I’m speaking from quite extensive experience with various sorts of weed and marijuana, and I’m telling you that I would never get behind the wheel of a car after smoking weed. And since the Dutch penal code for driving under the influence seems to agree with me in that marijuana and the like do indeed influence your driving capabilities, I think it’s fair to say I’m not applying the exception as a rule here.
I’ll take the penal system of pragmatic country in which marijuana has been legal to purchase for almost 30 years, and therefore a lot of experience has been gained with it, over some flimsly piece of bullshit research anyday.
What am I, mute? ACCIDENT STUDIES! There are multiple studies cited in this thread. You picked the one that seemed weakest to you and held it up as representative of all of them! :rolleyes:
How are hard figures from the U.S. NHTSA and the Australians “bullshit research?”
And what evidence did the Dutch base this penal code on, Coldie? You’re trying to tell me that a government has never made an inappropriate law?
Oh, forgive me for daring to question the omniscience of the all-seeing Dutch. The Dutch know all, they have ALL the answers! Why do we seek truths, when we have THE DUTCH to rely upon?!? Oh, cast aside thine woes, mortals, for we have THE GREAT and MAGNIFICENT wisdom of the ALL-SEEING DUTCH to guide our lives!!
:rolleyes:
Speaking of the relative strength of marijuana, my smoking days were all back in the 1970s. I don’t know if it’s true, but I keep hearing today’s dope is a lot stronger than that of the Cheech-and-Chong era. And that stuff knocked me right on my ass, rendering me unfit to use small kitchen appliances, let alone motor vehicles.
All I can say is, I hope t-keela is right, and the rate of marijuana involvement in accidents is low because most (small-d) dopers have the good sense to stay off the roads in the first place.
The whole notion that it’s OK to drive while impaired sounds pretty suspect to me. Studies or no studies, I have a hard time believing a large class of people overwhelmingly reacts to a particular impairment by exercising such caution as to negate it. It just goes against everything I know about human nature, and human nature is pretty reliable when you’re dealing with large numbers of humans.
One other thing I’ll toss in: I used to react to alcohol the way these large numbers of dope smokers did to marijuana, when driving: I’d drive slower, and become extra careful. That still didn’t make it the smart choice. Nowadays, I hand the keys to my wife.
Eh, cool off a bit, will you?
Look, research is just that. Cites are just that. I can post tons of sites stating that marijuana does significantly impair your driving skills. In fact, take your pick.
At best, the scientific jury still seems to be out on whether or not marijuana is dangerous in combination with driving, but it’s by no means a done deal. No matter how hard [n]neutron star** yells at me, it doesn’t change that fact that marijuana DOES alter ones perceptions and reaction time - I think we all agree there. Whether or not it does so in any significant form seems to be up for debate. I don’t have the answer myself, but I sure as hell am not going to blindly follow the “it’s safe” camp when there are numeorus studies saying the exact opposite.
And no, the Dutch aren’t almighty know-alls that should be the only source here. But as far as finding examples of places where marijuana use in society has been thoroughly documented, I think we can agree that the Netherlands is an excellent example, what with it being the only country where pot has been legal for so long. So yeah, I do value the Dutch legal structure surrounding marijuana. Not because I AM Dutch, but because it’s rooted in practical experience rather lab research.
Sure, the Dutch government has made many faulty laws, just like any other one I’d imagine. Still, I don’t see what’s wrong with erring on the side of caution in this case, especially when the academic world still seems to be divided on the issue. Seeing as how my personal experiences would be firmly in the “it’s definitely NOT safe” camp, I have no problem with this law whatsoever. Others might come up with anecdotes that they toked up for 10 hours on end, and still could drive safely. Just like there’s probably plenty of people who can chug down 10 cans of beer without having their driving skills impaired. The simple truth is that laws like this are aimed at the risk factors, not those who seem to escape those risks for some reason.
And I fail to see what’s so wrong, or surprising, about that. It’s not like I’m some sort of anti-pot fundie - au contraire. I just happen to think, from experience, that it doesn’t combine with operatin a motor vehicle - and Dutch law, again from experience, seems to agree with me.
So what’s the fucking problem? Agree with me, disagree with me, but don’t show me 3 cites and expect me to change my opinion based on 12+ years of smoking weed, OK?
The only things that suggest it could be dangerous are controlled studies. All of the real-life data shows that it’s not a danger. Thousands of blood tests don’t lie.
What, you mean like accident reports?
And the accident studies show that the risk factor for a stoned driver is on par with your average sober driver…
Coldie you’re wasting your breath man. Anyone who has smoked dope regularly knows it gets you fucked up. That’s why you fucking smoke it!
When a user finally quits…often it is because their tolerance has elevated to the point where it’s just not worth it anymore. My old lady asked me to quit when we first got together, so I did. I had practically quit anyway. All it did anymore was make me paranoid, hungry, sleepy or stupid. (don’t forget Dopey or Doc)
side note: I can still drink a gallon of tequila in a day and be cool. (that’s a tolerance example)
Back when I was tokin’ a lot…remember cheap but good weed? $10 for a 4 finger lid of pretty decent shit. Think late 70’s…How about some authentic “Acapulco Gold” (killer dope 
), take a couple of hits and be stoned all afternoon, I freaked when it went to $50 an ounce. Anyway, that’s all old shit for me. Back to drivin under the influence. Some can, some can’t…I remember stopping at a green light one night and just sitting there waiting for it to change.
Had to quit driving while stoned after that. Man, I’d look down and be doing 15mph in 40 mph zone. Now that old skunk ass weed…no effect. Smoke it like cigars. Never miss a lick. But I started gettin old and needed to speed up my life instead of slowing it down.
So it’s been several years since I touched the stuff, but I’m not buying the “it doesn’t effect driving skills” bullshit. I done seen it firsthand many, many times.
BTW My driving record is practically spotless. No accidents and only two speeding tickets in over twenty years. That don’t mean I didn’t pull some stupid assed shit when I was younger. Driving when I couldn’t see the fuckin road. or close one eye so I only saw one road. Stats. and studies are not proof, they may be evidence to support a claim. Not proof when it comes to driving while stoned.
I haven’t read anything past this yet.
I’m VERY drunk and stoned now but unfortunatly when I posted that I was just being stupid.
Heh, I was checking out Mr.2001’s link. It says that people driving under the influence of marijuana actually slow down or are perhaps even more cautious.
I had to laugh…I know why too. They’re scared shitless because they’re too fucked up to drive at normal speeds.
Notice, I didn’t say they were involved in more accidents. But the cite and most I’ve read, dismiss the effects of marijuana on drivers when alcohol is also present in their system. Which is about half the time. Pretty convenient huh?
Wow big highjack.
Seriously, when I’m stoned, I’m stoned. Gran Turismo yes but a tonne of metal and peoples lives? No thanks!
YMMV
Really? Can you honestly say you’re eye is on the ball in the same way it is when you’re straight? Over here it’s a no-no in my experience. No police test you for it but people accept it’s a risk to do it.