Stoned Drivers vs. Drunk Drivers

A few weeks ago, I noted that the Obama administration, reputedly more enlightened than its predecessor on matters of drug policy, is encouraging states to enact gratuitously punitive laws that treat drivers with marijuana metabolites in their urine as if they were drunk. Since traces of marijuana can be detected in urine long after the drug's effects have worn off, this policy is just an excuse for sending pot smokers to jail. I suggested that tests of THC in blood would be a more accurate measure of impairment, comparable to the standard for alcohol. But as at least one commenter noted, there is an argument for treating drivers under the influence of marijuana less severely than drivers under the influence of alcohol: They are less of a threat to public safety. Experiments repeatedly have found that marijuana has a less dramatic impact on driving ability than alcohol does, with the added advantage that pot smokers seem to be more aware of their impairment and therefore tend to compensate for it by slowing down (whereas drinkers tend to speed up). In the latest study, reported recently in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, subjects who smoked a joint containing marijuana with about 3 percent THC "decreased their speed [more than the sober control subjects did] and failed to show expected practice effects during a distracted drive," but "no differences were found during the baseline driving segment or collision avoidance scenarios."

In their book Marijuana Is Safer, which I reviewed in the April issue of Reason, Steve Fox, Mason Tvert, and Paul Armentano cite marijuana's relatively minor impact on driving ability as a public safety advantage. To the extent that legalizing pot encourages people to shift from alcohol to marijuana, it could actually produce a net decrease in traffic deaths, contrary to the nightmare scenarios painted by prohibitionists.

Armentano surveys the evidence on marijuana and driving here.


NewsHawk: Ganjarden: 420 MAGAZINE
Source: Reason Magazine
Author: Jacob Sullum
Contact: Reason Magazine
Copyright: 2010 Reason Magazine
Website: Stoned Drivers vs. Drunk Drivers
 
Hard to comment on this stupidity of THC in the system........unfucking real !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What next?
We smokers know its safer than alcohol, but know one should drive impaired period.
 
This is one of the misconceptions that is taken as fact in our society, that driving while stoned is a bad thing to do. I have a truck with 260,000 miles on it. I probably drove at least 200,000 of them with a buzz. I've never been in more than a very minor fender bender that was someone else's fault. I see people driving crazy around me all the time, and I know they aren't smoking weed. This is one urban myth that will take a long time to debunk. I'd far rather ride with a seasoned smoker with a buzz than a hurried corporate slave trying to put on makeup, drink coffee, and drive to work.
 
They're trying to pull this malarkey at a time when half the young-adults on the roads today grew up playing driving simulations while taking care of their other latch-key siblings and the other half did the same while dodging the antics of their friends - and many of them were mentally-tuned at the same time? Sorry, but my stoner neighbor could score 2.5 million on your test while flying at 35,000 feet and his very serious and straight-up brother can't manage to back out of his driveway without killing a small animal.

I think you're cherry-picking your test subjects!

Wander around at an unsanctioned and illegal street-race or freestyle motorcycle event. I'm not saying that all of the participants are medicated - or that they should be. But if you can manage to walk from one end of the starting line to the other and don't catch a contact-high then it's your own fault. Those guys/gals have to dodge each other, bystanders, obstacles, and LEO - and often do.
 
but officer i haven't smoked pot in two weeks why are you giving me a dui....... definate appeal matieral here i think
 
Back
Top Bottom