Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

new drug driving tests

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
good idea, shame all sortsof things can affect the results like natural bad judgement

i cant work out 30 seconds very accurately if im fully alert, let alone in the evening

linkage http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4116779.stm

if theyre only used as a guide its okay, if they used to say "oh youre on drugs" thats a terrible idea

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rubbish:lol:

    Count to 30 slowly you're on cannabis.
    Count to 30 quickly you're on cocaine.

    Utter crap:(
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    will they have a snack plate to see if you've got the mucnchies?
    a giggleometer?
    if your only hovering an inch above the ground will you be ok?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People driving under the influence of drugs is a serious issue. Many drug users do it even though they wouldn't drive drunk.

    Sobriety tests like this are a good move in the right direction but I am deeply concerned about any following urine or blood tests.

    There really is no way of telling if someone is intoxicated by the drug if you do blood tests (well unless they come back really high).

    Many drugs stay in your system long after they have become inactive and this could lead to many people getting charges even though they are not driving while intoxicated.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    People driving under the influence of drugs is a serious issue. Many drug users do it even though they wouldn't drive drunk.
    .

    I'm not a driver but most people who i know that smoke draw and drive are fine on the road, i feel completely safe with them, other drugs are dangerous, but i think weed's ok.

    Have u driven on weed, if so, were you fine, or do u think your driving was badly effected?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Driving while under the influence of cannabis is less dangerous than driving while drunk. Though thats not saying a great deal.

    Frankly I think anyone who drives while under the influence of anything is an anti-social fuck.

    Cannabis effects your ability to concentrate and judge distance properly, two skills you NEED while driving.

    If it was just the drivers life at stake then thats different, which is why I dont have any moral objections to people using drugs as such. But, when you drive you put others lives at risk too, driving is dangerous enough as it is let alone adding another risk into it as well.

    When younger I have done it, driving from my mates house back to mine accross a small town. I found it very difficult to concentrate on what I was doing and my mind wandered badly.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, I agree with you, anyone who drives under the influence of any drug that impairs them is a dick.

    My problem with the law is will it take in to accounts the amounts?

    “While detection equipment is also being developed, to be ready next year, the Department of Transport says it will only show if drugs are present but not whether driving ability has been impaired.”

    This bit scares me, for example if your have had 2 drinks it is acceptable for you to drive, I think this is the same for weed, if you’ve had a couple of joints I think it is fine (I may be wrong), but if you have been caning it all night, then I feel it isn’t safe to drive, the same as drink.

    Of course drugs such as weed are illegal, so the law will probably argue it doesn’t matter what amount you have had, you shouldn’t be taking them anyway.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As far as I know the DVLA have very wide spread powers in terms of drug use. If I remember rightly all they need is evidence that you have used and they can take your licence away for six months.

    So that would mean a possitive test while you are in charge of a car. This of course is a tough one because someone who smokes cannabis say every two weeks will virtually always test possitive.

    As I said actually knowing if the person is intoxicated by the drugs is very hard, it would mean running complex blood tests and working out concentration levels. And even those would be quite inaccurate.

    Personally I think it should be a lower limit for alcohol and anyone even vaugely intoxicated on drugs shouldnt drive. The 2 drinks thing really makes no sense, if I have one pint on an empty stomach I know I'm not sober enough to drive safely, but I would be legal.

    Some 3500 people die in car accidents a year, its a modern black death, anything you do that makes it more risky is bloody stupid.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by dolly dagger
    My problem with the law is will it take in to accounts the amounts?

    “While detection equipment is also being developed, to be ready next year, the Department of Transport says it will only show if drugs are present but not whether driving ability has been impaired.”

    The law states that your driving must be "impaired" through drink/drugs. For drinking it is easier and is based on volume in blood. For drugs this is harder and it's why many people get away with it.

    The test that is being introduced now is a guide to show an impairment, if the policeman believes that one exists you can then be asked to submit to a test. Still hard to prove the impairment so don't expect too many prosecutions.
    if your have had 2 drinks it is acceptable for you to drive

    No it isn't. You can have one drink and give a positive result, it's all dependant on the individual. Some cannot touch a drop, others can drink 4/5 pints of lager and still give a negative test result.

    The two drinks thing is a guide only and shouldn't be taken as gospel.
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    As far as I know the DVLA have very wide spread powers in terms of drug use. If I remember rightly all they need is evidence that you have used and they can take your licence away for six months.

    Not to my knowledge. The DVLA actually has very limited powers and a court case/fixed penalty is required for any effect on your licence. Other than medical issues that is.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The balance of evidence is stronger than I thought, but they can take away your licence for 6 months for;

    "The persistent use of or dependency on these substances, confirmed by medical enquiry, will lead to licence revocation or refusal until a six month period free of such use has been attained. Independent medical assessment and urine screen arranged by DVLA, may be required."

    For - Cannabis, Amphetamines, Ecstasy & other psychoactive substances, including LSD and Hallucinogens

    And,

    "Persistent use of, or dependency on these substances, confirmed by medical enquiry, will lead to licence refusal or revocation for a minimum one year period free of such use has been attained. Independent medical assessment and urine screen arranged by DVLA, may be required. In addition favourable Consultant or Specialist report may be required
    on reapplication."

    For - Heroin, Morphine, Methadone*, Cocaine

    Thats from the DVLA themselves.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    good idea to test for drugs, but i think you shouldnt be allowed to drink to drive at all, have it strict i say

    the tests though are stupid ive done them before and i failed them when completly sober, i can drive really well though

    i cant walk that straight sober, i can balance on one leg, i cant count to 30 accurately, and i look stoned as hell most of the time, just through family genetics, and if u dont believe me, see wen i go the meet, if i do
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I believe that some countries do have very low alcohol limits, and there certainly is an arguement for doing this.

    But if you set it at zero then many people would get busted who havent really had a drink, cough mixture for example is normally about 10-12% vol alcohol.

    These are a blunt tool but its a good start.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you have to pass a proportion of these tests? or all of them? I probably wouldn't pass them all, dyspraxic dontchaknow
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Fiend_85
    Do you have to pass a proportion of these tests? or all of them? I probably wouldn't pass them all, dyspraxic dontchaknow

    I dont know, I think it is based on the officers opinion, which means like stop and search it will be mainly based on sterotyping and potentially racism.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    reminds me of the test officers in america do cause they dont do breathiliser tests
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by wheresmyplacebo
    reminds me of the test officers in america do cause they dont do breathiliser tests

    I think it has to do with no standard limit accross the different states and their law being based on impairment rather than a limit. But I think that is changing now.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Re: new drug driving tests
    Originally posted by wheresmyplacebo
    good idea, shame all sortsof things can affect the results like natural bad judgement

    i cant work out 30 seconds very accurately if im fully alert, let alone in the evening

    linkage http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4116779.stm

    if theyre only used as a guide its okay, if they used to say "oh youre on drugs" thats a terrible idea

    the serious aspects aside I think this must be a piss take.
    They must then count "one thousand and one, one thousand and two" and so on until the officer tells them to stop.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    Not to my knowledge. The DVLA actually has very limited powers and a court case/fixed penalty is required for any effect on your licence. Other than medical issues that is.


    this is untrue, i had a examination by a doctor and was asked about my history of drug use, i only smoke cannabis i was asked the last time i used it on a daily basis, i told them september 1999 before i went into rehab.
    they used this as evidence that i was dependant upon the said drug and it was a guenuine medical condition, even though i have my GP two hospital consultants and the dvla franchise doctors saying that im fit to drive.
    i dont drink/drive nor do i drug/drive, they have no proof as i have never been in trouble before nor pulled by police, but i still have to take the dvla to court as they wont back down to either myself or the five doctors who have spoken to them on my behalf.
    also i dont know if you are aware, but with these new tests there is concequences, if you fail this test then the police are being told that they must submit details of license holder to the dvla medical enquiries section. as drug use is (by the dvla) considered to be a relevent medical condition for which you will get your license revoked untill you can prove a six month period free from such use.
    but how do you prove that? submit yourself to the doctors every two weeks for a urine sample? at whos cost? and how can they prove that you are using on a daily basis essecially cannabis as there are so many strenghs out on the market therefore different levels of thc in the system?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree with them. Someone who has impaired judgement through the use of drugs is as bad as someone impaired through drink.
    They're both shit heads and they both deserve to be banned from driving.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere
    I agree with them. Someone who has impaired judgement through the use of drugs is as bad as someone impaired through drink.
    They're both shit heads and they both deserve to be banned from driving.
    i think we all agree with that whowhere but ...the problem is how do you tell if someone is intoxicated and not just having residue in the blood?
  • SkiveSkive Posts: 15,282 Skive's The Limit
    I used to drive pissed and I used to drive after taking drugs. I can't believe how lucky I was not to hurt somebody or myself. I've lost a stupid number of mates in road accidents due to drink and drugs and excluding the odd line of coke, I won't drive after consuming anything anymore - not even after a smoke.
    Weekender Offender 
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Skive
    I used to drive pissed and I used to drive after taking drugs. I can't believe how lucky I was not to hurt somebody or myself. I've lost a stupid number of mates in road accidents due to drink and drugs and excluding the odd line of coke, I won't drive after consuming anything anymore - not even after a smoke.

    Same as now, i last used regulary in 1999, ive not drove under the influence as i view it as most other people do the same as alcohol, however i feel it is not fair that the dvla are using evidence from 1999, to ban me now, i finished rehab four years ago and they found no trace in my blood tests, but its still haunting me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by morrocan roll
    i think we all agree with that whowhere but ...the problem is how do you tell if someone is intoxicated and not just having residue in the blood?


    I believe that's why they brought in the perception tests for use on the road side.
    I expect the procedure will be similar to the drink driving one. If they fail they are taken to the police station and given a more accurate test.
    I think it's likely the person under the influence of drugs will be taken back and given a blood and/or urine test to establish how much drugs are in the system.
    If it's over a certain amount and of a specific type then they are prosecuted.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere
    I believe that's why they brought in the perception tests for use on the road side.
    I expect the procedure will be similar to the drink driving one. If they fail they are taken to the police station and given a more accurate test.
    I think it's likely the person under the influence of drugs will be taken back and given a blood and/or urine test to establish how much drugs are in the system.
    If it's over a certain amount and of a specific type then they are prosecuted.

    these results will only determine wether drugs are in your system, not, wether you are under the influence. i cant stand on one leg for 5 seconds without falling over, does that mean im under the influence?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    where these kind of tests will utterly fail are with the old and frail.
    many of them take prescription medicines such as valium and opiates.
    many of them will fail the tests ...but not cos of their medication.
    more and more very old and frail people are using cannabis ...how can you expect a seventy five year old arthritic to do these roadside tests?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by 01j01
    these results will only determine wether drugs are in your system, not, wether you are under the influence. i cant stand on one leg for 5 seconds without falling over, does that mean im under the influence?

    Clearly it is not as simple as that. The tests would surely be employed in the same manner as a drink/drive test, as in you really need to have been driving stupidly to begin with in order to be pulled over for the tests.

    Then, I would guess, you would have to fail the tests comprehensively to get taken in for further investigation or whatever happens.

    People are saying ridiculous things in this thread like "I can't stand on one leg" or "I can't count to 30". Well that may be, but you look at some of the people on World's Wildest Police Videos or whatever when they administer these tests in the US. These people are falling over themselves just trying to stand up straight, that's the sort of thing that the cops will be looking out for.

    If you were asked to close your eyes and think up to 30 without being under any influence then you could do it to some degree of accuracy. Try the same thing under influence and your thought train will be buggering off left right and centre. It'd probably be five minutes before you said stop.


    Noone who drives safely should have any reason to object to tests like these, methinks.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sorry but I don't see how if I smoked a joint last week, they can do me for driving under the influence tommorow.

    Let's be honest, that's a load of fucking shit!!!!!!!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.