jef

iTrader: (13)

as a follow on from the drink driving thred,

this year the queen announced at some speech that the police would have equipment and powers to prosecute drug drivers- although why they differentiate the 2 is beyond me?
so has anyone been made aware how these work, there effectivness, what substances they test for, there allowable tolerance ect ect or just another ill thought through crowd pleasing bit of legislation?
whose behind the testing equipment and have they come up with a fool proof testing protocol?
have the police been fully trained in the effective operation of such devices?

IWatkins

Yes, to most of your questions.

If you are drug driving in March 2013 in the South-West at least, you are fugged.

Leslie

Not only that, you deserve to be metaphorically strung up!

Les

specialx

People drug drive every day.


Morphine, tranquilizers etc will this test catch these ofenders too

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

More info please?

Like what drugs?
How do they test?
Is there a limit like alcohol? Or is it zero?

Or are ALL drugs taboo, including those prescribed which say that IF you are effected you shouldn't drive?

jef

iTrader: (13)

my op is a question, what drugs ae included, tolerance levels like alcohol, have the machines been developed and tested yet, and with brigades.

and most importantly if so why arent people being informed, is 8mg of codien in cocodamol acceptabel, ephedrine in cold remedies, levels off caffine which are regulalry high enough to cause palutations, then, nicotine, paracetamol, NSAIDS like diclofenac ibfrufen, natural remedies than have similar effectes to caffine, guarana, extreme glucose sweets, which can affect behaviour, is there test to check tiredness

or whats the actual case? is this meant to catch stoners, smackheads or coke heads?? and the rest can use drugs and drive as they please? ive not seen anything promoted?

KAS35RSTI

iTrader: (73)

Its the Marryjiwana

billythekid

Been FIT testing round here for several years.

stevebt

iTrader: (8)

So does that mean I won't be able to drive after a few sniffs of coke ?

addi monster

iTrader: (6)

If some little chav is driving around stoned out of his head or off his face on other drugs he wants BANNING plain and simple, Infact anyone for that matter who drives and takes ilegal substances wants banning.

KAS35RSTI

iTrader: (73)

If your smoking Skunk & driving then your asking for death really, thai weed would make you concentrate

c_maguire

It's about time drug testing was implemented as chances are there are far more drivers under the negative influence of drugs than booze.
Everybody knows they may be tested for booze and will get punished if caught which acts as a deterrent, in addition to which people are aware of the effects of booze so self-restraint is easier anyway.

I remember trials of drug testing equipment a few years ago (for pot I think) but the cost was high compared to a pipe for a breathalizer and the results were less accurate and a blood test was the only way to get more accurate results which takes time and more cost.
The timeframe is probably about right for the next advance.

c_maguire

And there are so many drugs how the hell can you test for them all?
Testing for pot only would only be scrapeing the surface now.

Coke
Pot
Anti-depressants
Sleeping pills
E's
skunk
crack
solvents

and so on

jef

iTrader: (13)

just illegal 1s, why? what about the legal drugs many of use that impair/alter driving behaviour? or bodily systems that can alter natural functions/reactions or behaviour?

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Slightly confused, I thought they were just going to be rolling-out FIT testing nationwide, with blood-test follow-ups at the station if a person seems incapacitated. Don't really see the need for anything else myself.

addi monster

iTrader: (6)

If you take these drugs and drive then they are also illegal are they not ?
If a drug says do not drive or operate machinary and you do so then you should be liable for the rath of the land pal.

jef

iTrader: (13)

they dont just become illegal, but if they warn not to use machinery - is that mandatory or a guidance?
say you take a cough medicine at night containing ephedrine, wake up the next day, and as your metabolism has slowed during sleep it meant you still had a traceable level in your system (all hpyothetical as i dont know if they test for it or its actual half life) could that result in a punishable crime. or the same scenario with countless other medication, or every day drugs.

my point is really that there seems to be an immenant introduction of a policy which could result in loosing licence or jobs and no-one seems to be clear whats what. all im asking is if theres a published guideline that makes it black and white to avoid confusion of whats an offence or not. there needs to be widley circulated documents expalining the exact details. its not much to ask for something that was announced many months ago, and about to come into effect.

c_maguire

With your system there'd be no need for the London congestion charge, it'd be like 28 Days Later

addi monster

iTrader: (6)

some clearly state do not drive so if you do then your liable for the rath, anyone stupid enough to get squiffy on cough medicine ect and drive didnt ought to be driving in the first place, its a tough one to call but all illegal drugs should be the starting point imho of course.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

I'm with jef on this.

ALL this to catch a few stoners.
And yet what is being done about those who smoke while driving, light cigarettes etc? Drop lit cigs? Are THEY fully in control of their car?

Apparently, you aren't if you are eating an apple......

And what of the idiots who now stop when and where they please to answer their phones? And hang everyone else?

addi monster

iTrader: (6)

I think we all have issues with drink/drug & bad driving habbits so its up to the boys in blue to sort this out and it looks like they are just starting to do so by clamping down on pot heads ect.

Fair play to them i say, Lifes hard enough without morons adding to the danger on the streets,

Ask yourself this, If your child was killed right there in front of you by some tw@t that staggered out of his car with a joint in his hand what would you do ? i would kill him.

Moley

iTrader: (9)

I guess some might just be worried about being on steroids and driving

jef

iTrader: (13)

pmsl, if any c*nt stops infront of me, then fully accept to get dragged out your car and battered to death. shame i dont use steroids and have them to balme them for my actions

my main bone of contention as per usual and it sounds like a broken record - education education education. by all means have some legislation but atleast the minimum id expect would be for the wide public made aware of the exact specifics of legislation - when drugs is such a loose word.

my personal prefferance would be to make training when learning to drive much more comprehensive, and include things like the influence of drugs - and shock the trainees with images that will haunt them - and that goes for shocking the general public who already obtain a licence yet drive like d*cks. its easy done, but some will be "offended" therefore we cant infringe on there human rights, even to enable us to better control driving attitudes, and ultimatley reduce incidents.

its not rocket science.

Moley

iTrader: (9)

I'd assume they'll concentrate on illegal drugs.

jef

iTrader: (13)

but moley assumption is the mother of all fckups mate

i too would think theyd target drug users, clearly out of ther face, ecstacy ect, where there mind is far from the activity of driving and staying safe, but then you have all the still legal hihgs, often worse than the illegals.
but then would you feel a bit aggreived if you were stopped and charged for a positive result for say a above law of stimulant (speed) ect if the potentially the copper couldve been under the weather consuming a cough remedy with a strong stimulant in it, and then to wake up in the morning had 2 cans of red bull and an esspresso to get him ready for work ect - where the cumulative effect could be equal to or greater than the effect of whatever youve ingested?

its just a series of possibilities that at present dont seem to have been clarified. - definate clarity is exactly whats needed, mg levels in tested people, the actual drug being tested, if there is a tolerance of some degree or ?????....

as far as i know its due to be impleted very shortly yet i have seen zero guidnace available for the public. youve got to think of sleeping aids from prescribed to herbal remedies, that may still be active after waking the next day. just doesnt seem to be any guidance or clarity? unless someone knows more details?

stedee

iTrader: (4)

weed was actually shown on fifth gear to make you more careful, from previous experience i agree, mixing weed with beer is a different matter.
all the ppl who seem to think it makes you dangerous etc etc have probably never smoked it or they are lightweights lol. if they do it for "proper " drugs no complaint from me

jef

iTrader: (13)

also how easy it to differentaite legal from illegal, youve got heroin - which is a great headliner for the forces and papers, but what about all opiates derived from it, used in so many medicines. could you take co-codamol or 2 be stopped tested and it claimed you have traces of an opiod in your system? then loose licence and potentially job?
its likely a bone fide herion addict may have much higher levels or appear intoxicated, but as it has a fairly short hal lfie it wont be long before the trace could be comparible to 20mg of dihydrcodine? - or could a health professioanl say otherwise - be interesting to know.

there literally could be hundreds of scenarios available, and there doent seem to be any clear cut advice or guidance as to whats illegal or not, or if there are tolerance or a way of determing whether that opiate was derived from source as herion or an otc pill free to all?

i dont want o quash the idea atall as i agree lives could be saved, but wheres the clarity, where the published data thatll be used to enforce the laws.

alos got to thinking about entonox and how several medical staff have been dismissed due to abusing it, severly short half life - but freely available to medics and others - certainly can impair driving function , yet likelyl by time to station or even pull over and chat, its untraceable?

i just wander how well thought through this actually is or if its more of a treat the massess as fools to hammer motorists more, esp when there are other means avaialble to reduce risk of injury or death on the roads?

thoughts?

c_maguire

So you can have a spliff and drive home no bother, but I can't have a couple of pints and do the same.
I don't see the difference.

jef

iTrader: (13)

that was actually one of my thoughts, remebering that first smoke fo the day, it defo had an effect, could often make you feel ill, possibly pause or even stumble - so its oken to do that driving a 2 two ton vehicle at speeds of 40-70mhp? and not a risk to other road users? hmmmm something smells like a massive cannibis joint coming directly from the house of commoms smokescreened window lol.

but its ok cause its legal and lots of people do it, must be all those pesky smackheads that drive there cars while in so much of a coma they cant even sit up lol. or the paranoid pot smokers scared to venture out of the central 30% of the lane, starining to see every possible road sign, cross roadsa dn evry other vehicles registrations plate lol