Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 281 posts

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#31

Post by thaumasiotes »

JPKab wrote: post #3

As a full supporter of cannabis legalization, I'm also a big supporter of a technology that can instantly detect whether someone's reflexes are impaired by cannabis. Notice that I'm focusing on whether or not they are impaired, as opposed to the amount in their bloodstream. The point being that people that use cannabis regularly for medical reasons don't seem to be impaired by it at all, while newer or more occasiona…

How would you differentiate between someone with good reflexes who is currently impaired by cannabis, and someone with bad reflexes who isn't?

As a followup question, what would be the point of making that distinction?

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#32

Post by _dark_matter_ »

I wonder if, as public perception changes on the issue, stoned drivers will be in even less accidents as their own perception changes - i.e. "I'm high on cannabis, but that doesn't impair driving, so my own driving isn't impaired", and thus they drive better. Compared to before, "I'm high, high drivers are bad drivers, so my own driving is impaired".

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#33

Post by beat »

mankyd wrote: post #13
beat wrote: post #7

Alcohol has two synergetic problems for drivers... it reduces reflexes and increases confidence, simultaneously. Less capable, and more aggressive. No wonder it's so awful for drivers. Marijuana doesn't significantly impair reflexes (as generations of musicians have shown). As for judgment, it tends to make users more cautious, not more aggressive. They're not trying to get around that car in front of them to blow th…

> Marijuana doesn't significantly impair reflexes (as generations of musicians have shown). As an aside, is music really reliant on reflexes like this? I would assume that the beat of a song gives one plenty of forewarning as to when a melody might change. And that assumes that the rhythm of a melody doesn't put you in am altered, hypnotic state in other ways.

The original association of marijuana and music is in jazz, and playing while stoned is still as much norm as exception among jazz musicians. Jazz is a form of structured improvisation. The raw music actually isn't that complex. What's complex is trying to make a new statement with that music on the fly, while simultaneously listening closely to other musicians in the band, who are making their own statements. Done right, it feels like two (or more) minds thinking as one.

So yes, in addition to the physical reflexes needed to play difficult instruments gracefully, there's a lot of in-the-moment reflex in responding to the music and your fellow musicians.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#34

Post by MadManE »

oarsinsync wrote: post #14

> "At the current time, specific drug concentration levels cannot be reliably equated with a specific degree of driver impairment" Massively leading title given the statement actually issued, and their own remarks later on: > There's plenty of evidence showing that marijuana use impairs key driving skills[0]. If you get really stoned and then get behind the wheel, you're asking for trouble. [0] http://www.ncbi.nlm.ni…

But if they told the truth, they wouldn't get upvoted to the front page.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#35

Post by zamalek »

mankyd wrote: post #27
singlow wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jazz musicians and other improvisational music require fast reactions to other players.

But I still wonder if that's not a different skill. Significant changes to the melody still come on the beat. The same can't be said to you driving down the road and the car ahead of you slams on the brakes. Talented musicians of all sort can learn how to improvise, but it's a learned skill, not simply "hey, different music means I do something different!" It's an acquired skill that means training your ear to create…

"Super High Me" (on Netflix) has a fair amount of experimentation around this - in one specific case the narrator/subject does a SAT and showed both augmented and diminished faculties in different disciplines. It's obviously far off from a scientific study but interesting none-the-less.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#36

Post by bryanlarsen »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #8
riggins wrote: post #2

But what about their propensity to drive really slow?

Slowing down is the single most effective thing to reduce traffic accidents and injury. Not good for efficiency or smooth flow, sure. But can't claim its not safer.

Slowing down is not safer because it significantly reduces the number of traffic accidents.

Slowing down is safer because it significantly reduces the severity of the traffic accidents that do happen.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#37

Post by jlcx »

JPKab wrote: post #3

As a full supporter of cannabis legalization, I'm also a big supporter of a technology that can instantly detect whether someone's reflexes are impaired by cannabis. Notice that I'm focusing on whether or not they are impaired, as opposed to the amount in their bloodstream. The point being that people that use cannabis regularly for medical reasons don't seem to be impaired by it at all, while newer or more occasiona…

Impairment should be the focus, rather than the amount of any substance in anybody's bloodstream. Why not a general test of perception and reaction time?

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#38

Post by JoeAltmaier »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #36
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slowing down is the single most effective thing to reduce traffic accidents and injury. Not good for efficiency or smooth flow, sure. But can't claim its not safer.

Slowing down is not safer because it significantly reduces the number of traffic accidents. Slowing down is safer because it significantly reduces the severity of the traffic accidents that do happen.

Both; as shown by the statistics (I posted below).

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#39

Post by ElijahLynn »

criley2 wrote: post #11
throwaway2016a wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the US you can get a ticket for going under the speed limit if it is deemed to be impeding traffic even if there is no posted minimum limit. Especially if it is a multi-lane road and you are not in the rightmost lane.

>At least in the US you can get a ticket As a US citizen I will tell you this is false. We have basically no national traffic laws. Your local state, city or other local government may have passed a law like this. For example, in my area, it was made illegal to stay in the left lane moving more slowly than those behind you -- you must yield to the right if they want to go more quickly. But some 99% of Americans do no…

There are some highways that have a "minimum speed limit" sign posted. Not often, but they do exist, and you can get a ticket on those highways.

Also, a Google Self-driving car got pulled over the other day for simply going the speed limit, it did not get a ticket but I thought I would mention it.

Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

#40

Post by beat »

mankyd wrote: post #27
singlow wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jazz musicians and other improvisational music require fast reactions to other players.

But I still wonder if that's not a different skill. Significant changes to the melody still come on the beat. The same can't be said to you driving down the road and the car ahead of you slams on the brakes. Talented musicians of all sort can learn how to improvise, but it's a learned skill, not simply "hey, different music means I do something different!" It's an acquired skill that means training your ear to create…

As someone who both plays improvisational music and loves driving, they're very much the same feeling to me. It's a mixture of predictability and surprise. (And no, I don't drive intoxicated, I've had a total of two moving violations in 30+ years of driving, and I haven't been involved in an accident in 15 years - I'm a lot more daring with a guitar than with a car!)

Musicians tend to either play high or play sober, consistently. I'm consistently sober. However, I've heard recordings of myself playing under the influence of marijuana, and cannot hear a difference. Alcohol, on the other hand, wrecks me musically. Beyond a three-beer limit, my playing becomes a litany of technical mistakes and bad ideas. I won't drink more than a beer while playing music, because it makes me suck.

Post reply on HN