I remember an article on this in New Scientist back in the 90s that went into a lot more depth. A study showed that while alcohol impaired multiple aspects of driving skill marijuana mostly impaired just time judgement. And stoned drivers tended to overestimate their level of impairment and slow down while drunk drivers tended to underestimate how impaired they were. They actually found that drivers who were moderately drunk and stoned were less likely to crash than drivers who were just moderately drunk because they slowed down even though they were more impaired.
Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
41–50 of 281 posts
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#42Do not read this and think it's okay to drive high. It's not. Do not drive high. Call an uber or something.
I worry that people read studies like this and suddenly justify going out and driving while impaired. Driving is an incredibly dangerous activity on its own. Doing it when you're stoned is a stupid and risky move, and comparing it to how much more dangerous drunk driving is doesn't make it less stupid.
If you've never smoked pot, you don't understand how it feels and affects your thinking/reactions/perception of time and reality. If you smoke pot everyday, it may affect you less due to tolerance, but it's still affecting you, much like a functional alcoholic.
I have nothing against usage and I strongly encourage legalization, but I don't think it's okay to pretend that it's safe to get high and go driving.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#43I can't argue with this data, but I have to wonder how much tolerance/individuality plays a role in this. I know that I personally could not drive high on THC, my propensity to zone out would almost certainly result in an accident, but I (used to) have friends who drove regularly during and after partaking and I was completely confident in their abilities.
Personally, I think prohibitionists/law enforcement is looking for an easy money-grab and are hunting for justification of their desires rather than responding to an actual harmful issue that society is facing.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#44Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#45I can't argue with this data, but I have to wonder how much tolerance/individuality plays a role in this. I know that I personally could not drive high on THC, my propensity to zone out would almost certainly result in an accident, but I (used to) have friends who drove regularly during and after partaking and I was completely confident in their abilities. Personally, I think prohibitionists/law enforcement is lookin…
>> I can't argue with this data, but I have to wonder how much tolerance/individuality plays a role in this.
A ton. Someone who only drinks a couple times a year and drives home drunk from a wedding or something and isn't used to it is a lot more unsafe than someone who goes to happy hour every day and drives home all the time like that.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#46Get off your high horse.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#47Earlier 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.
Sure, I can make that claim. People driving slow, as you state, aren't good for smooth flow. Have you ever been driving at night at the speed limit and suddenly come upon someone going 15mph under? It's really dangerous.
True, but pot isn't making people do that. It's even more dangerous if people completely stop completely, or reverse, at night, on a curved stretch of highway with a 75mph speed limit, but pot isn't making people do that either.
I don't even think that pot makes people drive slowly. IMO it's a result of stoned people being afraid of giving the police any excuse to pull them over.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#48As 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…
Right now, there is none. Obviously the measurable amount isn't reliable - but that has been known to general users for years. And so much of it is personal - a person going out on the weekend and smoking a lot (much like drinking most weekends or occasionally) is going to be really impaired. A regular smoker, who keeps a slight buzz and gets used to it would have very little effect most times. People around them don't have a clue.
I honestly think the best solution would be to regulate the current traffic laws better - including things such as speed limits, yeilding to pedestrians, keeping distance ahead of you (don't know if that is a law) and other things. Not only is this going to help catch people too impaired to be driving, but folks that are simply not paying attention to the road and trying to multi-task while driving.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#49As 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…
I could see something like an augmented reality setup for a driver where fake pedestrians wander into the road ahead of you and if you don't slow down in time you are warned / flagged as impaired / ignition shuts down. Passes the specificity test, for sure - which something like a reflex test to turn the ignition switch does not.
The problem is that it's way too invasive for people to sign up for it voluntarily - not to mention you'd cause a bunch of sudden stops for no reason and maybe create more accidents than you prevent.
Re: Stoned drivers are safer than drunk ones, new federal data show
#50As 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?
>> As a followup question, what would be the point of making that distinction?
People with better reflexes might drive less conservatively due to their reflexes, and may continue to do so even while impaired.