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

51–60 of 281 posts

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

#51

Post by bostonpete »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #48
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…

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…

> And so much of it is personal

This is true of drunk driving too. I don't think that means we just shouldn't try to impose any restrictions...

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

#52

Post by Broken_Hippo »

kdamken wrote: post #42

Do 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'v…

That isn't what the article was saying.

I do find it a bit unfair to compare daily smokers to functional alcoholics, however - there is a definite difference in the way the drugs affect folks. This was the main point of the article. A slight buzz like that of a daily smoker - or someone using for medical reasons - isn't affecting safety, but going more than that and it should be obvious. Be safe and all that.

Besides. Part of the issue is that public transportation lacking in a lot of parts of the country. Some folks just don't have options, even things like Uber, and if you live just slightly out of the way, such things wind up costing even more money. If you are drunk, you can get arrested in some places (indiana) for walking home - instant public intoxication charge. Still more places don't have safe options to walk or ride bikes if you are impared. These things need fixed to be able to do what you are encouraging.

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

#53

Post by tetrep »

kdamken wrote: post #42

Do 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'v…

> I worry that people read studies like this and suddenly justify going out and driving while impaired.

The keyword here is "impaired." It doesn't just have to involve drugs, being exhausted and attempting to drive is also very dangerous. Not just for you, but for everyone else on/near the road.

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

#54

Post by dubcanada »

kdamken wrote: post #42

Do 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'v…

It's also not safe to drive while tired, on any medication at all (including over the counter drugs), while texting, while on the phone, while not looking at the road, with glasses (they could fall off and you'd be blind), with a heart condition, etc etc.

I think it's safe to assume you drive very often with things that affect your driving. If pot is proven to not affect your driving to a measurable degree, then the only thing that is different between that and random over the counter medication is one is called pot.

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

#55

Post by Broken_Hippo »

jlcx wrote: post #37
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?

How do you figure out what is normal for that person, though? Or what is normal to society? How do we set up a test that is fair to most folks? Can we rely on police training to be able to make accomidations (quickly) for those that are disabled, etc?

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

#56

Post by hristov »

This means nothing. The big difference between alcohol and other drugs is that there is a relatively straightforward correlation between the amount of alcohol in the bloodstream and the current effect of alcohol on the brain.

Somebody testing positive for marijuana may not be stoned at all. It could be they were stoned last week and tested positive.

Furthermore, alcohol testing is much easier and is the only type of testing really done by police in the field. Police will try to get you to admit being impaired by other drugs if they stop you, but they do not have anything like the breathalyzer to test for other drugs.

Current data comparing driving impairment of various drugs and alcohol is almost entirely an artifact of the difference in testing methods.

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

#58

Post by curiousgeorgio »

You can distort the data all you want, or in this case, put it in an absurd context to try and prove a point, but the fact remains - the legalization of marijuana is not without negative consequences.

I'm surprised no one here has mentioned AAA's findings (legalization followed by a 2x increase in fatal marijuana-related crashes): http://newsroom.aaa.com/2016/05/fatal-road-crashes-involving...

EDIT: Link to the study [PDF]: http://publicaffairsresources.aaa.biz/wp-content/uploads/201...

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

#59

Post by rudolf0 »

dubcanada wrote: post #54
kdamken wrote: post #42

Do 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'v…

It's also not safe to drive while tired, on any medication at all (including over the counter drugs), while texting, while on the phone, while not looking at the road, with glasses (they could fall off and you'd be blind), with a heart condition, etc etc. I think it's safe to assume you drive very often with things that affect your driving. If pot is proven to not affect your driving to a measurable degree, then the…

People really, really shouldn't be driving under those conditions, either.

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

#60

Post by Broken_Hippo »

bostonpete wrote: post #51
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> And so much of it is personal This is true of drunk driving too. I don't think that means we just shouldn't try to impose any restrictions...

That is true, but like the article stated, there is much more relation and science affirming the connection between BAC and an impaired ability to drive than there is due to pot. And I'm sure that there are plenty of people that simply don't get caught, and more that would otherwise not get caught if it weren't for checkpoints.

If we don't have the science, technology, nor a fair way to test, I'm not sure how making pot-specific laws is going to help do anything other than make people feel like something has been done.

At least with better controls and better general laws, it makes everyone safer. People that can't drive accordingly, regardless of any drug, probably shouldn't be driving at all.

Post reply on HN