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

81–90 of 281 posts

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

#81

Post by lukeschlather »

mywittyname wrote: post #43

I 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…

The headline is simply a lie. The study basically showed that you cannot measure whether someone is stoned by testing their blood for THC. The blood test only proves they were stoned at some point in the past few weeks.

The study did not show that it's safe to drive while stoned, and if you read the entire article they're fairly clear about that.

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

#82

Post by rudolf0 »

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #70
rudolf0 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving while high should definitely be banned, but it kind of seems like they're making a big assumption here. >The percentage of drivers involved in fatal crashes who recently used marijuana more than doubled from eight to 17 percent between 2013 and 2014. How are they ruling out the fact that since it's been legalized, more people in general are using marijuana?

> How are they ruling out the fact that since it's been legalized, more people in general are using marijuana? That's exactly the point. No one is trying to say that driving high has gotten more dangerous as a result of legalization - just that it's inherently dangerous (and a certain percentage of marijuana users are going to be driving either way), so legalization only contributes to more usage, leading to more irr…

My point is: They're getting this data by doing drug tests of drivers in fatal car crashes after the crash has occurred. Previously, 8% of those drivers had cannabis detected. Now, 17% have it detected.

What evidence is there that the increased cannabis use is causing these crashes, considering you have to control for the fact that more people in general are using cannabis, so in almost any population (drivers in fatal car crashes; fast food employees; school teachers; whatever) you could expect to see an increase in use.

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

#83

Post by Someone1234 »

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…

> on any medication at all (including over the counter drugs)

I assume you mean any medication which may impair you.

There are lot's of medications which people should take before driving, like anti-seizure, antipsychotics, heart control, blood sugar control, and so on.

It will typically tell you on the label if it is safe to take and operate heavy machinery. Although I'd always suggest taking it the first time while not doing so regardless, just in case of an unexpected side effect or adverse reaction.

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

#84

Post by samsonradu »

I was watching a documentary the other day about life in a Delhi prison and I was thinking to myself if there's the slightest possibility for me to ever end up in prison for one reason or another, considering of course that I don't have the slightest intention of committing a felony. Then I realized that a driving mistake has the best odds of causing such a thing. It's crazy how many don't take such a high-responsibility task seriously, texting, drinking, smoking while driving.

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

#85

Post by rjeli »

rufus-overhead wrote: post #75
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…

I disagree. Marijuana can impair reflexes significantly, at least for some individuals. My high school drivers education class (1979) had an electronic device used to measure brake reflex time. The device had simulated accelerator and brake pedals. A red lamp would light to signal the need to brake. I believe the average response time for most teens was around 250ms. I smoked pot nearly everyday during this period of…

I am curious, did smoking every day affect you permanently in any way?

I have used cannabis recreationally a few times, and each time I feel slightly mentally impaired (slow thinking) for days afterward. It has completely scared me off from using it further.

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

#86

Post by wildmusings »

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…

Your analogy is terrible. Marijuana is not comparable to anything you can buy over the counter. Unless you chug a bottle of cough syrup and then drive, which is just as illegal as driving drunk or stoned.

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

#87

Post by MaxfordAndSons »

_dark_matter_ wrote: post #32

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".

I can't imagine that's how cognition and an activity like driving interact. It's not like negative reinforcement in a social setting (getting demoted at work and as a result getting discouraged and becoming a worse performer, for example) - most people realize driving is an inherently dangerous activity, and most people don't want to die (even if they're doing moderately risky things like driving stoned), so they're not going to have an emotional reaction like "Welp! Guess I'm just fated to drive like shit since I'm stoned right now, hope I make it home, but first lets do some donuts." No, they're going to overcompensate and drive more safely.

If anything, I'd be concerned the opposite effect would occur - data suggesting that driving stoned is safe will cause stoned drivers to lower their guard and not compensate for their impairment as much, and thus raise stoned driving accident rates.

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

#88

Post by deelowe »

rudolf0 wrote: post #82
curiousgeorgio wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How are they ruling out the fact that since it's been legalized, more people in general are using marijuana? That's exactly the point. No one is trying to say that driving high has gotten more dangerous as a result of legalization - just that it's inherently dangerous (and a certain percentage of marijuana users are going to be driving either way), so legalization only contributes to more usage, leading to more irr…

My point is: They're getting this data by doing drug tests of drivers in fatal car crashes after the crash has occurred. Previously, 8% of those drivers had cannabis detected. Now, 17% have it detected. What evidence is there that the increased cannabis use is causing these crashes, considering you have to control for the fact that more people in general are using cannabis, so in almost any population (drivers in fat…

I doubt there is any. Else they would have quoted a cumulative increase in fatalities.

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

#89

Post by curiousgeorgio »

rudolf0 wrote: post #82
curiousgeorgio wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How are they ruling out the fact that since it's been legalized, more people in general are using marijuana? That's exactly the point. No one is trying to say that driving high has gotten more dangerous as a result of legalization - just that it's inherently dangerous (and a certain percentage of marijuana users are going to be driving either way), so legalization only contributes to more usage, leading to more irr…

My point is: They're getting this data by doing drug tests of drivers in fatal car crashes after the crash has occurred. Previously, 8% of those drivers had cannabis detected. Now, 17% have it detected. What evidence is there that the increased cannabis use is causing these crashes, considering you have to control for the fact that more people in general are using cannabis, so in almost any population (drivers in fat…

Ah, I understand what you're saying now. Still, I think it'd be a stretch to assume that none of those fatalities were actually related to the marijuana use. But I agree, it doesn't necessarily imply causation, just a correlation (which as you say, could in part be coincidental).
Post reply on HN