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

Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 421 posts

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#111

Post by chadash »

slg wrote: post #104
chadash wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Driving under the influence should be detected by professional law enforcement observation. It is. I've been pulled over a few times in my life. Never had a breathalyzer test done, because they assumed (correctly) that I hadn't been drinking. But human observation is far from perfect. And even harder to defend in court. > Then if suspected after being pulled over, tested clinically. This is not that difficult. What…

>Yes, you might feel perfectly fine, but I don't want your subjective opinion of how well you think you can drive under the influence of marijuana to be the determining factor in whether we let you drive after smoking pot or not. Couldn't you approach the same problem by testing the capabilities of the driver rather than testing the amount of a substance in their system (after all there are countless substances than…

> Would an improved field sobriety test be a more appropriate product than an improved breathalyzer?

Yes, do you have such a test?

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#112

Post by Mountain_Skies »

itsangaris wrote: post #93

Driving with an inadequate amount of sleep is almost certainly more dangerous and ubiquitous than having consumed a normal amount of cannabis (drowsy driving even causes more accidents than drunk driving). If we're going down this road, is there a similar effort to enforce and test for a minimum amount of sleep for drivers?

There are mandatory rest periods for drivers of commercial vehicles. For non-commercial drivers, there is no such required rest periods but you can indeed be ticketed or arrested for driving in an unsafe manner due to sleep depravation.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#113

Post by danenania »

chadash wrote: post #31

I don't understand the negativity in many of the comments here. I'm all for legalization of marijuana, but I actually think that the inability to test for people driving high is a very reasonable argument against legalization. I generally feel that people should be able to make their own choices, but not if those choices involve driving a 3000 pound piece of metal down the highway while impaired. Yes, we need to be c…

Apart from the difficulty of testing, I think the lack of simple guidelines like ‘one drink per hour’ makes it hard for cannabis users to guage their level of intoxication. I’m not sure whether it’s biologically practical, but it would be a big improvement if people generally had a reasonably easy and consistent way to determine how long they should wait as a function of how much they’ve consumed, the delivery method, their weight, their tolerance etc.

Right now it’s just completely subjective and that makes it easy for someone to justify DUI when they would never do so if similarly impaired by alcohol.

We need research and education as much as (and probably more than) enforcement.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#115

Post by VWWHFSfQ »

firethief wrote: post #103
davidw wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving impaired in any way shape or form is dangerous. https://www.dailycamera.com/2016/06/09/affidavit-teen-driver...

As is driving unimpaired. https://www.stripes.com/us-army-soldier-three-others-serious...

nobody should ever be allowed to drive ever then

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#117

Post by Stratoscope »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #105
Stratoscope wrote: post #92

> Whereas a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% (the legal limit in most states) might result in a concentration of 208 ppm of ethanol in the breath, a similarly impairing dose of cannabis results in 0.00001 ppm of the drug in breath. [emphasis added] From personal experience, it seems to me that cannabis and alcohol have radically different effects. How can you define a "similarly impairing dose" when they are so u…

Perhaps by comparing accident statistics for similarities in the two groups and then comparing the doses of each that lead to those similar accident outcomes?

Interesting idea, that sounds like it would give some useful information. I wonder if a study like that has been done?

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#118

Post by Fogest »

reroute1 wrote: post #76
Noah_SannTek wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This gets us to a weird gray zone of.. how impaired is too impaired? Many would say that any level of impaired is not ok, and I would definitely agree. Check out what the national highway traffic safety administration has to say about this: https://feeldifferentdrivedifferent.org/

-> Many would say that any level of impaired is not ok Many would also disagree, including the law which in my state allows a BAC of up to .08 to not be charged. In general my opinion is that .08 BAC sounds reasonable and an equivalent of MJ "could" be also. But most cases that would be a huge amount of MJ, and still doesn't relate to the effects noticed at high consumption of alcohol. IE I have never seen someone sm…

Weed is also in other forms like edibles too which are quite potent. I have seen many people who have smoked excessive amounts, or had way too many edibles. I have personally working in the event medical field dealt with countless people who are puking and unconscious due to weed.

It definitely is not anywhere near as bad as other drugs impairment wise, but it definitely can be quite dangerous to drive on.

And yes, being sleepy while driving is also super dangerous.

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#119

Post by reroute1 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #55
imsofuture wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing the point that the war on drugs is racist, oppressive, expensive and counterproductive. Adding technology does not improve any aspect of that. FWIW I do not think driving high is safe at all, but I don't think it's a serious problem either (by the numbers).

Except your defensive "war on drugs" reaction is not really applicable here, as this product is being developed in the context of an environment where cannabis consumption is 100% legal (Canada).

Actually it's still applicable regardless of legality... that doesn't change police profiling and would still adversely affect minority groups. So instead of more people of color getting arrested for marijuana possession they get arrested for marijuana dui

Re: Launch HN: SannTek (YC S19) – Breathalyzer for Cannabis

#120

Post by corndoge »

core-questions wrote: post #94
corndoge wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the motivations of most police to choose a career as a police aren't in line with the best interests of citizens

Why do you think this? Do you know many police officers, or are you operating off of narratives you've absorbed from elsewhere? You'll note that most people angrily report their bad incidents with cops; when they're doing their job it goes unremarked. Not too far off from good IT support.

It's an opinion built up over repeated interactions with police. Of course the Yelp effect applies to police but even my positive interactions with police have left me with an impression that public safety and in some respects law enforcement itself is not their primary motivation for being police. In the absence of a comprehensive psychological analysis covering a geographically distributed sample of police with a large sample size, my own experiences are what I fall back on to form my opinions. YMMV.
Post reply on HN