I bet 100% of them had been drinking water recently.
Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
51–60 of 523 posts
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#52Just noting there’s a difference between THC in your system and THC in your blood. THC leaves the bloodstream after your high. Goes into fat cells and other areas to be broken down and processed (up to a month) later. Having it in the bloodstream after an accident means they were intoxicated at the time according to science. Whether their CB1 receptors were letting it through is another matter. I can smoke a lot of w…
> So until we have a valid method of testing if someone is “too stoned to drive” we have to push back on any attempt to classify marijuana users as ineligible to drive.
You’re not really going to win anybody over to the legalization side when you basically say that people can consume as much THC as they want and drive without any penalties because of testing limitations.
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#53An issue with having the legal limit at ~2-5ng/ml is that it makes habitual users be over the limit if they have smoked recently or not.[0] Making the prohibition seem unserious to some, not about safety but about punitive control, and in turn making it matter less if you smoke and drive as you are taking the risk of getting into trouble in any case. The impairments of driving under the influence of alcohol have been…
But the truth is that habitual users are always impaired. Source: former habitual user.
Got any real sources? I've been a daily user for over 10 years and also have a spotless driving record.
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
It absolutely would. If 40% of people test positive for THC, then this would mean there is no effect. I find it unlikely 40% of people test positive for THC, but yes, it does matter.
That wouldn't actually mean no effect, you need 40% of people driving to test positive for it to be no effect. It's unlikely the population driving is equivalent to the population at large - for one there's a set of responsible people who won't drive while high. For another weed use isn't randomly distributed through the population but correlated with certain subsets, which probably have a non-average rate of driving…
There is a case for the two populations to be quite similar.
THC in the blood doesn’t mean actively high for habitual users, which would be most users if THC consumption is high. It means recent use, but not clear impairment.
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#55An issue with having the legal limit at ~2-5ng/ml is that it makes habitual users be over the limit if they have smoked recently or not.[0] Making the prohibition seem unserious to some, not about safety but about punitive control, and in turn making it matter less if you smoke and drive as you are taking the risk of getting into trouble in any case. The impairments of driving under the influence of alcohol have been…
But the truth is that habitual users are always impaired. Source: former habitual user.
Sure, but the problem isn’t whether or not a driver is impaired, but the degree to which they are impaired.
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#56Based on the headline, I was guessing it was any amount of positivity, and may be close to the population level, but it's actually impairment levels of THC: > In a review of 246 deceased drivers, 41.9% tested positive for active THC in their blood, with an average level of 30.7 ng/mL — far exceeding most state impairment limits. Since COVID in CA, it feels like driving has become far more dangerous with much more law…
Before this year I had only seen 1 wrong way driver in 30 years. In the last year alone I've seen 6! I saw one person going the wrong direction in a round-about. Another person going over the inner portion of a round-about. People stopping in the road for no reason. It's insane. The strange driving patterns is indeed a major issue. I thought it was maybe a Gen Z thing, but often times these people seem to be between 30-50 in age.
Edit: no offense to Gen Z with my earlier comment btw. My reasoning was maybe we're failing younger generations with drivers ed so the blame would be on us anyway.
Also I've seen these strange patterns in many states in the last year+: Oregon, Washington, Wyoming, Idaho, California
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, pretty much no one I know drives under any influence regardless what they use. I wonder how many of these people were under the influence of alcohol and other substances.
There is a very common sentiment among weed users that it doesnt really count as far as driving goes. Stoners will be repulsed and outraged by drunk drivers and then think nothing about going for a "blunt ride"
Even though their sentiment is wrong, I get why they would feel that way. Marginally drunk vs marginally high certainly feel* very different in how they would impact my own ability to drive.
That said, I don't do either. I also wouldn't take any amount of weed while working, but I'd feel comfortable having a beer during lunch if appropriate (work lunch/celebrate, e.g.).
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#58I live in a "working poor" neighborhood 50% of the people on this street get stoned before driving to work, every single day dope isn't even legal here and even if it was DUI is wildly illegal We can only cure this if we get serious about penalties because we can't undo murder and injuries How about first time warning, second time weekend in jail, third time week in jail, fourth time month in jail, fifth time year in…
> We can only cure this if we get serious about penalties
Saying that in the country with world-leading mass incarceration mostly due to its decades long “war on drugs” which has very much not cured drug problems is a perfect example of putting ideological preconceptions ahead of reality.
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, pretty much no one I know drives under any influence regardless what they use. I wonder how many of these people were under the influence of alcohol and other substances.
There is a very common sentiment among weed users that it doesnt really count as far as driving goes. Stoners will be repulsed and outraged by drunk drivers and then think nothing about going for a "blunt ride"
[deleted]
Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study
#60I live in a "working poor" neighborhood 50% of the people on this street get stoned before driving to work, every single day dope isn't even legal here and even if it was DUI is wildly illegal We can only cure this if we get serious about penalties because we can't undo murder and injuries How about first time warning, second time weekend in jail, third time week in jail, fourth time month in jail, fifth time year in…
Maybe we can declare our intent to eliminate drug use with harsh penalties using a metaphor, like going to war against them. That should do the trick.