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

Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

facs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 523 posts

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#371

Post by sallveburrpi »

Nasrudith wrote: post #266
sallveburrpi wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zero degree of impairment is only possible if we don’t have access to 2 tons of murder box. I think the way cars dominate roads and our public spaces and how they are being used is inherently dangerous. I know this is going to get downvoted by people who cant imagine an alternative but it’s possible all the same.

I don't think you understand what "inherently dangerous" actually means. FYI murder requires intent, otherwise it is just manslaughter. Your indoctrination is showing by your turns of phrase.

Inherently means “qualities or traits that are intrinsic and fundamental, not added or external”

So yea cars are inherently dangerous.

I’m not sure who you think I’m indoctrinated by but around 3000 people are killed every year in my country by cars.

Meanwhile around 200 people are murdered each year.

I’ll give you one try to guess which one dominates the newspapers and public discourse.

And you tell me something about indoctrination, real funny

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#373

Post by spike021 »

epistasis wrote: post #7

Based 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…

I got a dog during COVID and I'm not sure if this is a related issue but the number of times I've had people not brake but accelerate as we're crossing the street or flash their high beams or try to drive around us at the last moment is insane.

there are days where it happens multiple times during one walk and weeks where it happens at least each day of the week.

i'm actually a car guy but when i drive if i see any pedestrians i always slow down and i take it even easier if i see they have small children or dogs since either can randomly stop or dart away.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#374

Post by malikolivier »

boston_clone wrote: post #283
rayiner wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same thing in DC. I thought the new development in DC where we lived had a major sewer gas problem. Turns out it was marijuana.

Genuinely asking - had you never smelled cannabis before living in DC? To claim the odor is mistakable for sewer gas is borderline funny, unless you’re slyly trying to name a new strain.

I've never smelled cannabis before in my life and don't know what it's supposed to smell like. I live in an area of the world where it's illegal and I guess not many people are smoking it. I may also have had a quite sheltered education.

This year, I went to British Columbia, and there was this weird scent everywhere that I could not describe. My wife said it was cannabis. I'm still not used to it so I don't know if I'll be able to recognize it next time I travel to North America.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#375

Post by tqi »

Youden wrote: post #114
tokai wrote: post #13

An 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…

There was a larger discussion in a previous thread on this topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45494730 Since then, [0] has been published and I think it's worth at least a skim. Since it's quite recent the introduction summarizes some of the most recent research. The things that jump out at me are: - [0]: Habitual users with baseline concentrations above legal limits perform just as well as habitual users wi…

- [1]: A study in Canada analyzed crash reports and blood tests to look at the state of drivers responsible for accidents. While alcohol had a very clear and statistically-significant influence on the risk of a driver causing an accident, THC did not.

I don't understand how this study can make that claim just looking at crash report data. The assumption that not at fault drivers are representative of people who aren't in accidents at all is pretty generous? It seems likely that folks who are unimpaired are also better at avoiding accidents / driving defensively

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#376

Post by jmye »

sanex wrote: post #363
mvdtnz wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very bold to claim it's a biased sample without any evidence or even a theory of how.

The evidence is the n being 246 lol

What, specifically, would be an optimal sample size and why, specifically, is 246 insufficient, in this case? “Lol”

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#377

Post by Mawr »

phito wrote: post #321
hattmall wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's seat belts. People who die in wrecks are overwhelmingly not wearing seat belts. I would think marijuana users as a group probably have average seat belt usage, but people who don't wear seat belts probably have much higher than average marijuanna usage. Roughy 92% of people wear seat belts. But that 8% of people that don't wear setbelts makes up 50% or more of all fatalities. From my personal experience it seems…

How are people not wearing seatbelt? I've never seen a car that doesn't make a constant annoying noise if you're not wearing it while driving. Do they mod the car to disable this safety system? That seems too far stretched...

Then you've only ever seen fairly new, modern cars. Seatbelt warnings are a relatively new feature.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#378

Post by nradov »

the_gastropod wrote: post #165
sallveburrpi wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zero degree of impairment is only possible if we don’t have access to 2 tons of murder box. I think the way cars dominate roads and our public spaces and how they are being used is inherently dangerous. I know this is going to get downvoted by people who cant imagine an alternative but it’s possible all the same.

I borderline want a conscription-style policy, where young adults are required to live in Boston, Philadelphia, NYC, DC, Seattle, or Chicago, car-free for a year. Americans’ inability to even imagine a world where a car isn’t the way to get around is really a problem.

Some of those cities you listed have rather high death rates for young adults for reasons unrelated to cars.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#379

Post by nradov »

rafabulsing wrote: post #365
sokoloff wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So long as you’re also willing to label swimming pools, grapes, and crayons as, by definition, inherently dangerous on account of not being able to be made 100% safe, then I’ll at least grant you a level of consistency in your argument.

Swimming pools are absolutely inherently dangerous. Why do you think lifeguards are a thing? Like, really man? If you can't even recognize as dangerous the one activity that famously requires someone specifically trained to save people to be present, then I'm happy to end this conversation right here. It's clearly just a waste of time all around. I just hope there's no one in your life depending on you to judge what'…

No lifeguard on duty. Swim at your own risk.

Re: Over 40% of deceased drivers in vehicle crashes test positive for THC: Study

#380

Post by Mawr »

mrj wrote: post #107
walletdrainer wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the problem isn’t whether or not a driver is impaired, but the degree to which they are impaired.

Well, it would be good for the rest of us on the road if people driving two tons of murder box are 0% impaired. I'm no angel but I have gotten more diligent... I'm just reacting to "the degree". The goal has to be zero degrees of impairment when a moment of inattention can kill. Also, my son was just hit by a driver while he was on a bike and in the bike lane. They claimed not to see him. He's fine thankfully but it'…

> Also, my son was just hit by a driver while he was on a bike and in the bike lane.

Let me guess, the painted line on the road did not in fact prevent the vehicle from crossing into the bike lane? What we as a society consider acceptable cycling infrastructure is pathetic.

Post reply on HN