http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/02/19/how-well-did-they-drive-stoned Comments On: How Well Did They Drive Stoned? by Dominic Holden en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 18 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 18 May 2013 05:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
Forget about it. My comments came out of the total lack of consistency The Stranger writers and commenters display on a regular basis (e.g., shit like, "I personally hate guns so I want them all fucking banned immediately! But I'm a goddamned stoner and I can drive great after six bong hit so this law sucks!). Pisses me off and I start veering off-topic.

What I really think should happen is this: Install breathalizers mandatory in every car. If you blow over a .06 BAC, the car won't start. Take a nap and try again later.
As for pot and driving? Too early to tell. Once pot's legalized in enough places, we'll start getting better data as to how much is too much. We'll work it out from there. There's definitely gonna be some pot-impaired driving fatalities... that's as inevitable as is the inevitability that it's gonna be legalized nationwide within 20 years or so. We'll learn plenty then.

And nope, I don't have a ton of experience smoking pot (not zero, but not much), but one doesn't have to be a regular user of something to know what the effects of that thing are.

But whatever... I think this thread's dead anyway.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 20:47:40 -0800 The Stranger
While I agree to a certain extent that impairment from inhaling a sufficient amount of the drug occurs, it's an utterly different kind of impairment that doesn't have the same cognitive effects that alcohol has on the hand-eye coordination parts of the brain.

Honestly, all smokers are vocalizing an obvious point they've tacitly learned while driving stoned; you need to get seriously ripped before your driving is noticeably impaired, and it's a different ballgame than drinking. While I personally think the limit is extremely low, I also think you'd need to be ridiculously stoned to ever get pulled over for poor driving in the first place. So good riddance if you're a pinballing between lanes. But you're a dumbass who has no business participating in the discussion if you don't see potentially negative implications arising from setting a limit which isn't congruent with real driving and consumption behaviors.
Posted by srslydude]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 18:09:32 -0800 The Stranger And I know people who could drive quite safely with a .05 to .08 BAC (including myself).

We can't tailor the law to suit everyone's individual tolerances. Better to make it zero tolerance. Need to drive? Then don't take mind-altering drugs beforehand. Simple as that. Just fucking stop.

If someone is incapable of stopping themselves from getting drugged up on pot or booze before they drive to work, they've got serious problems. They need help.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 14:08:50 -0800 The Stranger
Can you drive and operate heavy machinery? Certainly. People do it all the time while loaded without killing people. Should they? Nope.
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 09:15:58 -0800 The Stranger Posted by floater]]> Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:35:35 -0800 The Stranger Posted by dangerousgift]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:53:45 -0800 The Stranger You obviously cant handle, well, anything.
Back when I was pouring concrete, we used to light up at 5am on our way to work, work our asses off for 10-12 hours, be getting stoned on the way back (and a couple times during the day as well), usually driving 60-80 miles each way in all kinds of weather and traffic conditions.
Never wrecked anything, It's because I paid attention to the road, kept aware of everything and everyone around me, I wasn't texting , or fucking around with the cd player.
I've gotten ripped and taken some long fast rides on my motorcycle as well.
I'm a lot less dangerous stoned than the woman I saw recently on I-5, driving with her knee, texting, swatting her kid in the back seat, and stuffing her face with a cheeseburger. Basically doing everything except driving.
Take me to the track, get me super stoned, and let me drive MY car(the one I am familiar with), and I can demonstrate there is no statistical difference, in terms of speed, safety, or other metrics, between driving straight and stoned.
It's all about staying focused, and adjusting to the changing conditions around you.
Posted by youdontknowwhatyou'retalkingabout]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:16:32 -0800 The Stranger Posted by fitzj]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:07:03 -0800 The Stranger
When you're driving, you're in a 1 ton death machine. Treat it with some fucking respect.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 20:20:27 -0800 The Stranger Posted by ragold]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 18:37:21 -0800 The Stranger
Posted by jnonymous]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:43:48 -0800 The Stranger
But anyway, I agree that more studies will tell us what the optimum level will be.
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:40:55 -0800 The Stranger
Compared to 0 ng? Yes.
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:35:42 -0800 The Stranger Posted by laterite]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:30:58 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Pope Peabrain]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:03:07 -0800 The Stranger
I understand that it was necessary to be draconian on the limit initially...you have to err on the side of caution and this was tremendously progressive legislation already. But my sincere hope is that reasonable people can soon agree that something like 10 nanograms is probably more appropriate, and get the law changed accordingly after pot legalization is more normalized in the culture.
Posted by schmacky]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:57:44 -0800 The Stranger
Regardless, once pot gets rescheduled, the availability of multiple studies will help tune better, more accurate laws (or at least give less subjectivity to the argument.)
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:42:55 -0800 The Stranger
These drivers KNEW they were on a closed course, being monitored and watched, with no distractions, in daylight.

How well would they do if all that was gone and they were out at night to visit friends, stoned and not trying to show the maximum caution and skill?

This was just a controlled "experiment" not real life.
Posted by Urgutha Forka]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:24:08 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Granny Smith]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:15:03 -0800 The Stranger
You do realize that this video addresses the stoner myths/lies, right?
Posted by undead ayn rand]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:06:35 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Jesus]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:58:03 -0800 The Stranger
Addy is awesome.
Posted by NinjaJohnson]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:57:56 -0800 The Stranger
Or your response times are higher? Well, whatever; the point is, if you've been drinking, it takes longer for you to react to problems on the road.
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:42:32 -0800 The Stranger
You could make the same case about alcohol. Many people drive fine at .08 BAC. They are somewhat impaired, but they are absolutely not the veering-all-over-the-place, falling-down-drunk drivers that we all associate with drunk driving. But that's not the point. Even at such a low BAC, you still have a higher risk of getting into an accident since your response times are lower. And the limit needs to be set somewhere.
Posted by keshmeshi]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:40:28 -0800 The Stranger
http://www.kirotv.com/videos/news/seattl…


Posted by stinkbug]]> Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:22:40 -0800 The Stranger