C No Ego
Well-Known Member
yeah but..... the reaction time for Bruce Lee would not be the reaction time for anyone else, except maybe Chuck Norris.. they do it so fast you do not even see it! cops would be like- what just happened?
Driving whilst high
- Thread starter bluenavey00
- Start date
yeah but..... the reaction time for Bruce Lee would not be the reaction time for anyone else, except maybe Chuck Norris.. they do it so fast you do not even see it! cops would be like- what just happened?
C No Ego
Well-Known Member
they got nothing except outdated reefer madness and can only say someones endorphins were more active in that high guy compared to someone that did not add cannabinoids into their biology... the " High" is the actual medicine and you go to jail because of it???
FYI ... someone can be charged with impaired for having too much Red Bull. If they are hopped up enough on it to show visible impairment, they can be charged and convicted.
flotntoke
thoroughly vaped
Many good points, that I agree with more than not. I do hope you weren't driving anytime soon after writing this post. The use of #4 twice in a row would be something that I think would indicate an impairment of a level that would make driving unsafe.
Some points on your lengthy post, though. Sorry - I had to remove much of your post in quote to stay below character limit here.
1. ... "that negatively affects driving ability." How about that CAN negatively affect driving ability? Again, studies show that not ALL THC intake negatively affects ALL drivers. Too much is too much, no matter what the agitator that affects driving (THC, alcohol, cold meds, caffeine, lack of sleep, etc).
"2. Whether you feel like you are "impaired" or not, is irrelevant. People who regularly drink alcohol often feel like they are ok to drive when they aren't." I totally disagree here for THC. Alcohol and the way it affects people and their "false confidence" is in most cases different than for THC. My own personal experience over decades, anecdotal evidence provided here, and at least several studies confirm this. So, besides talking apple vs oranges (THC vs alcohol), you're assuming that most who are impaired from THC don't feel "impaired". Why - in the face of so much to the contrary?
Point 3 - yes.... totally agree. But, are the effects of low THC intake necessarily bad? Studies and many claims in this thread show the opposite.
First "4. The "lesser of two evils" argument is not a sound one, at all, and should be left out of debate, unless you are specifically debating which of two things is worse..." I don't think lesser of two evils is what has been presented here as much as "If it is legal to drive with 2 beers in you, or cold meds, or tired, etc - why shouldn't it be legal to drive with lower levels of THC after vaping a few hits?" In many cases impairment will be much less, and driving safety may actually increase - rather than decrease as it does with most of these others.
Second "4. Regardless if you are a recreational user or a medical one, you shouldn't be allowed to drive while under the influence of Cannabis..." So, even if medical users (or rec) are MORE SAFE while driving, they shouldn't be allowed to drive? If studies show this is the case (as they do) - your opinion (or others) that any level of THC recently in the bloodstream reduces safety on the roads should be taken as superior? Why?
"5. The same way two people with the same BAC can "feel" different levels of drunkenness..." Sorry... this is plain and simple bullshit. I don't know of your experiences with alcohol, and don't think you have explained them here. But, BAC has little to do with impairment from individual to individual, and often within the same individual. I explained this in more detail for myself somewhere above, but think suffice to say here that my regular drinking habits have changed several times throughout my life. I know there have been times when my BAC would be relatively low (and legal) while my impairment was much worse for driving and other motor functions. Now, typically drinking a couple days a week I would say my impairment is more in line with accepted BAC levels. A .05, legal level in most states, now is no big deal as far as impairment. When I was drinking less, .05 would leave me wobbly to walk and often ready to pass out. FWIW, you won't find me driving at .05 then or now - because I feel that either is still too impaired to drive safely - but there is a HUGE difference.
"6. Consciously trying to drive more safely due to knowing you are buzzed (whether for the safety of others or out of fear of being pulled over) is not necessarily a good thing....
& 7. Similarly to #6, the increased focus provided by a Cannabis buzz, is not one that is generally going to be beneficial to driving in the open world..."
First, again this is contrary to studies. Second, you seem pretty sure of this in the face of most people being differently affected by MJ. The cannabis buzz focus may indeed be a good thing for me (or for others) while driving. Again, why go contrary to published studies?
"8. Regardless of how used to the way Cannabis usually affects you, the fact that so many factors can cause an unexpected change in how it affects you each time, makes it unsafe to drive while under the influence..." I don't know about you, but my impairment/buzz from cannabis is pretty much the same with the same amount of the same strain from the same batch. Things can get a bit hard to predict if changing or combining strains and the amount used. Hell, this is often what makes it so fun to play with at home. But, if I have a sativa heavy hybrid, or a pure sativa (ie Sour Diesel or Candyland) that I have played with a bit already, I haven't found any differences from session to session. Two hits out of my VC, Mi or new Mist are very consistent.
Have you had a chance to look at those studies, yet? They do actually show less culpability for accidents in drivers who are regular users when they have used small amounts of MJ. I don't know whether such facts would help convince the general public or politicians & LEOs that MJ should be legalized, but they shouldn't be ignored - especially in the discussion here.
Agree entirely, and even worse, in most states (I think all but 2) you can be convicted of DUID days or weeks after your last hit as the level of THC threshold is 0 for conviction. Studies and data from those states seem to also use 0 for the threshold of considering THC as a contributing factor to traffic accidents and fatalities. So, if someone is shitfaced drunk - let's say .18 BAC - and got high a day or two before and is still showing MJ metabolites in their system - MJ would be considered a contributing factor. This can skew things quite a bit!
Yes, but you can't be convicted based on caffeine - or whatever the hell else is in those things - levels in your bloodstream. Conviction would be based on impairment - which I think would be more fair and realistic no matter what is causing it.
Yes. Exactly. This is exactly the point I've argued repeatedly; because of the length of time it stays in your bloodstream, based on frequency of usage and the level in your blood does not correspond directly to a level of impairment, etc., etc. it should not be used for evidence or conviction. Cannabis usage impaired driving should require proof through impairment tests, witness observations, and stand up to cross examination.
There was a case in Idaho where they overturned a man's conviction because the THC content in the blood test didn't prove he had used it recently enough.
http://crrh.org/news/content/idaho-court-appeals-overturns-marijuana-dui-conviction
okay I don't hate this thread anymore, but the problem is that I agree with ALL of you! @EverythingsHazy you make some great and valid points, but @flotntoke so do you!
I don't think there really is a right or wrong answer here... but whatever the saliva testing will be, the price will have to be paid for whatever laws/rules they make.
It's up to the driver to be safe with care and control, and I don't trust anyone out there, so keep your heads up and your reflexes sharp, because it's the proactive forward thinking while driving is what will save your ass in the end, if you're lucky.
I'm nearly a month cannabis free, and just took some CBD oil with 0% thc, and although I would pass a saliva test, I certainly don't feel like I should be driving. Maybe CBD affects everyone differently, but yeah, I haven't had a beer in 2 months, and if I drank one relatively quickly (I always do) on an empty stomach, i'd still pass a breath sample, but definitely won't not be "straight".
Maybe they need to develop "reaction time" tests that are fairly accurate or something?
I don't think there really is a right or wrong answer here... but whatever the saliva testing will be, the price will have to be paid for whatever laws/rules they make.
It's up to the driver to be safe with care and control, and I don't trust anyone out there, so keep your heads up and your reflexes sharp, because it's the proactive forward thinking while driving is what will save your ass in the end, if you're lucky.
I'm nearly a month cannabis free, and just took some CBD oil with 0% thc, and although I would pass a saliva test, I certainly don't feel like I should be driving. Maybe CBD affects everyone differently, but yeah, I haven't had a beer in 2 months, and if I drank one relatively quickly (I always do) on an empty stomach, i'd still pass a breath sample, but definitely won't not be "straight".
Maybe they need to develop "reaction time" tests that are fairly accurate or something?
nomadicsoul34
Well-Known Member
17 years ago i was engaged to a phd grad at Bristol uni where they were working on a device that monitored eye movement .I cant really remember how it worked but I guess the idea was that you had to look at a certain light from a set of lights around the windscreens edge within a certain time of time of it lighting up . I suppose the idea was that it recorded your attention span and reaction speed. If you couldn't pass then you couldn't start the car. I have no idea why we never saw it in action.
https://sshs.exeter.ac.uk/media/uni...arple-Horvat_et_al_2008_NPP-drink_driving.pdf
this looks like an interesting development though .-http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-197295/New-eye-scanner-detect-drink-drugs.html
sorry for posting a link to the shitty mail though.
Probably because the elites and the powers that be really don't give a fuck about our wellbeing? It's like they encourage carnage... doesn't distracted/fatigued driving kill WAY more than drunk driving? You just don't hear about it as often. Produce produce! Be a rat! Drink your coffee and get back to slavery! Sleep when you're dead!
nomadicsoul34
Well-Known Member
Oh so cynical..oh so correct
Ironically if we could all get on the same frequency we could see we don't need them, their money, their control system, or their laws, and we outnumber them so much there's nothing they could do about it. Instead they keep us disconnected so we don't notice our house is on fire while we sleep.
This should be framed. Unfortunately, the sheep continue to sleep. But sometimes there is little one can do, except play the game. The medical system is one example... i've had more experiences with doctors, specialists, etc over the past couple of years than ever in my life. They flat out don't listen, ignore, and downplay. And then there is nowhere to go, unless you're rich.
And now a trade war with our neighbours? What the fucking fuck? There goes our dollar, er I mean what little we have left of it. And now, the middle class has been wiped out of owning a decent home. Good times!
I think all these "leaders" need to visit the UFC octagon and fight their own wars instead of killing innocent youth.
I digress!
CarolKing
Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
This is Ireland - roadside check points? 
The testing groups cannabis with drugs like cocaine and heroin.
GARDAÍ CAN NOW TEST MOTORISTS FOR DRUGS AT THE ROADSIDE
The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross has today, Wednesday 12th April, announced the commencement of the drug driving provisions in the Road Traffic Act 2016. One of the key measures in the legislation provides for Preliminary Drug Testing, which will enable Gardaí to test motorists whom they suspect of driving under the influence of drugs at the roadside. The launch of the new measures, in conjunction with An Garda Síochána, the Medical Bureau for Road Safety (MBRS) and the Road Safety Authority (RSA) took place at Store Street Garda Station in Dublin.
The new Garda powers mean Gardaí can now establish roadside checkpoints, Mandatory Intoxicant Checkpoints (MIT), to test drivers for the presence of both alcohol and drugs. The new drug testing devices (Dräger DrugTest 5000) involve testing a sample of a driver’s oral fluid (saliva) for the presence of cannabis, cocaine, opiates (e.g. heroin, morphine) and benzodiazepines (e.g. valium). The new devices will also be available in Garda stations.
The MBRS has found that of the 3,020 specimens of blood and urine that it received in 2016, 24% confirmed positive for drugs other than alcohol. Of these, 91% were specimens from male drivers, most of whom were in the 17-44 year age range. Cannabis was the most prevalent drug detected, followed by benzodiazepines.
Speaking at the launch, Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross, said the introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing is an important step in tackling drug driving: “Driving under the influence of drugs has been an offence in Ireland since 1961. The law states that a person must not be impaired (through alcohol, drugs or any combination of both) while driving or in charge of a vehicle. However, driving under the influence of drugs remains a problem in Ireland. It is estimated that drug driving is a factor in approximately one in ten fatal crashes. Drug driving not only puts the driver at risk but also passengers and others who share the road. The introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing now strengthens the ability of the Gardaí to tackle the problem. This is just one step in a multi-faceted approach my Department and I are taking to tackle the recent increase in road fatalities.”
Assistant Commissioner Michael Finn, Roads Policing and Major Event /Emergency Management, stated that: “The new roadside test for drugs will enable An Garda Síochána to tackle the serious issue of drug driving. There will be 86 drug screening devices located in Garda stations nationally and 50 more available for use at the roadside. Over time up to 150 devices will be available for use at the roadside. While the test will take longer to conduct than the roadside test for alcohol, the test is easy to carry out and within minutes will tell if a driver has drugs in their system. This new screening device is an important tool for An Garda Síochána in the identification of drug drivers, ensuring our roads are safer for everyone to use.”
Director of the Medical Bureau for Road Safety, Professor Denis Cusack explained that there is a twin-track approach to tackling drug driving in Ireland: “Firstly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of drugs, including prescribed drugs, where your driving is impaired to such an extent that you don’t have proper control of the vehicle. Secondly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of certain drugs, regardless of driving performance, above specified levels. There are currently three drugs tested for in this category – cannabis, cocaine and heroin. If you are found to have any of these drugs above the specified limits, you can be prosecuted for drug driving even if your driving is not impaired.”
The testing groups cannabis with drugs like cocaine and heroin.GARDAÍ CAN NOW TEST MOTORISTS FOR DRUGS AT THE ROADSIDE
The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross has today, Wednesday 12th April, announced the commencement of the drug driving provisions in the Road Traffic Act 2016. One of the key measures in the legislation provides for Preliminary Drug Testing, which will enable Gardaí to test motorists whom they suspect of driving under the influence of drugs at the roadside. The launch of the new measures, in conjunction with An Garda Síochána, the Medical Bureau for Road Safety (MBRS) and the Road Safety Authority (RSA) took place at Store Street Garda Station in Dublin.
The new Garda powers mean Gardaí can now establish roadside checkpoints, Mandatory Intoxicant Checkpoints (MIT), to test drivers for the presence of both alcohol and drugs. The new drug testing devices (Dräger DrugTest 5000) involve testing a sample of a driver’s oral fluid (saliva) for the presence of cannabis, cocaine, opiates (e.g. heroin, morphine) and benzodiazepines (e.g. valium). The new devices will also be available in Garda stations.
The MBRS has found that of the 3,020 specimens of blood and urine that it received in 2016, 24% confirmed positive for drugs other than alcohol. Of these, 91% were specimens from male drivers, most of whom were in the 17-44 year age range. Cannabis was the most prevalent drug detected, followed by benzodiazepines.
Speaking at the launch, Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross, said the introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing is an important step in tackling drug driving: “Driving under the influence of drugs has been an offence in Ireland since 1961. The law states that a person must not be impaired (through alcohol, drugs or any combination of both) while driving or in charge of a vehicle. However, driving under the influence of drugs remains a problem in Ireland. It is estimated that drug driving is a factor in approximately one in ten fatal crashes. Drug driving not only puts the driver at risk but also passengers and others who share the road. The introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing now strengthens the ability of the Gardaí to tackle the problem. This is just one step in a multi-faceted approach my Department and I are taking to tackle the recent increase in road fatalities.”
Assistant Commissioner Michael Finn, Roads Policing and Major Event /Emergency Management, stated that: “The new roadside test for drugs will enable An Garda Síochána to tackle the serious issue of drug driving. There will be 86 drug screening devices located in Garda stations nationally and 50 more available for use at the roadside. Over time up to 150 devices will be available for use at the roadside. While the test will take longer to conduct than the roadside test for alcohol, the test is easy to carry out and within minutes will tell if a driver has drugs in their system. This new screening device is an important tool for An Garda Síochána in the identification of drug drivers, ensuring our roads are safer for everyone to use.”
Director of the Medical Bureau for Road Safety, Professor Denis Cusack explained that there is a twin-track approach to tackling drug driving in Ireland: “Firstly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of drugs, including prescribed drugs, where your driving is impaired to such an extent that you don’t have proper control of the vehicle. Secondly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of certain drugs, regardless of driving performance, above specified levels. There are currently three drugs tested for in this category – cannabis, cocaine and heroin. If you are found to have any of these drugs above the specified limits, you can be prosecuted for drug driving even if your driving is not impaired.”
Last edited:
I just can't like that one @CarolKing ... the last sentence pretty much sums up the whole problem ... how can they even say that without there being a massive outcry? How can they convict people for impaired driving while knowing they're not impaired and that be ok? How is it ok to ruin someone's life for this?
I guess it depends on the country, is cannabis legal in Ireland? If not, I can see why they lump it in with the others. I've never done cocaine, but from my understanding it's an extremely short lived high, unlike cannabis, and somewhat alerting like caffeine? I like that they are testing for prescription drugs! That one was a 
Will big pharma not revolt? 
Nice to see benzo's on there too.
As I mentioned before, I don't pick sides, there isn't a right answer IMO but it's the extreme right or left wing arguments that I disrespect the most.
If only 10% (they say "approximately") of crashes are caused by drugged driving (and they actually say "a factor" WTF about the other 90%? Let's pick our battles here, and go after what's hurting us the most?
Once again, all about the $$$$$$$! And distracting the masses about the real issues that require attention. They are winning though, just look at this fucking thread!
Keep dividing us elites! You literally treat humankind like cattle, and play a real life world game of Risk. Lots of money for weapons and war to keep the machine turning.
Ok, I digress again.
Will big pharma not revolt? Nice to see benzo's on there too.As I mentioned before, I don't pick sides, there isn't a right answer IMO but it's the extreme right or left wing arguments that I disrespect the most.
If only 10% (they say "approximately") of crashes are caused by drugged driving (and they actually say "a factor" WTF about the other 90%? Let's pick our battles here, and go after what's hurting us the most?
Once again, all about the $$$$$$$! And distracting the masses about the real issues that require attention. They are winning though, just look at this fucking thread!
Keep dividing us elites! You literally treat humankind like cattle, and play a real life world game of Risk. Lots of money for weapons and war to keep the machine turning.
Ok, I digress again.
flotntoke
thoroughly vaped
Thanks.
I've only had few high CBD/low THC samples and all have left me buzzed, though a bit less than high THC/low CBD. At any rate, I think it's important top know what you are doing and have experience with anything before using it in any situation that could be dangerous - or uncomfortable for that matter.
This is Ireland - roadside check points?
GARDAÍ CAN NOW TEST MOTORISTS FOR DRUGS AT THE ROADSIDE
The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross has today, Wednesday 12th April, announced the commencement of the drug driving provisions in the Road Traffic Act 2016. One of the key measures in the legislation provides for Preliminary Drug Testing, which will enable Gardaí to test motorists whom they suspect of driving under the influence of drugs at the roadside. The launch of the new measures, in conjunction with An Garda Síochána, the Medical Bureau for Road Safety (MBRS) and the Road Safety Authority (RSA) took place at Store Street Garda Station in Dublin.
The new Garda powers mean Gardaí can now establish roadside checkpoints, Mandatory Intoxicant Checkpoints (MIT), to test drivers for the presence of both alcohol and drugs. The new drug testing devices (Dräger DrugTest 5000) involve testing a sample of a driver’s oral fluid (saliva) for the presence of cannabis, cocaine, opiates (e.g. heroin, morphine) and benzodiazepines (e.g. valium). The new devices will also be available in Garda stations.
The MBRS has found that of the 3,020 specimens of blood and urine that it received in 2016, 24% confirmed positive for drugs other than alcohol. Of these, 91% were specimens from male drivers, most of whom were in the 17-44 year age range. Cannabis was the most prevalent drug detected, followed by benzodiazepines.
Speaking at the launch, Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Mr Shane Ross, said the introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing is an important step in tackling drug driving: “Driving under the influence of drugs has been an offence in Ireland since 1961. The law states that a person must not be impaired (through alcohol, drugs or any combination of both) while driving or in charge of a vehicle. However, driving under the influence of drugs remains a problem in Ireland. It is estimated that drug driving is a factor in approximately one in ten fatal crashes. Drug driving not only puts the driver at risk but also passengers and others who share the road. The introduction of Preliminary Drug Testing now strengthens the ability of the Gardaí to tackle the problem. This is just one step in a multi-faceted approach my Department and I are taking to tackle the recent increase in road fatalities.”
Assistant Commissioner Michael Finn, Roads Policing and Major Event /Emergency Management, stated that: “The new roadside test for drugs will enable An Garda Síochána to tackle the serious issue of drug driving. There will be 86 drug screening devices located in Garda stations nationally and 50 more available for use at the roadside. Over time up to 150 devices will be available for use at the roadside. While the test will take longer to conduct than the roadside test for alcohol, the test is easy to carry out and within minutes will tell if a driver has drugs in their system. This new screening device is an important tool for An Garda Síochána in the identification of drug drivers, ensuring our roads are safer for everyone to use.”
Director of the Medical Bureau for Road Safety, Professor Denis Cusack explained that there is a twin-track approach to tackling drug driving in Ireland: “Firstly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of drugs, including prescribed drugs, where your driving is impaired to such an extent that you don’t have proper control of the vehicle. Secondly, it is against the law to drive under the influence of certain drugs, regardless of driving performance, above specified levels. There are currently three drugs tested for in this category – cannabis, cocaine and heroin. If you are found to have any of these drugs above the specified limits, you can be prosecuted for drug driving even if your driving is not impaired.”
I had to like it for the post. Thank you! This is a good example of what I've been talking about for a while. It seems in this case this is as much as a scare tactic as a warning (a regular technique of LE for years). But, it certainly seems to echo the sentiments of LE & legislatures around the US - whether they are this blatant and forceful with it or not.
A ways off; but, in the not to distant future? Cars will absolutely be blackboxed.
I've been in this situation, and must say it is extremely contingent on the skills of the driver!
Talk about paranoia if they aren't confident! Especially at hwy speeds!
I just like being in control of the vehicle, it's amazing how much you realize that people don't know how to drive when you're a passenger. That that goes for slow paranoid defensive drivers as well. There is a reason that some people get honked at and get the finger all the time!
Vaporbabe
Member
I've been in this situation, and must say it is extremely contingent on the skills of the driver!
Talk about paranoia if they aren't confident! Especially at hwy speeds!
I just like being in control of the vehicle, it's amazing how much you realize that people don't know how to drive when you're a passenger. That that goes for slow paranoid defensive drivers as well. There is a reason that some people get honked at and get the finger all the time!
Yeah there is reasons many people get sworn at while driving, but many people out there are also in such a hasty rush they don't realise they just being douchbags! And while I'm flying I'm in a happy place where driving with these people on the road can just be stressful I like speed and excitement but I also like to take things chilled - I think more people should just chill out!
Maybe we should all just drive while flying - this will avoid many nasties
Maybe we should all just drive while flying - this will avoid many nasties
Sure, let's all get fucked up and get behind the wheel...great idea!! It's reasons like this that I actually want roadside testing and harsh penalties.
I wish there was a test for proper intoxication with zero tolerance. Not saliva for "metabolites" but actual blood level of THC. Same with alcohol, if you are over that line, that's it - zero fucking tolerance - you lose your license for life. And if you hurt or kill someone, game over for you.
Our laws are far too lax IMO. I can't even fucking believe who walks away free, while families suffer for eternity.
King_Bob
Well-Known Member
Have you ever been prescribed pain killers or other medication that had the potential to cause impairment ? And did your doctor ask you if you drive and discuss the dangers of driving when taking the drugs you were prescribed ? I don`t believe most doctors even know how what level of opiates, pain killers, anti anxiety drugs, etc are safe for operation of a motor vehicle. Yet I believe we have more people driving under the influence of these prescription drugs than we do alcohol and cannabis.
I believe doctors need to step up and take more responsibility for the drugs they prescribe. That includes a good understanding of how and what level of the drugs they prescribe will affect driving. I know some will say that there is not enough information for doctors regarding cannabis and driving. But I suspect the same is true for many of the other drugs they prescribe.
My doctor had me sign an agreement that I would not drive for 4 hours after using cannabis. I believed that if I followed that guideline I would be legal to drive . But with the proposed 2 ng limit, I wonder if that guideline will still allow me to drive legally.
I plan to discuss this with my doctor because driving legally is my biggest concern going forward and I would like the medical professionals to get involved in helping determine exactly what the legal limit should be for a medical user.
I suspect 2 ng might be a good limit for recreational users, and maybe a level of 5 ng (like in Colorado) would be more realistic for medical users. But if we are stuck with a 2 ng limit for everyone I suspect that anyone with a prescription of more than a gram a day will no longer be able to drive legally in Canada, and doctors should make that clear when giving the prescriptions.
I believe doctors need to step up and take more responsibility for the drugs they prescribe. That includes a good understanding of how and what level of the drugs they prescribe will affect driving. I know some will say that there is not enough information for doctors regarding cannabis and driving. But I suspect the same is true for many of the other drugs they prescribe.
My doctor had me sign an agreement that I would not drive for 4 hours after using cannabis. I believed that if I followed that guideline I would be legal to drive . But with the proposed 2 ng limit, I wonder if that guideline will still allow me to drive legally.
I plan to discuss this with my doctor because driving legally is my biggest concern going forward and I would like the medical professionals to get involved in helping determine exactly what the legal limit should be for a medical user.
I suspect 2 ng might be a good limit for recreational users, and maybe a level of 5 ng (like in Colorado) would be more realistic for medical users. But if we are stuck with a 2 ng limit for everyone I suspect that anyone with a prescription of more than a gram a day will no longer be able to drive legally in Canada, and doctors should make that clear when giving the prescriptions.
C No Ego
Well-Known Member
and how would glaucoma sufferers deal with retinal scans... thc helps glaucoma suffering
because thc exactly mimics the endogenously created endocannabinoid called anandamide, then a naturally happy person pumping anandamide to the membrane would get busted for to many cannabinoids..lol. hell, just smiling can make you suspect... what a world and we wonder why anti depressants are the new happy
I joke about it but to really know live what cannabinoids ( active cannabinoids and not ooh metabolites) are firing @ a given moment would require spectral analysis or to spin the person in a lab device to get a spectral graph analysis. I could see it now, the cop pulls you over and forces you into this device that dismantles you to find out every molecule in there LOL... then they would need a reconfig device to put you all back together and then charge you based on findings... guess that is the kind of world we are heading in with all these control freaks scared of their neighbors cannabinoid content
Last edited:
I'd like to give the California Highway Patrol a sobriety test, they drive around like complete dipshits, absolutely a danger to others around them. Flying around recklessly, looking for innocent citizens to bust while not paying any attention to the road. Running red lights, not yielding to pedestrians, high speed swerving; a danger to our community for sure.
I agree with you, but that ain't ever gonna happen! They are legalized drug pushers plain and simple IMO. THEY are the true control freaks! How in the world am I going to drive home after I hit my "runner's high" at the track?It's like prohibition 2.0 no?
We should have been careful for what we wished for but the entire -> legalize - regulate - educate - medicate takes on an entirely new spin eh? Perhaps WE should be educating THEM. Like the pathetic cannabis "task force" in Canada that did all the "research" They must of had a fucking awesome time getting blazed in Amsterdam! Probably banged alot of hookers too Well, I gotta say, i've visited Cali, and thought you residents were some of the luckiest in the world, but holy shit that's fucked! It's not like that in Canada. Even pursuits don't happen (often), it's just not worth the life safety of the public, or officer.