Driving whilst high

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
I didn't make the "test (the) for all or nothing" argument. @biohacker did; and I think your taking the comment and twisting it around. I agree with the intent of @biohacker's comment which I believe is to not unfairly target cannabis users vs other prescription users (people use both cannabis and other prescriptions to cope with disabilities and to be able to be contributing members of society). I don't think calling someone else's point "ridiculous" is very nice.
Not singling out one Cannabis users is fine. I said multiple times that I am all for testing for all different chemicals. What's ridiculous is allowing everything to slide just because some things aren't tested for. It would be insanity to allow BAC to go untested, just because they don't test for allergy medicine. Some protection from dangerous behavior is definitely better than none.
 
Last edited:
EverythingsHazy,

CalyxSmokr

Well-Known Member
So then test for all. However, since that's not happening anytime soon, just not testing for others isn't the next logical option. Just because one bad thing is allowed, doesn't mean every bad thing should also be allowed.

By the logic you just used, we shouldn't test for alcohol either. That should be proof enough that it isn't sound reasoning.

Some protection from dangerous behavior is better than no protection.


It IS Cannabis, AND it gets you buzzed. "Medicated" isn't synonymous with "buzzed", nor should it be used as a replacement for it. You might medicate with Cannabis, but that doesn't change the fact that you get buzzed/high/stoned as a result of that medical use. "Medicated" means you have medicine in your system. Being buzzed, or stoned, or high, means you feel something as a result of that medication.

I can't count the number of times someone on here says "I got really medicated last night", when what they mean is, I got a strong buzz last night from using Cannabis. That use of the word takes away from the actual medical Cannabis movement. It makes it seem like people refuse to realize that using Cannabis (with thc) gets you buzzed (assuming you're not using insanely small amounts that you can't feel, in which case you would t say "I got really medicated, anyway).

That's like someone who drinks to calm anxiety saying they got medicated when they got drunk.

Also, the whole, "I don't get high, I get even" thing, is just a nonsense saying that Cannabis users like to repeat. If you feel a buzz of any level, you aren't getting "even".

It is interesting that you decry the use of the term "medicated" when you have tried to treat the term "buzzed" as if it now has some sort of legal standing and definition.
Your language is sloppy and your conclusion that people should be tested for cannabis when the tests are less than worthless is ridiculous.
If you want to search people's bloodstream and outlaw states of consciousness then at least get some scientific basis for your claims. Until then...no thanks.
 

biohacker

H.R.E.A.M
I would need probably 6 or 7 weeks of no cannabis for me to have a clean test for our fav flower.

Same here! I'm 4 weeks in and failing my piss strip test. Am I a danger to society on the road? The testing is bullshit. So this means I can't use my medicine so I can "legally" drive, so my symptoms will flare up, and I WILL be a danger to society on the road. The saliva tests are premature and immature, and don't mean shit IMHO.

By the logic you just used, we shouldn't test for alcohol either. That should be proof enough that it isn't sound reasoning.

Some protection from dangerous behavior is better than no protection.

Yeah, sure buddy, "dangerous behaviour" from metabolites, stone cold sober. Alcohol testing allows for up to .05? Hmmm, much more inebriated than some metabolites in my body fat or saliva. By your reasoning, alcohol should be 0.0% because that's the same as 2ng in your saliva I bet.

It IS Cannabis, AND it gets you buzzed. "Medicated" isn't synonymous with "buzzed", nor should it be used as a replacement for it. You might medicate with Cannabis, but that doesn't change the fact that you get buzzed/high/stoned as a result of that medical use. "Medicated" means you have medicine in your system. Being buzzed, or stoned, or high, means you feel something as a result of that medication.

Stop extrapolating your own personal relationship with the drug on to others. Just because it gets YOU buzzed, doesn't mean that others get buzzed. Are you a medicinal user? Do you know what tolerance is? It's MEDICINE whether you like to admit it or not. Buzzed, stoned, high doesn't help our cause, let's grow up yeah? This isn't high school, it's FC.

I can't count the number of times someone on here says "I got really medicated last night", when what they mean is, I got a strong buzz last night from using Cannabis. That use of the word takes away from the actual medical Cannabis movement. It makes it seem like people refuse to realize that using Cannabis (with thc) gets you buzzed (assuming you're not using insanely small amounts that you can't feel, in which case you would t say "I got really medicated, anyway).

Let's not get into semantics here man, it's the "strong buzz" that is taking away from the medical cannabis movement. We're adults, it's cannabis, it's a medicine, and it gets you medicated. Leave the buzz on pot/weed/etc for the "stoners" on GrassCity.

That's like someone who drinks to calm anxiety saying they got medicated when they got drunk.

Semantics....let's just stop there.

Also, the whole, "I don't get high, I get even" thing, is just a nonsense saying that Cannabis users like to repeat. If you feel a buzz of any level, you aren't getting "even".

IF? Have you tried and CBD dominant strains? And yes, many of us long term medical users get even, and is the only way we can hold down a job, sleep, not commit homicide, suicide, etc. Your opinions and perceptions are completely out of reality IMO. Do you mind telling us your age? I'm 41 BTW. Yes, it's relevant.

That just proves the "test the for all or nothing" argument to be ridiculous.

The only thing that's ridiculous is the saliva testing and your arguments for it because it's "the best thing available". I think you're missing some key points here.

I agree with the intent of @biohacker's comment which I believe is to not unfairly target cannabis users vs other prescription users (people use both cannabis and other prescriptions to cope with disabilities and to be able to be contributing members of society). I don't think calling someone else's point "ridiculous" is very nice.

Thanks man, I think Hazy perhaps is in "recreational mode" and doesn't know what medicinal users go through, I can related because I know far too many people like that as well. Like you said in your other post, "just a reason to get high".... backwards thinking from prohibition. The stigma is still massive for the less educated, and most people are. Too busy watching Big Brother or some BS reality show instead of feeding their brains.

What's ridiculous is allowing everything to slide just because some things aren't tested for. It would be insanity to allow BAC to go untested, just because they don't test for allergy medicine. Some protection from dangerous behavior is definitely better than none.

See point above on "dangerous behaviour". Why don't they target pharma drugs? Why hasn't it been a priority? Dude, they fucking encourage driving drunk.... how are bars even legal?? Society accepts and promotes drinking! Can I offer you a drink? That's society.

Your language is sloppy and your conclusion that people should be tested for cannabis when the tests are less than worthless is ridiculous.
If you want to search people's bloodstream and outlaw states of consciousness then at least get some scientific basis for your claims. Until then...no thanks.

Very well said, thank you!

Get real tests, or fuck off I say. They have real tests for alcohol, but not Cannabis, so don't test for it until it's ready. Or test your reaction time or ability to safely operate a vehicle, which is all that matters in the end. Medicine is personal and no business of anyone but the patient and their doctor.

And the testing for seniors starts at 80? What the fucking fuck??

And oh look, the Ontario government is now going to provide FREE pharmas for anyone under the age of 25! That's nearly $500m dollars for over 4000 prescription drugs! So much for money for actual proper drug testing. I guess we know where the money will come from? Innocent cannabis users that perhaps don't line the pockets of pharma? What a disgrace.
 
Last edited:

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
I had a long post typed up, with actual definitions and such, but the terminology can be discussed in another thread. I'll just say this...

Regardless of what you call the effects of Cannabis, the amount of THC in your system that makes the average person unable to drive safely, should be determined (not the few people with high tolerances), and that should be enforced.
 
Last edited:
EverythingsHazy,

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
Why are bars legal? Plus they have a parking lot, assuming that you are driving there. The legal system makes huge amounts of money off of drunk drivers. Many times the same people over and over again. I'm sure they want to do that with cannabis too. A big difference between the two.

I agree folks that aren't able to drive should be off the roads. These archaic tests for cannabis needs to go.

So if @biohacker god forbid got into a wreck and if he was tested for cannabis even though he hasn't had any for 1 month or more and he tests positive, that he should be prosecuted for drugged driving? That isn't right IMO. The law is overstepping their boundary. The laws are way out of whack.

There are many medical cannabis users at risk for losing their license, plus the cost if cannabis testing is stepped up in legal cannabis areas. Cannabis patients should be able to go to work and live their lives without this extra worry.
 
Last edited:

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
who gave you the idea that medicines have no psychoactive properties?
Nobody...But it's not only a medicine. It's also a recreational drug for some people. Unless you consider everything that everyone ingests, a medicine and nothing else.

Alcohol can put people to sleep, or numb pain (they used to use it when getting primitive surgery without an anesthetic). Do you consider that being drunk or medicated?

Also, @biohacker... Cannabis has lots of medicinal benefits for me. I'm not just a purely recreational user, nor am I a medical use denier. I just don't like the term medicated, the same way you don't like the term buzzed or stoned.


I do believe the current Cannabis tests aren't at the level that they should be. They seem to be very arbitrary. I am not saying that someone who hasn't used Cannabis in a week should be punished. I do think everyone who uses Cannabis and drives while buzzed should be. I don't know enough about the correlation between the blood levels and driving ability impairment to suggest a specific number to abide by, but I do think a number that works for the large majority of people can be established, and then should be enforced. If we can test for driving ability (a reaction based test, perhaps), that would be ideal.
 
EverythingsHazy,

CalyxSmokr

Well-Known Member
Nobody...But it's not only a medicine. It's also a recreational drug for some people. Unless you consider everything that everyone ingests, a medicine and nothing else.

Alcohol can put people to sleep, or numb pain (they used to use it when getting primitive surgery without an anesthetic). Do you consider that being drunk or medicated?
I don't bother to distinguish or foul the discussion with nonsense words like "buzzed".
 
CalyxSmokr,
  • Like
Reactions: biohacker

MinnBobber

Well-Known Member
Regardless of what you call the effects of Cannabis, the amount of THC in your system that makes the average person unable to drive safely, should be determined (not the few people with high tolerances), and that should be enforced.
..........................................................................................................
The huge problem with THC testing is that the "exact amount detected" is MEANINGLESS because it could be from vaping 3 weeks ago (ala @biohacker ). He'd fail such a test but have zero active cannabinoids, which is totally wrong.
Such test information is meaningless for "sobriety testing". It's only valid for one unrelated question: who has ingested cannabis in the last 4?? weeks?
 

biohacker

H.R.E.A.M
It's also a recreational drug for some people

So are pharmaceuticals. And how old are you just curious that's all?

I do believe the current Cannabis tests aren't at the level that they should be. They seem to be very arbitrary. I am not saying that someone who hasn't used Cannabis in a week should be punished. I do think everyone who uses Cannabis and drives while buzzed should be. I don't know enough about the correlation between the blood levels and driving ability impairment to suggest a specific number to abide by, but I do think a number that works for the large majority of people can be established, and then should be enforced. If we can test for driving ability (a reaction based test, perhaps), that would be ideal.

Agreed! But now I don't even understand your stance? Are you for the saliva testing for 2-5ng or not? If you're not, i'm not even sure what you're arguing for? I'm pretty certain that most here aren't for impaired driving.

The huge problem with THC testing is that the "exact amount detected" is MEANINGLESS because it could be from vaping 3 weeks ago (ala @biohacker ). He'd fail such a test but have zero active cannabinoids, which is totally wrong.
Such test information is meaningless for "sobriety testing". It's only valid for one unrelated question: who has ingested cannabis in the last 4?? weeks?

:rockon: But i'll tell you, I do feel slightly medicated from time to time (daily) as I go through my detox. However it's all in my body, and doesn't affect my brain or driving ability that's forsure. Lack of sleep does that way more than Cannabis ever could. Good thing I can do shrooms and drive and get away with it?:shrug:

Oh, and Seroquel, which is like getting hit over the head with a sledgehammer (antipsychotic), my doctor says it's the closest thing to Cannabis for a pharma drug! Maybe he doesn't profit from Marinol or something.
 
Last edited:

just_the_flu

they say im crazy but i have a good time
...I fall in the 'I don't feel the effects' category unless I've been using for a few hours... I would easily fail any test 31+ days after... I consume an ounce to my self on a weekly average...

...comparing weed testing to booze is wrong because alcohol is in your system for basically the time as the effects are... this is easy to test for and they do...

...I don't think they could test accurately if your 'impaired' off weed...


...I'm not in favour of testing but being forced on us they need to be able to consistantly test for impairment not %blood levels... blood levels do not work with weed... I have no answers but 'stoned' drivers are no concern to me compared to drinkers, txters and opiates....I do not have to deal with big city driving hardly ever... big city driving makes me nervous and anxious in best of conditions (environmental and mental)........
 

biohacker

H.R.E.A.M
I have no answers but 'stoned' drivers are no concern to me compared to drinkers, txters and opiates

I agree with your post man, but lost me with this one. Stoned driving is a concern to me as much as the other things, why wouldn't it be? Not everyone knows their limit, and although the other things are bad, so is impaired driving on Cannabis, if it's in fact impaired.
 

just_the_flu

they say im crazy but i have a good time
I agree with your post man, but lost me with this one. Stoned driving is a concern to me as much as the other things, why wouldn't it be? Not everyone knows their limit, and although the other things are bad, so is impaired driving on Cannabis, if it's in fact impaired.

...I agree with you.. my point was I view the effects of weed more like caffeine and nicotine...

...I agree people who do not know limits are the problem and needs to be addressed... but in my opinion thats just people being bad drivers and there are far too many bad drivers... that includes condition of vehicles to personal conditions and knowledge of how to drive... if I were a cop I'd make my quota in 5 min just on shitty drivers doing stupid shit :rofl:
 

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
I don't bother to distinguish or foul the discussion with nonsense words like "buzzed".
I'm not going to derail this thread debating definitions with you. I go by the dictionary.

So are pharmaceuticals. And how old are you just curious that's all?



Agreed! But now I don't even understand your stance? Are you for the saliva testing for 2-5ng or not? If you're not, i'm not even sure what you're arguing for? I'm pretty certain that most here aren't for impaired driving.



:rockon: But i'll tell you, I do feel slightly medicated from time to time (daily) as I go through my detox. However it's all in my body, and doesn't affect my brain or driving ability that's forsure. Lack of sleep does that way more than Cannabis ever could. Good thing I can do shrooms and drive and get away with it?:shrug:

Oh, and Seroquel, which is like getting hit over the head with a sledgehammer (antipsychotic), my doctor says it's the closest thing to Cannabis for a pharma drug! Maybe he doesn't profit from Marinol or something.
I prefer to not state my age, for privacy reasons, but I will say that I'm old enough to have been on my fair share of prescribed medicines, and know very well how many of them can make you feel, from first hand experience.

I also know very well how tolerance affects the way Cannabis makes you feel. What I don't know 100% yet, are the exact biological limits to tolerance (whether feeling buzzed completely equates to physical impairment, or how tolerances to the various chemicals in Cannabis vary). I don't believe 100% that just the feelings correlate perfectly with impairment. For instance...

Person A (low tolerance)
-Consumes a gram
-Feels a level 8 buzz

Person B (high tolerance):
-Consumes a gram
-Feels a level 4 buzz

I'm not convinced that Person B is necessarily half as impaired as Person A, just because they feel half as buzzed/stoned. They might be, but they also might not be. Person A might be an 8 on the impairment scale, while Person B is a 6.


I don't know about the nanogram amount I'd agree with, because I haven't done enough blood level studying and research to settle on what I'd call a safe amount, but I agree that if it gets you a positive reading more than 48hours after using less than a few grams of Cannabis, I think it's ridiculous.

I'm not arguing for busting people who haven't smoked in days. I disagree with that. I am "arguing" (not fighting, in case it sounds that way over text) against driving while you're buzzed or stoned. I don't think that should be legal.

My ideal preference would be, a driving simulator reaction test, that measures eye/hand/foot coordination and reaction speed*. That would be usable for everything, including tiredness, drunkness, being stoned, being caffinated, being old, etc.. That's obviously a long way off with the way things are going, but an hand/eye coordination test might be more feasible.

*If we can find a blood level of THC that is impairing for the average person, I'd like that to be added to the test as well, and tbh I'd be ok with that being the sole test for driving while under the influence of Cannabis, even though it would be harder for some people to stay under that limit due to tolerance. I don't believe the laws should only be made if they can cater to everyone individually. If there is a limit that proves to be impairing for most people, everyone having to abide by that is fine by me. We don't have to spend tons of time sitting people in front of driving simulators on the side of the road, to test if they are too buzzed on Cannabis to be driving. It's much easier to swab them and have a clear limit that can't be surpassed. If you truly have such a high tolerance that it doesn't affect your driving at all, you aren't very likely get pulled over and asked to step out for a sobriety test of any sort, anyway.

......


I also find it hard to believe that more than 1% of Cannabis users genuinely don't feel anything, and that's being generous. Maybe they feel very little, but people like Snoop Dogg and Tommy Chong can catch a buzz, and they smoke weed all the time. I don't think you'll find very many people who are completely immune to the buzz it gives, unless they are using THC-free products or have a neurological lack of the associated receptors. Perhaps if you are using an ounce a week, in an efficient vaporizer, you're never truly sober, and therefore think you're not feeling anything, but would come to change your mind if out on a forced three month break from all Cannabis use.
 
Last edited:

CalyxSmokr

Well-Known Member
buzz'd
what about when a test is over the nanogram limit and it has been 4 hours since you vaped and there is no impairment. Why make the discussion ridiculous and talk about 48 hours out?
All things you want require voluminous scientific research anyway.
Thus blood tests are not accurate. Still.
 

invertedisdead

PHASE3
Manufacturer
...acting high and being high are two different things....'stoner' is there persona...

Like, come on, man.

tumblr_nl5y07Wu2B1u8rn1ro1_500.png
 

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
buzz'd
what about when a test is over the nanogram limit and it has been 4 hours since you vaped and there is no impairment. Why make the discussion ridiculous and talk about 48 hours out?
All things you want require voluminous scientific research anyway.
Thus blood tests are not accurate. Still.
I would "feel" fine to drive four hours after vaporizing, but I'm not 100% sure that I would react as well as if I hadn't vaporized at all that day. That's what I'm saying... I don't trust letting people go by their "feelings". Yes, I know that's what they do with pharmaceutical drugs, and yes, I think that's stupid.

I don't believe that someone's who's never gotten high before, or who only uses Cannabis once in a while, would be perfectly normal in four hours. I think a lot of daily users forget just how powerful and Lon lasting Cannabis can be for those with zero tolerance.


...acting high and being high are two different things....'stoner' is there persona...
That's true. I still don't think they feel absolutely nothing, though. Perhaps, very little, but them feeling nothing is hard for me to believe. They're probably just burned out all the time, which is still feeling something, but just not realizing t, due to it being the norm.
 
EverythingsHazy,
  • Like
Reactions: biohacker

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
@EverythingsHazy if you consume cannabis yourself you are at risk for a drug driving ticket and at risk with everything that goes with it. The only way you can avoid that is to not drive. It looks like you are in the same boat as the rest of us. Maybe you don't drive? That would be the only way of getting around it.

I'm not ashamed to say I'm 60 and a very conscientious driver and I'm a medical cannabis user. It's important that I continue to live a productive life even though I deal with some medical issues.
 
Last edited:

CalyxSmokr

Well-Known Member
I would "feel" fine to drive four hours after vaporizing, but I'm not 100% sure that I would react as well as if I hadn't vaporized at all that day. That's what I'm saying... I don't trust letting people go by their "feelings". Yes, I know that's what they do with pharmaceutical drugs, and yes, I think that's stupid.

I don't believe that someone's who's never gotten high before, or who only uses Cannabis once in a while, would be perfectly normal in four hours. I think a lot of daily users forget just how powerful and Lon lasting Cannabis can be for those with zero tolerance.


That's true. I still don't think they feel absolutely nothing, though. Perhaps, very little, but them feeling nothing is hard for me to believe. They're probably just burned out all the time, which is still feeling something, but just not realizing t, due to it being the norm.
And I am telling you your theories on this are not well thought out and your language is impercise.
Now the standard to drive is "normal"? Is the definition of that the opposite of "buzzed"?
The definition we care about is "impaired". Not buzz, stoned, normal, or anything else you can come up with.
Sure people with low tolerances need to be careful. The best way to encourage that is to educate them. Sure not everybody knows their limit.
That does not mean we should have blood tests that are inaccurate.
I have been way past too stoned to drive off of edibles for more than 24 hours. I have never been too stoned to drive after 4 hours from vaping. Honestly I am OK after 45 minutes for sure and at the outside edge - an hour and 1/2 for a huge dab. Anything more than that and we are not really talking about impaired in most cases.
 
Last edited:

EverythingsHazy

Well-Known Member
And I am telling you your theories on this are not well thought out and your language is impercise.
Now the standard to drive is "normal"? Is the definition of that the opposite of "buzzed"?
The definition we care about is "impaired". Not buzz, stoned, normal, or anything else you can come up with.
Sure people with low tolerances need to be careful. The best way to encourage that is to educate them. Sure not everybody knows their limit.
That does not mean we should have blood tests that are inaccurate.
I have been way past too stoned to drive off of edibles for more than 24 hours. I have never been too stoned to drive after 4 hours. Honestly I am OK after 45 minutes for sure and out the outside edge an hour and 1/2 for a huge dab. Anything more than that and we are not really talking about impaired in most cases.
Change "normal" with "impaired", then. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if someone who has zero tolerance, is still impaired, four hours after getting stoned.

I said, I only want blood tests if they find out a safe limit for the avg person. If that proves impossible, which I think is unlikely, a coordination/reflex test would be best. If we can find a number that correlates well with the average person's level of impairment, it would be accurate for the majority of people. Those who fall on the far end of the spectrum would just have to deal with that. It sucks, but laws aren't based on each individual person.

You just said that you've been too stoned to drive for 24+ hours off of edibles, and then in the next sentence, said you've never been too stoned to drive after 4hrs.. Which is it?
 
EverythingsHazy,

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
I understand what @CalyxSmokr meant. Wrecked off of edibles even 24 hours later but can drive easily after 4 hours since vaporizing.

I've lived through the too much edible senerio. I always give advice about no driving after edibles because you don't know how it will effect you. the key is using common sense. The screwy drug testing is rediculous.
 

CalyxSmokr

Well-Known Member
Change "normal" with "impaired", then. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if someone who has zero tolerance, is still impaired, four hours after getting stoned.

Its funny. I have never seen arguments like this from an actual smoker and not reefer madness zealots.
You just said that you've been too stoned to drive for 24+ hours off of edibles, and then in the next sentence, said you've never been too stoned to drive after 4hrs.. Which is it?
I edited the post to make that clear.
 
Top Bottom