• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pot and driving:

1Perry said:
And yet, people drink and drive.
Click to expand...

Exactly. They would also possess alcohol if it were illegal. People who break the law don't care about the law. You already said that you obey the law.
 
Thorgasm said:
Exactly. They would also possess alcohol if it were illegal.
Click to expand...

Fewer would. I would not have it in my fridge at the moment if it was illegal.
 
1Perry said:
Fewer would. I would not have it in my fridge at the moment if it was illegal.
Click to expand...

I know you wouldn't. We've already established that.

How do you know fewer would though? How do you explain that they would honor one law and not another?
 
Thorgasm said:
I know you wouldn't. We've already established that.

How do you know fewer would though? How do you explain that they would honor one law and not another?
Click to expand...

People do not think as they otherwise would when not under the influence. Nearly everyone caught drunk driving will admit the next day that they did something stupid and wouldn't have if not under the influence.
 
Temporal said:
How do you define "high"? Right now the law can drag you away if you have detectable levels of THC in your blood, even if you haven't smoked in over a week.

I don't think we can apply the same methodology to pot as we do to alcohol. They have different standards, affect people differently, and the presence in the body tissues is longer with pot. Up to a month, if I recall.

What if, hypothetically, you breathe in pot smoke second hand, but never smoked? You could be charged with a DUI in some states.
Click to expand...

Just a note to allay unnecessary worry.

Secondhand pot smoke wont get you busted.

There are "background" natural cannabinoids in your bloodstream.

These levels wont be elevated enough by casual contact to pop positive for thc.

Never have heard of anybody who doesn't partake being busted for secondhand exposure.

Its not the same as eating a poppyseed muffin will give a false positive for opiates.
 
1Perry said:
The arguement is more would partake because it is legal. It's certainly one of the reasons I no longer smoke.
Click to expand...

In countries where Pot has been legalized or decriminalized, initially the number of users go up, but later stabilizes and then drops. I can provide links if you want.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Ok: there's being "high" or "under the influence of a substance" and then there's "having THC in your blood" - you can tell if someone's smoked weed and is 'high' - per that link I gave it specifies this.

I thought you were clear on these differences between these things since you agree that testing THC levels is futile.

And beyond stating these differences I can't help you much more - if you don't get what I am and am not discussing at this point then oh well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the problem we face is that "being high" is subjective enough to where we can't just leave it to the discretion of a police officer. After a long day at work I could very well have a few characteristics of someone who is high (eyes red from fatigue, slower response times, slower speech) but I've never smoked a blunt in my life. There needs to be some kind of empirical test, like we have with a breathalyzer for alcohol.

It's a definite technical challenge.
 
Thorgasm said:
Pharmaceutical THC isn't the same. You don't have to smoke marijuana either. You can ingest it or vaporize it.



No, it is not a jab at pro-life people. (All people are pro-life)

It is a jab at hospitals who refuse to do certain medical procedures because of a book that doesn't lend itself to science and medicine. A tubal ligation has nothing to do with the abortion issue.
Click to expand...

Anyone for brownies? :mrgreen:
 
I don't know about you guys but if I ever try to drive with pot it just makes me go reeeaally slow.
 
Platypus said:
I don't know about you guys but if I ever try to drive with pot it just makes me go reeeaally slow.
Click to expand...

Same here. Truthfully, I wouldn't drive high anymore even if I did smoke, but it's no reason to keep it illegal. Alcohol takes so many lives, and it is one of the leading causes of violent crime.
 
I have to say, that my friend drives high all the time, and he obeys all the rules as far as I'm aware. That being said, I know he's a personal example and not even close to proof that it's ok. It's a moot point about legalization, because drinking affects your driving and it's still legal
 
NaturallyChill said:
I have to say, that my friend drives high all the time, and he obeys all the rules as far as I'm aware. That being said, I know he's a personal example and not even close to proof that it's ok. It's a moot point about legalization, because drinking affects your driving and it's still legal
Click to expand...

It can be measured. That's my problem. Legalize it.....after finding a legitimate way to measure it's effect.
 
Platypus said:
I don't know about you guys but if I ever try to drive with pot it just makes me go reeeaally slow.
Click to expand...
I've also heard people say that it makes them stop reeeaally slow, too .. so that by the time they actually do stop, they're half way into the intersection after running that red light.

Indeed, every aspect of neuro-mechanics is slowed down while on pot, so that driving reaction time simply takes longer, whether it's determining and actuating the pressure to put on the gas pedal .. or the brake pedal.
 
Ontologuy said:
I've also heard people say that it makes them stop reeeaally slow, too .. so that by the time they actually do stop, they're half way into the intersection after running that red light.

Indeed, every aspect of neuro-mechanics is slowed down while on pot, so that driving reaction time simply takes longer, whether it's determining and actuating the pressure to put on the gas pedal .. or the brake pedal.
Click to expand...

I've been smoking for thirty five gears or so and have never seen or heard such a thing outside anti-pot propaganda.

There is a reality of impairment but your data sets are WAY off, in my experience anyway.
 
NaturallyChill said:
I have to say, that my friend drives high all the time, and he obeys all the rules as far as I'm aware. That being said, I know he's a personal example and not even close to proof that it's ok. It's a moot point about legalization, because drinking affects your driving and it's still legal
Click to expand...

I can't speak for anyone else, but if I were to drive high on weed, I would be impaired. Anybody who drives high should be subject to the same penalties as those who drive drunk.
 
Ontologuy said:
I've also heard people say that it makes them stop reeeaally slow, too .. so that by the time they actually do stop, they're half way into the intersection after running that red light.

Indeed, every aspect of neuro-mechanics is slowed down while on pot, so that driving reaction time simply takes longer, whether it's determining and actuating the pressure to put on the gas pedal .. or the brake pedal.
Click to expand...

It depends on the weed. And how much someone smokes. When I drove high, I usually drove well because I was extra careful. So long as people concentrate on driving, they're fine. The problem with pot is that when someone daydreams while driving, it takes their mind longer to switch back into driving mode if an emergency happens. Once I was while driving high, and the douche bag in front of me suddenly stopped, and he had no break lights. To top things off, it was raining. I saw his car sitting there in front of me. I took note of that. I thought to myself "that car in front of me is not moving- oh ****!" I had to go through the process in my mind. It's like I saw him sitting there, but my brain took a few seconds to catch up. Trouble was, there were cars parked on the shoulder of the road (two lane road) so I couldn't swerve off to avoid him. The pavement was wet so when I hit the breaks, the car continued to lurch forward. Thankfully, my reflexes were not dimmed at all. Once aware of the situation, I made the split second decision to swerve into the oncoming lane which was free of traffic at the time, and into a side road. I was thankful for the antilock breaks having done spin outs before on wet pavement.

On pot, the brain cannot multi task. When driving, everything's fine UNLESS something unexpected happens. Then there could be trouble.
 
Temporal said:
All you're proving by asking this question is that you don't know how to read. Sorry that you have literary difficulties :shrug:

The gateway theory has been thoroughly debunked many times. It's like saying people who smoke cigarettes are prone to doing other drugs. I'm sure it's true of some but statistically it's not a trend.



I firmly believe that no matter what intoxicant you are on, you still have basic knowledge of what is happening... i.e. I should or shouldn't get into a car right now. People use alcohol as an excuse to act stupid, and then blame the intoxicant. I've met plenty of drinkers who love to get hammered, but they make accommodations to get home later that don't include driving their own vehicles.

You can blame the intoxicant all you want but there are still underlying choices that people make, and it's those actions which become affected by the intoxicant.

In other words, drinking or smoking do not drive people to make stupid choices. It's the people who do that. It's no different than saying guns kill people. Actually, it's people that kill people.
Click to expand...


Temporal people caught driving impaired with weed in their system the majority of the time have alcohol also...cross addicts with weed are commonplace..no one said anything about gateway drug....
 
danarhea said:
I can't speak for anyone else, but if I were to drive high on weed, I would be impaired. Anybody who drives high should be subject to the same penalties as those who drive drunk.
Click to expand...
\


You and everyone else that drives high on weed are impaired...this is one of the many subjects that people make their own rules up for because they LOVE WEED...or use it...its the same with all other special interest subjects
 
You know guys, I REALLY want marijuana legal so this kind of stuff can happen. I mean, we really DON'T have enough deaths from traffic accidents.
 
Wake said:
You know guys, I REALLY want marijuana legal so this kind of stuff can happen. I mean, we really DON'T have enough deaths from traffic accidents.
Click to expand...

I read a post by someone on a newspaper blog....why not allow people to use weed and drive we use cellphones right ? they are worse......Im hoping that she was kidding..but she sounded quite serious...
 
Not sure what the debate is here.

If they guy was impaired by multiple drugs especially illegal he should be punished.

Now dont know what his tests really showed and I guess THAT could be debated.

ALso dont know how legalizing pot would change THIS case? Impaired driving is impaired driving. While I would agree that the definitions of impaired and quality of testing should be accurate. Have no clue if they currently are not.

I'm fine with legalizing it by the way. While I was never a heavy user and pretty got the out of my system in a summer and havent uses in more than a decade Im fine with legalizing it.
 
evanescence said:
And what? You think keeping it illegal will prevent traffic deaths. :roll:
Click to expand...

How about we make murder legal. By your logic of COURSE there'd be no difference in deaths.

You see, punishment ISN'T a dissuasion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom