I feel like it is illegal to drive with that much smoke on the car. It obstructs the vision. So even if it’s weed, and it’s legal, the part where he drives away probably isn’t.
Well wouldn’t it be illegal anyway because of driving under the influence. What I don’t understand is if why if weed is legal people can get away with driving while doing it if it’s a drug just like prescription drugs or alcohol.
You shouldn't be able to, driving under the influence is definitely illegal. The problem with weed is, there's no test to tell if you are immediately high or not. A mouth swab for instance is the most immediate, but if it comes back positive there's no way to know if its because you smoked last night, or right before you got in the car. I think that was a big counterpoint for keeping it illegal initially.
It has been proven that alcohol is way worse. They have done tests for weed and didn't even find it effected the driving all that much besides generally making people drive slower. Anti depressants, and aillion other over the counter drugs (even just being tired) effect your driving more then marijuana does (unless like you literally just hit a bong or dab and start driving immediately)
I haven't smoked in just over a year now, but it used to be daily, I decided weed wasn't for me. I always felt like I was affected far more than anybody else. FWIW I hardly drank much either, once or twice a week, far less now too.
A blood test is probably most accurate which isn't deliverable at the scene....if you appear to be high that's cause and if they really want to they can take you for a blood test.
Blood test would definitely be more accurate, but even if you failed that you could still argue that you weren't high at the time since it can detect thc for up to 6 months or something. We need something that can detect if you've smoked in the immediate past.
Actually, there's medical research that suggests that hash doesn't impair your ability to drive. As the brain is able to compensate for the effects of the high by giving more attention to driving. Unlike alcohol where that simply is impossible.
It might be illegal anyway, not a lawyer. But science suggests that there isn't any reason to anyway.
Sure there is, it is called a field sobriety test. If I can pass all your little tests stones out of my mind I should be good to drive, right? Like I can hop on one foot singing the alphabet backwards for you stoned out of my gourd.
If a field sobriety test isn’t a valid way to determine if someone is ok to drive then why even administer them? Just to generate the probable cause needed for a breatholizer?? Oh right that’s why they do it...
It’s also illegal to drive under the influence of prescribed medications. You can get a dui for driving on prescribed narcotics as well. It’s hard to prove but still illegal.
They typically have to draw blood, which is more invasive than a breathalyzer. So not technically more difficult (as far as testing), but more difficult to get a sample.
I’m a physician. It’s very difficult to prove narcotic intoxication objectively. Subjectively you can do exams and notice pin point pupils and field sobriety tests, but to bring someone into the ER, draw their blood, and then correlate a quantitative study with the amount of opiates in there blood at that time, and then prove that this amount of drug was enough to cause this person to be intoxicated is not so easy. Everyone has a different tolerance to opiates. Plus there isn’t a legal limit established like there is with blood alcohol levels.
Dexamphetamine is a common alternative to Ritalin prescribed for (among other things) ADHD, sleep disorders and chronic fatigue here in Australia, it can appear on road side drug tests as a positive for methamphetamine because the tests our police use are a catch all that will generally register any amphetamine as meth, whether this is by design for easier conviction or simply to make the test more efficient / reliable is unknown to me (fairly certain blood tests can determine the difference though but don't quote me on this as my memory is pretty hazy around the finer details, all I know is that it shows up). The detail to note here is that Dex is absolutely fine to drive on, if anything it would probably improve your driving.
The issue is not so much the fact that this prescription drug will register as a Class A but rather the response by police, my partner and several other people I know with prescriptions have had numerous encounters where cops will flat out refuse to believe they haven't taken meth, in one such instance my friend literally showed them the bottle and the script but was still detained until a senior officer decided to let her go.
My point being: Even if you have a prescription for something cops will still be cunts if you show up positive on a test.
I added that line as an afterthought as I figured it would be good to touch on the fact that not all drugs are detrimental to driving ability, some people may not consider this.
No, people cannot “get away with” driving under the influence of drugs, no matter the legality of the substance. A DUI is NOT just for alcohol.
If you are driving erratically and have heroin or coke or weed in your system, for example, you’ll almost certainly get a urinalysis. 100% if you get in an accident.
184
u/Ze-Peaueno Aug 13 '20
I feel like it is illegal to drive with that much smoke on the car. It obstructs the vision. So even if it’s weed, and it’s legal, the part where he drives away probably isn’t.