Harper announces plans to crack down on drug-impaired drivers!! - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Cheese · 11-10-2006, 10:53 AM

Quick...Hide your Tylenol!

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has unveiled plans to clamp down on drivers who are high on drugs.

Driving...stoned?

Will be interesting to watch the lawyers get richer fighting this.

jolinar of malkshor · 11-10-2006, 10:57 AM

This legislation is long over due. Congrats on the Conservatives..

Crazy Flamer · 11-10-2006, 11:01 AM

Its a good idea but the article mentions there is no scientific method to test which drug a driver has taken. So how exactly will this be enforced?

11-10-2006, 11:07 AM

It's hard enough to get a guilty verdict with alcohol as the impairment. I can't even imagine how hard it would be for a drug.

You want to be outraged? Go watch an impaired driving trial. The fact the accused was completely wasted is never the really on trial.

Tron_fdc · 11-10-2006, 11:09 AM

How do you test for it though? Don't you need a blood test to check for things like that? Not all too practical, and I'm not too sure how keen I would be to submit to having a cop do it to me.

Agamemnon · 11-10-2006, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

How do you test for it though? Don't you need a blood test to check for things like that? Not all too practical, and I'm not too sure how keen I would be to submit to having a cop do it to me.

Maybe they'd call a special unit in to do an on the spot drug test? Or maybe he'd haul you down to the station? I'm sure it could be very difficult to confirm if someone's high while driving without a blood test, especially if they've taken steps to hide the fact.

What if you got high 3 days before, wouldn't that show up on the blood test too? Couldn't you just say you did it the day before, not when you were driving?

The Goon · 11-10-2006, 11:12 AM

Any day of this past week, I would have tested positive for an overdose of Neo-Citran.

Shazam · 11-10-2006, 11:13 AM

Did anyone actually read the article?

Quote:

There is currently no fool-proof scientific test in Canada to determine what drug a driver may have consumed.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving says that problem has been eliminated in the United States with the introduction of a series of tests that looks for families of drugs.

Agamemnon · 11-10-2006, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

Did anyone actually read the article?

Ok... so what does the 'series of tests' involve? I think the concerns raised in this thread are still valid.

Shazam · 11-10-2006, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Ok... so what does the 'series of tests' involve? I think the concerns raised in this thread are still valid.

You probably breathe into a paper bag and the cops smell it

Cheese · 11-10-2006, 11:28 AM

Maybe the test involves watching a rerun of Airplane 2 and watching the drivers reactions. If the driver gets the munchies during said vid presentation he gets arrested.

Other than that I think its blood or urine testing....not sure what would happen if someone had been in a fight and had blood in their urine though.

Agamemnon · 11-10-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

You probably breathe into a paper bag and the cops smell it

greyshep · 11-10-2006, 11:45 AM

I think this becomes a larger issue with the movement to legalize marijuana.

Isnt it logical that if its fully legalized you will have more people trying it...and then driving while under the influence?

(I know some people may argue that it does not effect driving ability. I just dont see how that is possible)

Shazam · 11-10-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greyshep

I think this becomes a larger issue with the movement to legalize marijuana.

Isnt it logical that if its fully legalized you will have more people trying it...and then driving while under the influence?

(I know some people may argue that it does not effect driving ability. I just dont see how that is possible)

I'm going to sidetrack this thread, but I just have to say this. Legalizing ganja has nothing to do with "freedom". It's all about money. The growers think they can make money selling the stuff. What they don't realize is that the moment ganja is legalized here, the big corporations will have stuff in the stores the next day at 5% the cost of what the illegal growers sold it for. The only people that will win if ganja is legalized are the big corps.

Sparks · 11-10-2006, 12:45 PM

Quote:

The only people that will win if ganja is legalized are the big corps.

And the government, of course. (taxation)

Quote:

Isnt it logical that if its fully legalized you will have more people trying it...and then driving while under the influence?

I can't back it up, but I would suggest that anyone who wants to try it can do so already fairly easily. I'm not sure its "illegal" status is much of a deterrent.

Driving while stoned should be "clamped down on," but only when they have an easy and reliable way to test it. At the moment, the whole thing sounds a bit sketchy to me. There are lots of tickets that can be issued to drivers at the moment in response to their driving behaviour (vs what they've ingested), which can be used by cops in the meantime.

fredr123 · 11-10-2006, 12:57 PM

Thorny: [after pulling car over] Do you know how fast you were going back there?
College Boy 1: Umm... 65?
Thorny: 63.
College Boy 1: But... isn't the speed limit 65?
Thorny: Yes, it is.
College Boy 3: [stoned] I'm freakin' out, man!

Winsor_Pilates · 11-10-2006, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

The only people that will win if ganja is legalized are the big corps.

You're forgetting anyone who doesn't like the drug trade and the violence/crime that comes with it.
Which would mean almost everyone will win.

Another issue with this testing will be clearly defining the rules around using each drug and driving.
Example: How long after getting stoned do you have to wait before driving? Will they be able to test the level of drugs in your blood and assign a point value like alcohol?

Shazam · 11-10-2006, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

You're forgetting anyone who doesn't like the drug trade and the violence/crime that comes with it.
Which would mean almost everyone will win.

Not true. Last time I checked, alcohol still causes violence, even though it's legal.

Winsor_Pilates · 11-10-2006, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

Not true. Last time I checked, alcohol still causes violence, even though it's legal.

I'm talking about the trafficing of the drugs. As I said, The DRUG TRADE.

And your example is false since I'm talking about trafficing. Since prohibition of alcohol ended violence surrounding the illegal sale of alchol also ended.

I don't think there's too many Al Capones in the alcohol business these days.

The same thing would happen in the drug trade if the profit was taken out of it by making it legal.

Agamemnon · 11-10-2006, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shazam

Not true. Last time I checked, alcohol still causes violence, even though it's legal.

I think he's talking about the illegal growers/distributors, often run by criminal organizations/gangs. Not the effects caused on users while high. Are there criminal gangs bootlegging lots of black market alcohol, killing each other and attacking/protecting alcohol distribution turf? No, because there are liquor stores everywhere.

edit: yeah, what he said above.