If I have a choice, I would rather want EVERYONE on the road to drive sober, not high, not under the influence of any drugs of abuse nor medical drugs. Yes, some people is able to drive THC in their system but not everyone.

If an officer pulls me over, aside from seeing my behavior (if I can't hide me being high), how exactly can the officer determine if I can tolerate 10 nanograms of THC as well as rJZx's godly body or if I have a tolerance of a 90 lb asian girl? Should the officer give everybody the benefit of the doubt and assume everybody's tolerance is as good as rJZx?

Let's say I am high as fuck, would I be rational enough to know I should not be driving?

^Never said I had the tolerance of Cheech and Chong bro. I agree some people shouldn't be on the road with THC in their systems but some people shouldn't be on the road at all.

If I ever feel like I am unable to drive I simply won't as should others, if you feel high af and act like a retard then you shouldn't be infront of the wheel. Also all my friends that smoke and drive have never been in an accident or done anything retarded while driving. That includes SLURREY seshes with surrey smokers :drunk: and occasional smokers I know.

inb4 thread turns into shitting on surrey.

i think when you are high as fuck, anything is tasty.

^
Clearly you haven't smoked or much before lol.. Soggy mcds is beyond saving.

or i was just high out of my freaking mind and not notice lol

I wouldn't drive high or under any influence.

ONLY because I don't do that substance daily.
However, I can see how someone who drinks everyday or smokes everyday could drive under the influence and it would be "normal" to them. I've seen reports of alcoholics and chronic marijuana users acting completely "normal" and could drive easily.

To the average citizen who only indulges in said activities, yeah, not a good idea at all. But, I can see an argument being made for those people who are chronic daily users.

Stoned drivers are a lot safer than drunk ones, new federal data show - The Washington Post

"A new study from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finds that drivers who use marijuana are at a significantly lower risk for a crash than drivers who use alcohol. And after adjusting for age, gender, race and alcohol use, drivers who tested positive for marijuana were no more likely to crash than who had not used any drugs or alcohol prior to driving."

article isn't recommending stoned drivers but the point is that stoned drivers aren't drunk. it's not the same and acting like it is the same just shows your ignorance.

I felt mellow and just wanna go to sleep when I smoke.

For me, driving high is tough, I had to pull over few times just to take a nap

My issue with this is the numbers.

They are trying to figure out what a "safe number" is to drive with THC in your body.
Personally I think that's retarded, just for the fact that THC can say in ones blood for a long time, even more so on hair follicles.

Now when I saw a video of how they are attempting to make this shit work, it is going to be reading the content of vapour (IIRC) that you blow out. So just like alcohol, it's on your breathe, not in your blood.

I've talked with afew friends about it, and I hope to be able to grab one of these and give it a trail run to find bugs in it. I can't see vapour hanging around that long if you're a stoner and you're eating 3 McDonalds meals because you've got the munchies.

If only some official government entity could do a study on the effects of Marijuana on the ability to drive.

Oh wait the NHTSA did.

Here's the summary:


Full Study: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.document...-marijuana.pdf

*Edit: Hot Karl beat me to it.

Speed isn't what kills when driving high. Its a momentarily lapse of judgment when turning right at a red light, or doing a lane change. You can easily run someone over or side swipe a car in those situations if you are high and your brain times out for a few seconds. I've had a few very close calls that would have landed me in jail for a better part of a decade if luck wasn't on my side.

Sure, I can drive way better high than when drunk, but I can drive even better sober. I don't do it any more.

So if they will be measuring vapor content how will consumables be detected I wonder.

so its wrong that i learned to drive while stoned? lol. i would smoke up at school and then come home and practice with my mom. now, i'm not talking about being completely cheech'd, just stoned enough to where i can still function.

i've driven stoned for so long now and never got into any trouble while doing so either. what it really comes down too is that if you're not a chronic smoker, do not fucking drive. i'm able to smoke a good sized joint to myself and function as if i'm still sober. but thats just me. i should also note that its been about 8 or 9 months now since i last got high and drove. i'm a grown ass man now and honestly i just don't want to ruin my perfect driving record. in the 11 years i've had my license, i've only been in one at fault accident(sober at the time) and have gotten 2 speeding tickets.

This is the problem though. People who can't still function, believe they can. Remember, half of Canada's population is dumber than the average. We have to make laws to babysit those that can't control themselves. I don't think anyone can argue that they NEED to make it legal for people to drive kind of baked. People don't need to live their life stoned anymore than I need to live drunk. You can argue that marijuana is a medication for some, but some medications you aren't supposed to drive on. As said before, DUI stands for driving under the influence, which doesn't just mean drunk.

driving stoned: ok. but might auto drive to another location before you remember that you werent supposed to be going that way.
mostly only veteran smokers. practice makes perfect for this one. like smoking and playing a video game. you get focused and very aware of the situation. newbs where vision is distorted and emotionally you feel hella not in control... no way.

edit: although i've heard of lots of people reacting to red/green lights that are one light away. ex. the light turns green, and you go forward, then you realise you're looking at the green light 1 block ahead and the nearest light to you is still red. that's hella dangerous. duno if this is weed related or it can affect anyone that goes into a daze at a traffic light.

driving drunk: not recommended, most people have worse hand eye coordination and delayed reactions. definitely no if you're caucasian. lol. if you "love drinking" and "can drink on the job and work "fine"" and you can drink for lunch and feel ok... you shouldn't drink and drive at all. if your face turns red flush, your face feels like it's got its own pulse, and u feel like there's poison going through your veins after a 1-2 drinks, you're more likely to be able to drink and drive better than people that don't get that flushing effect. but the law may disagree. ask for a breathalyzer, high chance you will blow below if you've only had less than 4 drinks within 1.5 hours.

driving on lsd: trying to solve cosmic secrets while maintaining a steady speed when your speedometer is dancing around and the lines on the road have a mind of their own is not a good idea. don't try. ever. but the cop that pulls you over may not notice. the craziness you experience is only in your own mind. you can easily talk your way out of this one... as long as they don't find you in a ditch.

driving on uppers (caffeine, amphetamines, coke etc.): i wonder if it's illegal in F1 racing. definitely performance enhancing drug.

driving on downers: I would be surprised if you could even get to your first red light before fading off. don't try.




driving on high negative emotions (anger, sadness etc): the most dangerous of all. that's a true DUI. driving under the influence of emotions. lol.


that is my guide. enjoy.



before i get labeled a racist by the dummies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_flush_reaction
it is widely accepted and known in the biochemistry community that there are a exponential amount of alcoholics in caucasians vs east asians because of the flush reaction. the flush reaction is literally what stops people from over drinking. people with the flush reaction (80% of east asians), usually stop drinking when they start feeling like complete shit. where as it is widely known that people that don't have this flush reaction can drink till they black out. or somehow still walk, while their pissing their pants and drooling and slurring and stumbling and falling over every other step and somehow STILL drink more and STILL have the confidence to get into a car and drive (they just don't feel any negative effects until the next morning hangover).
people with the flush reaction cannot even get close to that before they feel like they've been poisoned... puke and go to the hospital lol.

the problem is people like you act like there's an epidemic. in the face of all evidence that suggests there is no "marijuana driving" problem.

uh, you know we can all literally drink and drive legally all day every day?

as long as you're below the legal limit and aren't all fucked up.

its amazing how soccer mom you are. all the laws in the world don't actually solve stupidity. and it shows how smart you are when you think that.

if we had a no "drinking poison" law would that guarantee no one drank poison in canada?

i'm pretty sure you can't drink a bottle of gin, drive and kill someone. yet this shit happens all the time man. don't they know about the law?!?!!?!?

don't these gangsters know guns are illegal!?

semi related: i had a teacher like you recently who thought marijuana was basically evil. he had the attitude of someone 40 years older. saying shit like "if they legalize it everyone will be high on the roads and getting into accidents"

that shit is plain old ignorant scare tactics engineered by anti marijuana folks and just plain dumb fucks. we as a class had to explain to him the fallacy of his belief.

i've tried to be civil as much as i can but if you're gonna spout off ignorant shit then you're the problem. not me or marijuana.

Are you fucking retarded? Where did I say weed is evil? People can smoke weed whenever they want, wherever they want, and MOST shouldn't be driving while doing it. Jesus Christ you took what I said so far out of context.
For the record, I think weed should be legal, and controlled just like alcohol as a recreational drug, and people shouldn't be driving on it. Find me a formula thats safe for the GENERAL POPULATION to drive on, and then they can make it legal for people to drive after that amount.

This thread is full of LOL.

Let's not forget this thread is about "driving while high on MARIJUANA."

Again, the hardest part of this for me is finding a number that's suitable for ALL.
I honestly don't think this number exists. Weed isn't like alcohol, lots of smoke can smoke 2 grams of sativa and function absolutely fine. They usually say it helps them concentrate, yet if they smoked 2 grams of indica, they'd be laid out on their ass eating Doritos infront of the TV.

Yet you have people that are polar opposites. Sativa lays them out, and indica keeps them running.

The scary thing of all of this to me is: if this breathalyzer is given the go-ahead, and the government backs it 100%. It will set the standard for what the government thinks is a "safe driving" number.

^^^Correct! That's what's so fucked up about it. A breathalyzer? Really? How is that gonna work for those who consume via other means? Like alcohol, blood/alcohol content is what it is. Tolerance means nothings. So that begs the question: what is the legal limit? This will be considering how long THC stays in your system. I think this will be the biggest flaw in their system.

Hot Karl: I wouldn't pounce on Westopher so quickly, he's merely stating that the law will cater to the lowest denominator. There are always people out there that will fuck it up for the rest of us. He's stating just that. I wouldn't let his personal preferences rustle your jimmies.

For the record, I blazed heavily for 20+ years(minus a 4 year complete sobriety break) and have recently cut back to evenings due to parenthood. I like it, it works for me. I support the legalization and taxation of it. I believe in all the mediational benefits and support anyone who partakes. In fact, my closest and oldest friend is baked every waking moment and I don't bat an eye at it at all. I would get in a car with him after he's blazed 100 joints and wouldn't think twice. Not all are created equal though so it's the lightweights/big talkers that fuck it up for the masses.

Currently the legal limit is zero. So it's kind of an irrelevant argument for now. If the device was to be in use right now, it would be a zero tolerance.

The article is just awareness of the creation of the device. I'd imagine it could be calibrated to whatever we (the people) want it to be. In the article they had the device set to show "Recent" use defined at 2 hours. If in the future marihuana gets legalized they could change it to whatever the law dictates.

The article also said the device could detect marihuana from smoking or consuming. So I'm sure there a little more science to it than just eating some Mcdonald's to mask it as someone above suggested.

You guys are jumping all over the technology. Don't worry about that. Change the laws before getting up in arms about the technology.