| ▲ | Arainach 2 days ago |
| On the contrary: we should test for the actual issue (impairment) rather than an arbitrary number. |
|
| ▲ | nobodyandproud 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Blood test is a reliable indicator: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/judicial/resources/highwa... |
| |
| ▲ | squigz a day ago | parent [-] | | That link doesn't appear to say that blood tests are reliable Literally in the summary > While blood alcohol content (BAC) level represents an accurate measurement of alcohol impairment, the presence of THC in a driver’s body has not been shown to be a predictable measure of cannabis impairment. But further on > Because THC in the blood can result from both recent as well as past use, impairment cannot be inferred from blood levels. | | |
| ▲ | nobodyandproud a day ago | parent [-] | | That’s not the relevant bit. A blood test detects recent use of THC. Which other, less invasive methods cannot. Like alcohol, impairment is
highly individual and so we set a threshold. | | |
| ▲ | squigz a day ago | parent [-] | | It is not a reliable indicator of recent use though, since it can also indicate past use. I agree we need to set a threshold for impairment. I just want that to be measured reliably so that people who had a brownie last weekend aren't getting in trouble. | | |
| ▲ | nobodyandproud a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Driving isn’t a right. No matter how steeped the US is in car culture, it’s important not to lose sight of this. Now blood tests show a 12-24 hour window of usage. Much tighter than the 2 to 30 days of other tests. In terms of window of time, that’s essentially good-enough. Of course anyone who consumes cannabis has a strong desire for a tighter and more accurate test, but you’re really fighting against growing masses of irresponsible users. If the problem is truly wide-spread like alcohol was (and still is), it’s just a matter of time before states or feds push for a good-enough (for the rest of us) solution. | |
| ▲ | reactordev a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | THC leaves the bloodstream within 24 hours just to be clear. I know this is a giant hairball and the downvotes and passionate discussion is why I said what I said but in the end, until we have a breathalyzer for THC, it is what it is. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | xienze 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| So you’re advocating that a cop makes a subjective judgement about your impairment level? I don’t see how anyone could find an issue with that. |
| |
| ▲ | Arainach a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Then develop more empirical measures of impairment. A device that tests response time, etc. Doctors have been doing that with a hammer to the knee for decades, optometrists do it with a headset that flashes lights where you have to press a clicker, etc. - we have the tools. | |
| ▲ | loeg a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They are doing this every day for drunk drivers already. | | |
| ▲ | leptons a day ago | parent | next [-] | | They also frequently arrest people who have not had any alcohol or drugs at all for being "drunk". It happens far too often. Just one example of many: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFuVdlKD00s | | |
| ▲ | loeg a day ago | parent [-] | | Impairment is somewhat orthogonal to drug or alcohol intoxication. It's not safe to drive if you've been awake for 24+ hours, for example, or have some other medical condition (hypoglycemia, whatever) that impairs your ability to drive safely. | | |
| ▲ | leptons a day ago | parent [-] | | This has nothing to do with "intoxication" or sleep deprivation, or medical conditions. Some police will lie and charge people with "DUI" when there is zero justification, and they ruin lives because too many of them are sadistic assholes. It's in epidemic in Tennessee and other parts of the country, but it really could happen anywhere to anyone. Police unions are a problem, and taxpayers pay for the litigation when someone actually fights back against false charges. | | |
| ▲ | loeg a day ago | parent [-] | | So what? This line of argument can be used to dismiss essentially any crime, because police can always lie about whatever the particular crime is. It's not a principled reason not to have laws or enforce them. | | |
| ▲ | leptons a day ago | parent [-] | | Glad to know you're perfectly fine with lives being ruined for no reason at all. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | xienze a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | And field sobriety tests are routinely challenged in court because they aren’t objective and at best, they’re taken into consideration with other things like BAC. | | |
| ▲ | reactordev a day ago | parent [-] | | my ex-girlfriend challenged this in court last year and lost. She was pulled over coming home and forced to take a field sobriety test. She was angry and was refusing, trying to explain that she just got off work. They arrested her for DUI. Called me to get the vehicle with her crying in the squad car. I bailed her out of jail for $500 two days later. Her BAC was 0. Her attitude when asked to perform the field sobriety test was taken as a refusal and she lost her license, now with a DUI on her record. We all like to think that these methods work, and they do most of the time, and yet there still are cases where a normal person is subjected to them and they deem them "unworthy" to pass. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | reactordev a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Field. Sobriety. Tests. "Say your ABC's backwards starting from Z" |
|
