Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Drug Driving

  • 01-02-2006 11:38am
    #1
    Aodh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭


    Ok Folks I just wanted to gauge peoples opinions of drug driving.

    With all the controversy surrounding the random breath testing, is there an argument to introduce mandatory blood testing for any drivers involved in a collision?

    A blood test is the only way of telling exactly what substances are in a persons system.

    Statistically about 40% of young people in britain have driven under the influence of a controlled substance. 57% of these didn't believe it affected their driving. I'm sure the stats aren't that different for Ireland.

    Over the past year I have noticed that there are many people I know who don't see anything wrong with driving when they're stoned. This makes my blood boil.

    The same people have told me about research which found that it is safer to drive stoned than drunk????? Apparently the paranoia makes you drive more slowly. This is an effin' ridiculous argument.

    Personally I think if legislation is needed to bring in random breath testing why not tack on something to allow blood testing of drivers too.


Comments

  • #2
    alias no.9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,352 ✭✭✭alias no.9


    Why limit this to 'controlled substances'? There are loads of people out there on prescription medecine who shouldn't be driving and do it.

    As an aside, a test was carried out on the old top gear I think, where they got a guy to drive round an obstacle course, smoke a joint and redo the obstacle course. He performed better when stoned. Of course they didn't control the test for 'experience' so it's not exactly valid.

    Anyway, back to my original point, do you think that somebody who has smoked a joint will be less capable of handling a car than somebody who has just downed a prescribed anti-depressant?


  • #3
    Aodh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21 ✭Aodh


    I completely agree alias, I definitely think theres just as much danger from people on certain medication, prescription or otherwise.

    I'm sure the joint smoked in that experiment wasn't particularly strong and would probably have a similar affect to drinking one pint.
    There are people who smoke grass all night and then drive home thinking that they're driving carefully.


  • #4
    Anan1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Apparently it's not possible for blood or alcohol tests to prove that someone was driving while under the influence of marijuana. Unlike alcohol, the drug can be found in the system for up to a month after it's been taken.


Advertisement