New Drug Driving Road Test

Buzz84

I smoke at the weekend just at night. I never drive while under the influence. There seems to be no reliable information as to detection times. Some say 12 hours others say in a month.

Are the tests random like the alcohol testing or do they have to suspect you first of being under the influence of drugs.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Buzz84

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Nope. They need no reasons to ask you to take the test.

So its just random testing.

Indricotherium

From the outset, I will say, I am an advocate of decriminalising cannabis as I think its prohibition causes a deal more harm than it prevents.

However, I don't think it is unreasonable or draconian that people should have to choose to be a vehicle driver or a cannabis user.

I'd be all for an absolute zero tolerance approach to cannabis driving.

For me the best approach would be a roadside sobriety test, where fails are followed up by a blood test with the blood THC level set at whatever the absolute lowest that second hand smoke or contact absorption would explain.

jenny smith

Nope. They need no reasons to ask you to take the test."

What if you refuse? Do they invoke statute. Is there a difference between how long the sample record is kept if they invoke statute as it is/used to be with some samples when arrested. i cannot recall the details, it was in a legal book a friend had

What if you are positive for legit medicine. Can they ask what it is and do you have to tell. a friend of mine takes opiate based painkiller from consultant

byhookorbycrook

Indricotherium wrote: »

From the outset, I will say, I am an advocate of decriminalising cannabis as I think its prohibition causes a deal more harm than it prevents.

However, I don't think it is unreasonable or draconian that people should have to choose to be a vehicle driver or a cannabis user.

I'd be all for an absolute zero tolerance approach to cannabis driving.

For me the best approach would be a roadside sobriety test, where fails are followed up by a blood test with the blood THC level set at whatever the absolute lowest that second hand smoke or contact absorption would explain.

Or meds such as Sativex.

Really Interested

Buzz84 wrote: »

So its just random testing.

No it's all set out in the 2016 act which amends the earlier legislation.

Really Interested

jenny smith wrote: »

Nope. They need no reasons to ask you to take the test."

What if you refuse? Do they invoke statute. Is there a difference between how long the sample record is kept if they invoke statute as it is/used to be with some samples when arrested. i cannot recall the details, it was in a legal book a friend had

What if you are positive for legit medicine. Can they ask what it is and do you have to tell. a friend of mine takes opiate based painkiller from consultant

Only is a authorised checkpoint other than that they need to form an opinion of having taken a drug and the power is contained in the road traffic Act 2016 which amends the 2010 act

jenny smith

@ Really Interested

i do not know whaich part you are replying to and is "Only is a authorised " meant to be "Only in in an authorised"

Are these test always carried out under statute or are people asked to consent outside statutory regime? If you are positive for legit medicine do you have to say what it is?

Really Interested

jenny smith wrote: »

@ Really Interested

i do not know whaich part you are replying to and is "Only is a authorised " meant to be "Only in in an authorised"

Are these test always carried out under statute or are people asked to consent outside statutory regime? If you are positive for legit medicine do you have to say what it is?

An authorised road side check point as has existed for years for Drink a Garda above a certain rank allows a check point for random testing.

Or if a Garda under the road traffic act (for Drink is of the opinion you consumed Drink can do a road side test) if of the opinion you took drugs can perform the road side drug test.

If you have taken mess that may set off the roadside test like say Codine then you may be in trouble.

Kitsunegari

This is another nanny state law with terrible practical implications. The test by no means needs to prove that you're impaired and thus punishes the driver for simply smoking cannabis at some point in the past week depending on your metabolism. The 12 Hour rule is completely made up nonsense.

There is no scientific basis for this test and it's a horrible band-aid legislation to try and bring our drug, detection statistics up. Surely anyone caught under this new act will be able to challenge the conviction. What ever happened to the state having to prove it's case? This new legislation effectively allows the state to convict people on poor quality evidence.

jenny smith

I do not know what mess or codine is. The quote does not work for me the legacy site won't open.
Itwas said that people taking legit drugs would be ok but do they have to answer questions as to what they are to garda