Comments on: Roadside Drug Tests for Queensland Drivers

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:22:06 +0000

About 6 months from the introduction of roadside drug tests and there’s still no real information on it being released by the government. Total bullshit.

Anyone heard anything about how accurate QLD’s drug tests are and how long after ingestion drugs can be detected?

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 01 May 2008 08:26:30 +0000

Hi all,

Its not a number of months since these laws have taken effect, has anyone been personal effected or tested lately? I have not noticed the testing being done at all since December.

Thanks

By: Michigan

Michigan — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:19:06 +0000

Its all a load. Beattie/Bligh looking like they are doing something. If they really wanted to curb the road toll they’d limit car speedometers to 100 and raise the driving age to 21. Do some research guys! Don’t just throw half arsed laws around without testing, testing and more testing. Oh, and then informing the public of the results so that we can make safe, educated decisions about when it is ok to drive.

I don’t drink, smoke ciggarettes or take any other drugs. I just want to know its ok to have my 1 joint in the evenings. Is it?

By: Tom

Tom — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 04:12:29 +0000

Polar, I am in the same boat as you, I have smoked for 20 od years, and if you look at my driving history I have never ever in all those years had an accident that was my fault. This whole fiasco is just another revenue raising stunt. Most accidents that happen these days would accure from drivers consentrating too much on what speed they are doing, and then you get the idiots that dont need drugs or alcohol, they still manage to cause accidents out of pure stuppidity. As for the Brisbane roads, ha what a joke, even with all the proposal road plans they have, it still wont be any better. They have to start teaching drivers on the simple things on like how to merge with traffic without stopping, and a bit of defensive driving would go a long way. Pretty soon we’ll be down to a 20km speed limits, to make it safe on the roads. The bottom line is that mistakes is a natural human function, so why bother trying to save some idiots that have no idea on how to handle a vehecle, In my oppion 1 less idiot on the road is a good thing, but the gov doe’snt really care about peoples safety anyway, as I stated before its all about human greed, money, the rest of it is all pretentiouse.

By: Polar

Polar — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:08:30 +0000

Hi to all. Speaking from personal experience ( I have smoked marijuana daily for the past 27yrs) I, for one, do not find that driving stoned impairs my driving. If anything it stops me speeding, keeps me calm in traffic @ makes driving less stressful. Yes, of course some people will be affected differently from what I experience but according to my Doctor whom I see every month, certainly sees the benefits of marijuana & is quite happy with the fact that I no longer use any prescription drugs to alleviate pain, depression & anxiety. So I have to face the fact that I will no longer be able to drive myself once they implement this new no tolerance law & will have to rely on my straight mates, taxis, trains & buses. I personally do not know of anyone whom I know that has been swabbed. Has anyone out there been swabbed? or know for sure someone who has & has tested positive? I would be interested in finding out what happens to you once you do test positive. Yes I have read what is supposed to happen but what really does go on? It is such a grey area as there is no .05 limit. I agree with the idea of having a sobriety test, like they do in the U.S. with drink drivers. To all the smokers out there…stay safe, stay alert & stay out of trouble.

By: ralph

ralph — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:32:20 +0000

Years ago I heard on the news about a University in Melbourne(?) 5 year study that showed you were no more likely to be involved in a fatal accident under the influence of marijuana than if you had consumed none. The results showed, only when alcohol was added or in the system did the odds go up.

By: Al

Al — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:03:43 +0000

For me the issue is the lack of information about how to avoid driving under the influence.

I would love to wait till all effects (and saliva traces) of pot use have cleared before driving but no information has been made available to allow me to do so.

To compare to alcohol there have been many campaigns to tell people that 2 in the 1st hour then 1 every hour after that is about right (for men, i think thats right). I guess pot is a lot more variable in terms of potency and species etc than alcohol but surely some amount of research should have been done which could give us a worst case scenario so we can then drive safely.

with respect to penalties they also differentiate between whether you are actually under the influence or whether you just have traces in your system. you can get a work license if your not actually under the influence which would be extremely handy to most people who get booked for this but it seems totally subjective as to whether your actually under the influence or not. the whole thing seems really half arsed.

does anyone know anyone that works at a uni that would be up for researching effects and traces after use? i’m sure youd have no trouble finding volunteers.

By: Dean

Dean — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 16:23:01 +0000

Why just test the police test all the people who put the law in place and their family.. Its amazing how rebelling politicians Kids are out there.. I bet the law will quickly disapear :)… Police are getting to much power things needs to be fixed.. Australia has more laws in place than any other country.. how was the bloke done for drink driving for fixing his sisters car he did not even have the keys on him.. So now I guess you can get done if you have keys in your pocket and your drunk cos you have the intent to drive (while waiting at a taxi rank)… I am moving to Iran so I can have freedom

By: Jessica

Jessica — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 11:57:02 +0000

The qld government should consider randomly roadside drug testing police. It would be interesting to see how many of our officers in blue have traces of drugs in their system that are detectable by this method of testing. Wouldn’t it be nice if the same rules applied to us all?

By: Miles

Miles — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:49:47 +0000

Drugs such as marijuana affect different people differently. Regular users can ‘learn’ the skill of driving stoned until it becomes ‘normal’ Speaking from presonal experience I was often ’super-alert’ when driving stoned. As such a blanket law is flawed from the first instance. The epidemilogy of a marajuana-accident rate will never be proven as drivers get behind the wheel under varying circumstances and under the ‘influence’ of a variety of emotions and substances.

Of more concern is the amount of people that drive distracted, angry or who genrrally do not have any sense of their surroundings. e.g. not expecting the ‘unexpected’. I would suggest that far more incidents occur from inattention, speed and alcohol than from driving while stoned.

Maybe an intellegence (including a spatial awareness) test should go with the standard driving test?