Roadside Drug Testing to be Introduced

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Roadside Drug Testing to be Introduced

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378220 19-Dec-2019 09:30

I actually don't think this has anything to do with road safety. It is an attempt to remove one of the reasons people were planning on voting against the legalise cannabis bill.

A stoned population is a compliant population (that's my conspiracy theory and I'm sticking to it)

Matthew

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2378228 19-Dec-2019 09:42

I support this. I gave up driving and sold my car as I did not wish to drive or be tempted to drive with the pain medication I use. This is long overdue in NZ.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378237 19-Dec-2019 09:48

mdooher:

So if you are stoned on drugs it is fine, as long as you have a prescription. Sorry but that is ludicrous.

Not quite.

"The government will work with health practitioners to ensure patients are appropriately warned if they should not be driving on their prescription."

The law would or should include the same penalty for driving with drugs in your system, whether or not you had a prescription. I guess that's not what they're going to do though, and that's also flawed based on what they're suggesting in their list of drugs to be tested for. Zopiclone is one of the most prescribed drugs in NZ, it has much the same in effect as benzodiazepines (including driving impairment), but as it's not a benzodiazepine and not on the list, presumably you're good to go (even if it has a warning not to drive, operate machinery etc).

Then there's another problem with some of these drugs. They interact with small quantities of alcohol, so while being well under the alcohol driving limit and using a prescription drug that carries a "care" warning (if driving/operating machinery) but not a recommended absolute ban on driving, then you'd again be legally in the clear despite being seriously impaired. Clonidine is another very commonly prescribed and "mild" drug that springs to mind that fits this description.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378278 19-Dec-2019 09:59

MikeB4:

I support this. I gave up driving and sold my car as I did not wish to drive or be tempted to drive with the pain medication I use. This is long overdue in NZ.

I'm not sure of your logic here. You did the right thing, so assume that because you did then there should be a somewhat draconian (to police) law put in place to force everybody to do what you did?

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2378283 19-Dec-2019 10:02

Fred99:

MikeB4:

I support this. I gave up driving and sold my car as I did not wish to drive or be tempted to drive with the pain medication I use. This is long overdue in NZ.

I'm not sure of your logic here. You did the right thing, so assume that because you did then there should be a somewhat draconian (to police) law put in place to force everybody to do what you did?

It's not a new law it's just being given more enforcement tools. Draconian? sorry that is an extreme over reaction.

nzkc

1572 posts

Uber Geek

#2378291 19-Dec-2019 10:07

Honestly; I've been surprised its taken this long to get something here. It does seem like the upcoming referendum on Cannabis may have pushed the Police to get this. Just seems logical to me.

gehenna

8510 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378307 19-Dec-2019 10:17

Hope that means they're expecting it to pass (referendum)

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

old3eyes

9120 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2378313 19-Dec-2019 10:28

gehenna:

Hope that means they're expecting it to pass (referendum)

I hope not if the issues that the like of Colorado are having with mental health issues relating to Cannabis being legalized. .

Regards,

Old3eyes

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378315 19-Dec-2019 10:29

MikeB4:

Fred99:

MikeB4:

I support this. I gave up driving and sold my car as I did not wish to drive or be tempted to drive with the pain medication I use. This is long overdue in NZ.

I'm not sure of your logic here. You did the right thing, so assume that because you did then there should be a somewhat draconian (to police) law put in place to force everybody to do what you did?

It's not a new law it's just being given more enforcement tools. Draconian? sorry that is an extreme over reaction.

Random roadside oral fluid drug testing is new, and it is draconian - particularly given the lack of evidence provided as to the actual risk/toll, the lack of specificity (what level of which drug and/or combination of drugs correspond to a known level of risk) and other complications.

You could say that generalisations and assumptions are made already with blood alcohol levels, I'm certain that at the present driving limit there'd be big differences in levels of actual impairment at a standard blood alcohol level from person to person, but there's some level of impairment at levels well below the legal limit, there's also a reasonably accurate correlation between quick breath testing and blood alcohol levels. So we have a workable compromise.

That's not going to be the case with other drugs. There won't be a close correlation between levels detected in a quick saliva test and blood concentration, and there isn't good data on correlation between levels detected and risk. It is a knee-jerk response to a problem and draconian - that's not denying that a problem exists.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378326 19-Dec-2019 10:52

Fred99:

That's not going to be the case with other drugs. There won't be a close correlation between levels detected in a quick saliva test and blood concentration, and there isn't good data on correlation between levels detected and risk. It is a knee-jerk response to a problem and draconian - that's not denying that a problem exists.

That can't be right, this government doesn't do "knee-jerk" or "draconian" ...Oh, wait....

Matthew

FineWine

2983 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Nurse (R)

Lifetime subscriber

#2378330 19-Dec-2019 10:55

I agree that we do need a method of road side drug testing (RDT) but I have my doubts about the tools and methods currently being considered.

All over the world there have been different tools used to test for drugs in a drivers system but the majority of them all have their downsides.

Most, if not all, RDT kits will not pick up THC levels if they where ingested via a capsule or suppository as these do not leave traces in saliva.

Also each individual metabolises drugs differently. Therefore one person might process THC quite fast compared to another that does it quite slowly - e.g. healthy fit 21 yr old versus 71 yr old with lung cancer or 21 yr old who has liver disease versus a healthy fit 71 yr old.

As well you can have detectable levels of THC in your system which you acquired passively. Plus for infrequent users of marijuana, the THC can still be detected several days after your last toke.

Therefore law enforcement bodies are all getting false positives and false negatives.

My point is we need to come up with a reliable testing system to test for impairment as opposed to an arbitrary drug level.

Whilst the difficult we can do immediately, the impossible takes a bit longer. However, miracles you will have to wait for.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1424 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378334 19-Dec-2019 11:00

FineWine:

I agree that we do need a method of road side drug testing (RDT) but I have my doubts about the tools and methods currently being considered.

All over the world there have been different tools used to test for drugs in a drivers system but the majority of them all have their downsides.

Most, if not all, RDT kits will not pick up THC levels if they where ingested via a capsule or suppository as these do not leave traces in saliva.

Also each individual metabolises drugs differently. Therefore one person might process THC quite fast compared to another that does it quite slowly - e.g. healthy fit 21 yr old versus 71 yr old with lung cancer or 21 yr old who has liver disease versus a healthy fit 71 yr old.

As well you can have detectable levels of THC in your system which you acquired passively. Plus for infrequent users of marijuana, the THC can still be detected several days after your last toke.

Therefore law enforcement bodies are all getting false positives and false negatives.

My point is we need to come up with a reliable testing system to test for impairment as opposed to an arbitrary drug level.

how about a quick trip around the nurburgring on Forza,

Matthew

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378337 19-Dec-2019 11:05

old3eyes:

gehenna:

Hope that means they're expecting it to pass (referendum)

I hope not if the issues that the like of Colorado are having with mental health issues relating to Cannabis being legalized. .

Legalization of marijuana in Colorado has been associated with a trend of increasing hospitalizations and ED visits coded with marijuana-related billing codes, and RPC exposure calls related to marijuana. While this is not necessarily surprising due to the increased availability of marijuana in Colorado, the reasons and the public health consequences of these increases merit further investigation. One potential contributing factor to this increase may be increased honesty regarding marijuana use among patients in a legalized environment. Another contributing factor may be changes in healthcare provider behaviors around collecting marijuana-use medical histories, ordering urine toxicology screens, or documenting marijuana-related outcomes.

You are jumping the gun. FWIW, patients presenting at hospital with marijuana related billing codes and mental illness diagnosis are only 5% of overall patients presenting with mental illness, and it's well known that many people with mental illness self-medicate.

Anyway, that's a different subject, regardless of legal status, people use drugs anyway, and drive with drugs in their system.

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378417 19-Dec-2019 12:09

Considering that Road deaths due to drugs v alcohol are pretty comparable in numbers (in fact I think drugs is actually higher now), seems reasonable that the same measures be taken to ensure people are complying with the law in terms of not driving when under the influence of any drug.

Personally, I'd support a zero limit on driving at all if you are under the influence of recreational drugs, or alcohol.

ranjayryan

13 posts

Geek

#2378510 19-Dec-2019 13:16

@tehgerbil:

I agree. I see people ignoring the traffic light everyday, at the right turn from Te Ngae Road to Fenton Street in Rotorua. Drivers need to be more patience.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5