Roadside Drug Testing to be Introduced

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

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378513 19-Dec-2019 13:19

ranjayryan:

@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.

The thing is, there is *already* enforcement of this.

We are (probably) introducing a new thing, and there needs to be enforcement of that as well.

It's not an OR thing. It's an AND thing.

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2378518 19-Dec-2019 13:25

Not sure if I'd support a zero limit / zero tolerance on anything. Its too rigid, it doesn't allow for mistakes, it doesn't allow for the next day effect (has it worn off, how long does it take to wear off...)

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378522 19-Dec-2019 13:31

rb99:

Not sure if I'd support a zero limit / zero tolerance on anything. Its too rigid, it doesn't allow for mistakes, it doesn't allow for the next day effect (has it worn off, how long does it take to wear off...)

Well, it's one of the reasons I encourage abstaining from things like Mary Jane.

To be honest, it's not mandatory to take it, in any form, (except POSSIBLY for medical reasons), so if it's inconvenient to comply with a zero use when driving, then I am not that worried about that.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378627 19-Dec-2019 15:38

networkn:

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.

You'll never get a reasonable way to eliminate false positives if the limit is "zero" with either drugs or alcohol, so you'd have to set a threshold. For what it's worth, eat a poppy seed roll and you'll test positive for presence of opiates.

I think you also need to compare apples with apples, the official figure for alcohol related driving deaths was 70 in 2017, but that eliminated those with alcohol in their system - but below the legal limit, if you include those, then the figure jumps to 154, about double the incidence of fatal crashes where drugs were detected. That's comparable, as "presence" doesn't indicate degree of impairment, and probably looks worse than it is in terms of recreational drug use - as it will include some who were using prescription drugs and driving.

I agree that some measures are needed, but they should be correct and accurate measures - and the initial screening (saliva test) should not create false positives. The way it appears, you could be held on the side of the road because of a false positive, fined, have your license suspended for 12 hours automatically, be forced to submit a blood sample - because you ate some poppy seeds or took a prescribed benzodiazepine the day before, then wait for a chance to prove your innocence in court.

Meanwhile, someone tripping on acid or magic mushrooms (and very likely other recreational drugs) will get waved through.

What's proposed is absolutely unreasonable - unless I've misread it and the intent is to carry out an impairment test first for initial screening, and only then if you fail, a saliva and blood test.

mudguard

2119 posts

Uber Geek

#2378637 19-Dec-2019 16:23

I'm not sure how effective it will be. We all know who are going to be caught. I've driven some 300,000km in the past six years, and do you know how many times I've been pulled over? Once.

If you drive a late model car and drive sensibly you're never going to be pulled over. On the other hand, I guarantee if I drove my early nineties Civic track car on the road I'd be pulled over instantly.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#2378652 19-Dec-2019 16:58

Coincidentally, I just completed course around drug testing in the work place (I work in a safety sensitive workplace). The instructor noted that oral liquid devices (ie saliva test) don't comply with the ASNZ standard for drug testing in the workplace because they are unable to be verified within NZ. He also said they weren't the most reliable and give both false negative and false positive results. In the workplace urine testing is usually used, but I can see why that wont do for roadside testing.

I think drug-impaired driving should be treated the same as alcohol-impaired driving. The challenge IMO is that there may not be good data correlating levels of drug in blood to levels of impairment.

I've looked into this briefly in the past and IIRC there is good at from driving simulators on impairment by alcohol - enough to suggest a level that causes a defined level of impairment . Add a safety factor to that and you have your limit. With cannabis research attempting to do this hasn't been successful, due to the variation in impairment response to THC. In one study IIRC some of the subjects did better on the driving simulator when stoned.

Mike

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2378658 19-Dec-2019 17:04

Are you chaps sure this isn't a 'let's be seen to be doing something' thing ?

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

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.

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#2378670 19-Dec-2019 17:35

I think that it is sad that we now live in a society that needs this. I remember visiting the UK in the 80's and drug use was pretty bad, and was glad I lived in NZ.

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2378687 19-Dec-2019 18:37

Ah well, different viewpoints, different views. I think its sad that the government thinks its ok to force you to give a sample of I dunno, something, for apparently unreliable tests, which may have serious consequences, especially in our zero tolerance (or getting there) society.

Who knows, maybe in a few years we'll have random DNA testing or something.

Though I admit am very uneducated about tests and their accuracy or lack thereof.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2378692 19-Dec-2019 18:44

mattwnz:

I think that it is sad that we now live in a society that needs this. I remember visiting the UK in the 80's and drug use was pretty bad, and was glad I lived in NZ.

I was born in Liverpool (the UK one) and it used to not impress me that my mum used to try to avoid saying she was from there as well, always tried to stick to just mentioning the suburb. I'm perfectly happy to be from Liverpool. OTOH, the way the UK is going, I'm beginning to wonder whether I should admit to being from that whole country, and this place is still pretty terrific.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

raytaylor

4014 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2378779 19-Dec-2019 21:11

mdooher:

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)

Thats a good point - this is one of the steps on the path to legalization.

One may also consider that a large chunk of the police budget is currently fines - and driver-less cars will solve that problem for us, but create an income issue for the police.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2378810 19-Dec-2019 22:41

raytaylor:

One may also consider that a large chunk of the police budget is currently fines - and driver-less cars will solve that problem for us, but create an income issue for the police.

NZTA is taking over speed camera operations from police, so the argument that police use speed cameras for revenue-gathering is about to become obsolete.
(OTOH that doesn't mean NZTA won't have revenue targets - I guess it'll probably get worse for speeding drivers)

There will be more speed cameras, but they will be marked with warning signs.

I expect this will be happening here too:

https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/world-first-road-camera-scheme-nabs-thousands-nsw-motorists-illegally-using-phones

3,300 nabbed in the first 7 days - and they're only checking about 1/4 of the number of cars they intend by the time the scheme is fully implemented.

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2378949 20-Dec-2019 07:29

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?

Mike gave up driving. This law would be in place to ensure others give up driving for the period of drug use. If we disagree with this law, we need to roll back that drink driving is not acceptable. Booze is a drug. I can buy that drug, then walk a few paces and buy baby food. Booze and drugs are the same, one is illegal , but they are the same