Peace,

Not that this little PC harpy Louise Knocks gives a dang about actual results. She's too busy on her self-righteous crusade to pay much attention to little details like whether taking cannabis actually is a problem for drivers or not. (Clue: Cannabis is not a driving problem, because cannabis users are statistically SAFER drivers than non-cannabis smokers. Alcohol-impaired or even so-called "sober" drivers do WORSE and cause MORE accidents than marijuana users.) Of course, self-annointed punishers like little Louise there can't be bothered with facts. They just know better; their noble intentions make up for their politically-correct lies.

Cannabis/Driving Studies

Australia: No Proof Cannabis Put Drivers At Risk (2001) http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1849/a09.html

UK: Cannabis May Make You A Safer Driver (2000) http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n1161/a02.html

University Of Toronto Study Shows Marijuana Not A Factor In Driving Accidents (1999) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases\1999\03\990325110700.htm

Australia: Cannabis Crash Risk Less: Study (1998) http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n945/a08.html

Australia: Study Goes to Pot (1998) http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n947/a06.html

Janice Tibbetts, CanWest News Service

Wednesday, October 22, 2003

OTTAWA - The federal government wants to give police the power to conduct roadside checks for drug use by doing a battery of tests on the spot and further probing at the police station that could include taking blood samples.

The multi-level scheme to nab drug-impaired drivers, which has been in the works for months, is contained in a public discussion paper obtained by CanWest News Service that is scheduled for release today.

Federal officials acknowledge there is an increased urgency for a drug test -- dubbed a "potalyser" by some -- in light of proposed legislation that would decriminalize pot possession, even when found in vehicles.

People caught with less than 15 grams of drugs in their vehicles would no longer be criminally charged, but they would be subject to a $400 fine.

It will remain illegal to drive while under the influence of drugs, but there has been no reliable test like the breathalyser for alcohol.

Unlike drunk driving, in which there is a measurable link between blood alcohol levels and driving ability, research is lacking to equate drug quantity and impairment.

"Drugs, unlike alcohol, are often extremely difficult to link to a particular concentration level that will cause impairment in the general population of drivers," says the paper, written by a federal-provincial-territorial group on impaired driving. "Moreover, analysis for some drugs in certain bodily fluids may simply indicate drug use many days, or even months, in the past."

Unlike drunk driving, there is no legal limit for drug use while driving.

The federal government wants to train police officers across Canada to become experts in recognizing physiological symptoms of impairment and then allow them to conduct physical tests at the roadside.

If a suspect fails -- and it is determined he or she is not alcohol impaired -- police could proceed to the next stage of saliva and urine testing. The procedure could then move to the police station, where police could demand blood samples.

The Justice Department, in the discussion paper, concedes mandatory testing could raise Charter of Rights concerns, partly because screening would take much longer than tests for drunk driving. "These legislative proposals are charter sensitive," says the policy paper.

"These proposals would require the suspect to participate in a process that may result in incriminating evidence. Consideration would have to be given as to the point in time at which a suspect may be given information on the right to counsel."

The federal government's testing scheme would include penalties for people who refuse to co-operate.

Currently, police rely on a driver's behaviour and witness testimony to determine drug use. There are officers in British Columbia who are trained to administer roadside tests, but there is no law that forces drivers to comply.

Copyright: 2003 Edmonton Journal

Snipped:

- Between 5% and 12% of drivers may drive under the influence of cannabis; this percentage increases to over 20% for young men under 25 years of age;

- Cannabis alone, particularly in low doses, has little effect on the skills involved in automobile driving. Cannabis leads to a more cautious style of driving. However it has a negative impact on decision time and trajectory. This in itself does not mean that drivers under the influence of cannabis represent a traffic safety risk;

- A significant percentage of impaired drivers test positive for cannabis and alcohol together. The effects of cannabis when combined with alcohol are more significant than is the case for alcohol alone;

- Despite recent progress, there does not yet exist a reliable and non intrusive rapid roadside testing method;

- Blood remains the best medium for detecting the presence of cannabinoids;

- Urine cannot screen for recent use;

- Saliva is promising, but rapid commercial tests are not yet reliable enough;

- The visual recognition method used by police officers has yielded satisfactory results; and

- It is essential to conduct studies in order to develop a rapid testing tool and learn more about the driving habits of cannabis users.