Fatal crashes involving pot use have TRIPLED!!

[Harry Dresden]

If I was in a fatal car crash on my way home from work today, I too would test positive for marijuana, but I haven't smoked any today. Weed stays in your system for a month. Testing positive for marijuana doesn't mean you were high at the time.

Which makes you an impaired driver for a month. You're like the drunk drivers who insist their boozing did not affect their driving.

Why are you trying so hard to convince us you're retarded? Have you ever even smoked pot? Your post is one of the most ignorant comments I've ever heard about marijuana. It ranks up there with "refer madness".

ShootSpeados is the same idiot who put up a thread saying Obama is the one who controls the postage rates.....im still waiting for him to back that up.....he ran from that thread....

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Final Report - Volume I

The study findings show that cannabis alone does not increase the likelihood of responsibility in an accident.

What a steamy pile of BS. It says: "Cannabis alone, particularly in low doses, has little effect on the skills involved in automobile driving." Now there's a dishonest statement. No one in the study has been around someone stoned? and lumping it in with low doses? what does that mean exactly? I see potheads in the grocery store wandering across your path like zombies. They sober up when the get behind the wheel?

Well, i ripped several bong hits of some med grade indica about an hour before I took my driver's test. I had a license following that exam. I did the same thing for my SATs, my college finals and I've even gone to interviews after i nice session of that sweet cheeba.

Snowflakes, fella. We're all snowflakes.

I know a guy who has 3 beers to start his day. He then gets in the truck and drives to work. Are you familair with the term tolerance when talking about substances?

 

[OriginalShroom]

For the Dope Smokers here...

I have never smoked MJ. Not even once.

What proof do you have that you are not affected by the dope you smoked for days afterwards?

I am serious here.

I am looking for objective not subjective.

Well, poindexter, the buzz wore off hours after i smoked. That's how i know.

Serious question for you, what proof do you have that the color blue looks the same to me as it does to you?

The buzz from my favorite Whiskey wears off rather quickly also, but I am still illegal to drive.

That is subjective, not objective. Please learn the difference.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I

– According to a recent study, fatal car crashes involving pot use have tripled in the U.S.
“Currently, one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana,” Dr. Guohua Li, director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention at Columbia, and co-author of the study told HealthDay News.

Guohua Li, MD, DrPH

Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health

So who paid him for the study? Who funded the research?

Are there individuals who use MH , out there driving who are not involved in MVA's?

.

You and I pay for these studies via government grants awarded to the Ph.Ds who put forth these "junk science" studies. This has been going on ever since Reagan escalated the War on Drugs. Google up NORML's website for a full list and documented debunking of these phony "studies."

wont work ....the Anti-pot people will say NORML is biased.....even though many of the studies they show are from major Universities and the like who are proven neutral centers when it comes to pot....

 

[Vox]

People are ignoring this post for some reason. Do any of you have an argument to refute what I said, or can I claim victory now?

and the reason you are simply ignorant.

there are plenty of ways to test and prove the THC is in the system from the RECENT use. Especially for the admitted patient.
you were given a pass on your ignorance the first time, but you insisted to expose your stupidity - AGAIN.

No, no it can not. The only viable testing shows concentration. Which is hotly debated right now regarding legal limit laws, etc. There is no way to test for time elapse, passive exposure or other variables.

Unless you want to provide a link. Which I know for you is like kryptonite.

yes it can, dopehead.

the amount of THC per square millimeter of your system is showing.

stop so you still can function.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

For the Dope Smokers here...

I have never smoked MJ. Not even once.

What proof do you have that you are not affected by the dope you smoked for days afterwards?

I am serious here.

I am looking for objective not subjective.

Well, poindexter, the buzz wore off hours after i smoked. That's how i know.

Serious question for you, what proof do you have that the color blue looks the same to me as it does to you?

The buzz from my favorite Whiskey wears off rather quickly also, but I am still illegal to drive.

That is subjective, not objective. Please learn the difference.

if you'd have read before posting this, you would know that there is no concentration limiting set for THC and furthermore, there is no magic bullet to testing it either. So it's a silly point from an objective legal standpoint.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

and the reason you are simply ignorant.

there are plenty of ways to test and prove the THC is in the system from the RECENT use. Especially for the admitted patient.
you were given a pass on your ignorance the first time, but you insisted to expose your stupidity - AGAIN.

No, no it can not. The only viable testing shows concentration. Which is hotly debated right now regarding legal limit laws, etc. There is no way to test for time elapse, passive exposure or other variables.

Unless you want to provide a link. Which I know for you is like kryptonite.

yes it can, dopehead.

the amount of THC per square millimeter of your system is showing.

stop so you still can function.

Link?

(this is your kryptonite)

 

[Vox]

No, no it can not. The only viable testing shows concentration. Which is hotly debated right now regarding legal limit laws, etc. There is no way to test for time elapse, passive exposure or other variables.

Unless you want to provide a link. Which I know for you is like kryptonite.

yes it can, dopehead.

the amount of THC per square millimeter of your system is showing.

stop so you still can function.

Link?

(this is your kryptonite)

I don't link for the dopeheads - you are a lost cause.

go smoke a joint - there is no use for your head anyway, it's an ass for a long time already

 

[TakeAStepBack]

yes it can, dopehead.

the amount of THC per square millimeter of your system is showing.

stop so you still can function.

Link?

(this is your kryptonite)

I don't link for the dopeheads - you are a lost cause.

go smoke a joint - there is no use for your head anyway, it's an ass for a long time already

That's what i thought. Enjoy the incoming neg.

 

[Harry Dresden]

For the Dope Smokers here...

I have never smoked MJ. Not even once.

What proof do you have that you are not affected by the dope you smoked for days afterwards?

I am serious here.

I am looking for objective not subjective.

you would have to have smoked to get this.....when you get high at 10 in the morning and thats it.....by 5 in the afternoon you should be fine....of course each person is different....

 

[OriginalShroom]

Well, poindexter, the buzz wore off hours after i smoked. That's how i know.

Serious question for you, what proof do you have that the color blue looks the same to me as it does to you?

The buzz from my favorite Whiskey wears off rather quickly also, but I am still illegal to drive.

That is subjective, not objective. Please learn the difference.

if you'd have read before posting this, you would know that there is no concentration limiting set for THC and furthermore, there is no magic bullet to testing it either. So it's a silly point from an objective legal standpoint.

My point is nearly that. Since there is no Objective standard for determining if a person is under the influence of drug and how badly they can be impaired by that drug, why would anyone want to legalize it for recreational use and allow people to operate equipment, including vehicles of any kind, and endanger others?

You can't claim that it doesn't impair a person's judgment or impair their abilities to perform manual and mental tasks. It does.

You can't claim that no one has ever been injured by a person whose mental and physical abilities have been impaired while under the influence of the drug. It has happened.


So if you want to legalize the substance for recreational use, how do you suggest the use be policed for the safety of others?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The buzz from my favorite Whiskey wears off rather quickly also, but I am still illegal to drive.

That is subjective, not objective. Please learn the difference.

if you'd have read before posting this, you would know that there is no concentration limiting set for THC and furthermore, there is no magic bullet to testing it either. So it's a silly point from an objective legal standpoint.

My point is nearly that. Since there is no Objective standard for determining if a person is under the influence of drug and how badly they can be impaired by that drug, why would anyone want to legalize it for recreational use and allow people to operate equipment, including vehicles of any kind, and endanger others?

You can't claim that it doesn't impair a person's judgment or impair their abilities to perform manual and mental tasks. It does.

You can't claim that no one has ever been injured by a person whose mental and physical abilities have been impaired while under the influence of the drug. It has happened.


So if you want to legalize the substance for recreational use, how do you suggest the use be policed for the safety of others?

Some people get impaired judgment from a cheeseburger. How do we police that?

I suggest the use be policed in the same fashion as alcohol. Being that it is the state that wants to regulate the use "for the public sfaety" they ought to start coming up with a proper test to administer to those who are believed to be impaired while operating a motor vehicle. Otherwise its the same nonissue as DWI. Only AFTER the fact, for legal proceedings, does it make a difference. It does little for public safety in the time prior to an incident.

 

[Contumacious]

I

– According to a recent study, fatal car crashes involving pot use have tripled in the U.S.
“Currently, one of nine drivers involved in fatal crashes would test positive for marijuana,” Dr. Guohua Li, director of the Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention at Columbia, and co-author of the study told HealthDay News.

Guohua Li, MD, DrPH

Center for Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health

So who paid him for the study? Who funded the research?

Are there individuals who use MH , out there driving who are not involved in MVA's?

.

You and I pay for these studies via government grants awarded to the Ph.Ds who put forth these "junk science" studies. This has been going on ever since Reagan escalated the War on Drugs. Google up NORML's website for a full list and documented debunking of these phony "studies."

Oh, I know that very well.

But I wanted the poster to recheck his premises.

.

 

[Iceweasel]

Some people get impaired judgment from a cheeseburger. How do we police that?

Comparing pot to cheeseburgers? I think that type of rationale is what worries people, the fact that it somehow makes sense to a user.

 

[Godboy]

You guys are missing one important quote here... "1 in 9 drivers involved in a fatal crash will test positive for marijuana".

If I was in a fatal car crash on my way home from work today, I too would test positive for marijuana, but I haven't smoked any today. Weed stays in your system for a month. Testing positive for marijuana doesn't mean you were high at the time.

That is a bogus article and it shouldn't be taken seriously. The writer is clearly incompetent.

People are ignoring this post for some reason. Do any of you have an argument to refute what I said, or can I claim victory now?

and the reason you are simply ignorant.

there are plenty of ways to test and prove the THC is in the system from the RECENT use. Especially for the admitted patient.
you were given a pass on your ignorance the first time, but you insisted to expose your stupidity - AGAIN.

Prove it ass wipe, until then, shut yer face.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Some people get impaired judgment from a cheeseburger. How do we police that?

Comparing pot to cheeseburgers? I think that type of rationale is what worries people, the fact that it somehow makes sense to a user.

No it doesn't make sense. You discovered what i was driving at there. Congrats.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We used to roll joints while driving, using a knee to steer the car.
Ahhh da good ol' days.

Who doesnt remember the Frisbee under the seat?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

People are ignoring this post for some reason. Do any of you have an argument to refute what I said, or can I claim victory now?

and the reason you are simply ignorant.

there are plenty of ways to test and prove the THC is in the system from the RECENT use. Especially for the admitted patient.
you were given a pass on your ignorance the first time, but you insisted to expose your stupidity - AGAIN.

No, no it can not. The only viable testing shows concentration. Which is hotly debated right now regarding legal limit laws, etc. There is no way to test for time elapse, passive exposure or other variables.

Unless you want to provide a link. Which I know for you is like kryptonite.

Same with alcohol. There are plenty studies out there indicating alcohol effects people differently.
If someone is a daily drinker a .08 isn't drunk. Hell,I've watched my brother drink a twelve pack and you'd never know it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

For the Dope Smokers here...

I have never smoked MJ. Not even once.

What proof do you have that you are not affected by the dope you smoked for days afterwards?

I am serious here.

I am looking for objective not subjective.

Do you drink? If so you know you're not drunk two days after drinking. Same,Same.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

For the Dope Smokers here...

I have never smoked MJ. Not even once.

What proof do you have that you are not affected by the dope you smoked for days afterwards?

I am serious here.

I am looking for objective not subjective.

you would have to have smoked to get this.....when you get high at 10 in the morning and thats it.....by 5 in the afternoon you should be fine....of course each person is different....

DAMN!! What the hell are you smoking and where can I get some!
If I smoke a doobie at ten in the morning I'm fine by noon at the latest.