Stoned drivers

[PG2]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

You should probably read Russel's post where findings have shown a reduction in the likelihood of contributing to an accident as a result of smoking pot.
You'll probably find that alcohol increases your likelihood of an accident by over 7.4x whereas Marijuana use only increases it by 0.7x times and alcohol is legal to buy and consume.

Neither is acceptable, one is legal.

I have read Russ's post.

Where does it say that?

EDIT: Oops, found it. However don't just cherry pick the part of the post that suits your argument - post the whole post...

I have reposted it and highlighted your bit...

There isn't anywhere near as much definitive research yet on the effect of cannabis use as it relates to driving, however a recent study in the USA (where 23 States either condone or have decriminalised cannabis use) concluded:

Experts agree, however, that the combination of cannabis and alcohol raises the chance of crashing more than either substance by itself. In a study of 1,882 motor vehicle deaths, the U.S. Department of Transportation found an increased accident risk of 0.7 for cannabis use, 7.4 for alcohol use, and 8.4 for cannabis and alcohol use combined.

What that study also identified was that:

..the simultaneous use of alcohol and cannabis produces significantly higher blood concentrations of cannabis's main psychoactive constituent, THC, as well as THC's primary active metabolite, 11-hydroxy-THC than cannabis use alone.

A number of US States have set limits for THC detected at 5 ug/Land a recent Iowa University study found that:

Drivers with blood concentrations of 13.1 ug/L THC, showed impairment that was similar to those with a .08 breath alcohol concentration....

.. while another study concluded:

Attentiveness, vigilance, perception of time and speed, and use of acquired knowledge are all affected by marijuana; in fact, a meta-analysis of 60 studies concluded that marijuana causes impairment in every performance area that can reasonably be connected with safe driving of a vehicle, such as tracking, motor coordination, visual functions, and particularly complex tasks that require divided attention, although studies on marijuana’s effects on reaction time have been contradictory.

Perhaps the most definitive current view comes from the research conducted by one of the States that set an actual limit for the concentration of THC, which concluded:

In summary, laboratory tests and driving studies show that cannabis may acutely impair several driving-related skills in a dose-related fashion, but that the effects between individuals vary more than they do with alcohol because of tolerance, differences in smoking technique, and different absorptions of THC. Driving and simulator studies show that detrimental effects vary in a dose-related fashion, and are more pronounced with highly automatic driving functions, but more complex tasks that require conscious control are less affected, which is the opposite pattern from that seen with alcohol. Because of both this and an increased awareness that they are impaired, marijuana smokers tend to compensate effectively for their impairment by utilizing a variety of behavioral strategies such as driving more slowly, passing less, and leaving more space between themselves and cars in front of them. Combining marijuana with alcohol eliminates the ability to use such strategies effectively, however, and results in impairment even at doses that would be insignificant were they of either drug alone. Case-control studies are inconsistent, but suggest that while low concentrations of THC do not increase the rate of accidents, and may even decrease them, serum concentrations of THC higher than 5 ng/mL are associated with an increased risk of accidents. Similar disagreement has never existed in the literature on alcohol use and crash risk.

[fordsaretheonlycar]

It amazes me in Sth Aust that there is a set of cameras along the Freeway that will use recognition technology to detect if a car is unregistered by the number plate, also speed detection, but cars constantly tailgate each other in long columns at 100 km/hr under it and there is not the slightest concern. Tailgating is a huge issue. I will be getting front and rear facing camcorders in my car soon, I feel it is a necessity these days the way the roads are built up and the way the Govt slams you will expensive fines through the postal system, and you have no witness without video evidence. The Australian Attitude needs to change, very aggressive drivers as well. Precious little darlings everywhere who think you are holding them up doing the speed limit in front of them. There are more issues than just drug driving to combat. I am amazed that I passed my drivers test in 1988 and have NEVER been required to do a follow up/ refresher. I am amazed the lack of scientific knowledge required, especially Physics, that let's you pass a drivers test in complete ignorance of the facts. I am amazed that you can have a full license in Australia without ever needing to pass an Advanced Driving Course. I am amazed that you can pass a drivers test with absolutely zero knowledge of how a semi trailer acts and what they require. I am Australian born and bred for what that's worth.

[.:4:.]

Work is putting all the people in work cars into a defensive driving course in a a couple of weeks because the young bloke has had 5 accidents in 15 months, 4 in one van 1 in my ex van. I have had 1 not at fault in 7 and a half years. The email stated the test is in a Mitsubishi express. I refuse that. I stated my claim about safety and got moved up into a ranger so that's what I'll do the test in, or I'll pack up and go home. I risked 6 and a bit years of my life in an express. Compression lock In second is the only way to slow one down. Insurance wise I am the cheapest person on the books. Tangent done

[2011G6E]

People who want to drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs...or who at least think they should be allowed to do so because it's so unfair that "the man" cramps their lifestyle and restricts thier fun...always come up with excuses.
"It's not that bad"..."You're probably OK"..."You might not be that bad"...

**** off. Don't do it. You're lucky I'm not in charge of things, because I think if you get caught you deserve to have your licence cancelled forever and not be allowed out among the humans on the road.

Similar to a video on a Facebook page of a dash cam of a woman slowing for a red light with a light truck behind her. The light is yellow when she's some distance from it, so she slows down as you should and as she comes to a stop, it goes red a second or two before she actually halts. The truck...which had been slowing anyway...decides this is inconveniencing his busy busy day, suddenly gasses it and goes around her, right through the red light. He lost his job. Good.
Most people were outraged by the idiot truck drivers actions, but there were a disturbing amount of idiots who were defending his actions. "Damn dashcam owners", and "It's not that big a deal", and "The woman should have floored it and she would have just caught the yellow" (ignoring it's illegal to go through a yellow if you can stop).
The worst was people who apparently put thought into running a red...comments like "You have several seconds after your light goes red until the opposite light goes green, so there should be no issue as long as you're through within a few seconds"....
There are drivers out there who think the most basic of road rules...stopping for a red light...is just silly, and actually put serious thought into their tactics for running red lights! Holy crap!


Just don't drink and drive. If you simply can't live without the choof, then take a bloody bus you idiots, and don't make excuses and come up with reasons why it "isn't that big a deal". We don't want you on the road with the rest of us.

[Streets]

Originally Posted by fordsaretheonlycar

Tailgating is a huge issue.

The Australian Attitude needs to change, very aggressive drivers as well. Precious little darlings everywhere who think you are holding them up doing the speed limit in front of them.

Agreed. It has gotten much worse lately. I do the speed limit everywhere and every time I go out driving there is some idiot sitting up my ***. It used to just be tough guys in big 4wds but now it's every idiot in every car. Even much smaller cars that would lose in a fight with a Falcon.

Even on the highway when I am on cruise control at 100kph (GPS tested), they prefer to sit up my *** rather than use the overtaking lane. I don't get it. People can't keep their space. If they're not up your backside, they're cutting right in front of you.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by PG2

I have read Russ's post.

Where does it say that?

EDIT: Oops, found it. However don't just cherry pick the part of the post that suits your argument - post the whole post...

I have reposted it and highlighted your bit...

Why would I repost the whole thing, its already there for those who care to read it, clearly you didn't read the whole thing to start with or you wouldn't have needed to edit your post, lol.

The question is, why didn't you highlight the sentences in the last paragraph which suggests people who are under the influence of pot alone actually adjust their driving habits to suit and in fact become more cautious drivers.
Or doesn't that suit your argument, lol.
Its the alcohol that is the biggest problem and is legal to buy, consume and drive under the influence of, go figure.

And for the record, none of it 'suits my argument' as I don't have an 'argument' to suit, I was simply pointing out the misconceptions that pot provides some euphoric high where all sense of reality goes out the window because its just not true and I supported it with scientific findings as provided by the bloke who runs this show.
But I do note that none of you heroes took up the challenge when Russ provided it...

[PG2]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Why would I repost the whole thing, its already there for those who care to read it, clearly you didn't read the whole thing to start with or you wouldn't have needed to edit your post, lol.

The question is, why didn't you highlight the sentences in the last paragraph which suggests people who are under the influence of pot alone actually adjust their driving habits to suit and in fact become more cautious drivers.
Or doesn't that suit your argument, lol.
Its the alcohol that is the biggest problem and is legal to buy, consume and drive under the influence of, go figure.

And for the record, none of it 'suits my argument' as I don't have an 'argument' to suit, I was simply pointing out the misconceptions that pot provides some euphoric high where all sense of reality goes out the window because its just not true and I supported it with scientific findings as provided by the bloke who runs this show.
But I do note that none of you heroes took up the challenge when Russ provided it...

Heroes?

Probably you should have re-read my post. Once again, I did initially forget about that bit (and other bits for that matter). At least I did admit to the mistake and not delete the whole post to cover it up (I'm not saying you did that either).

Originally Posted by PG2

I have read Russ's post.

Where does it say that?

EDIT: Oops, found it. However don't just cherry pick the part of the post that suits your argument - post the whole post...

I have reposted it and highlighted your bit...

I posted the whole thing of Russ's and did not cherry pick anything to prove anything either way and only highlighted that bit to show the bit you quoted.

Sure, there are many, many studies out there that are inconclusive, however, I have not come across one creditable study that shows conclusively that marijuana does not affect your driving.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by PG2

Sure, there are many, many studies out there that are inconclusive, however, I have not come across one creditable study that shows conclusively that marijuana does not affect your driving.

Have you ever smoked pot and driven?

Be honest, I will.

[PG2]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Have you ever smoked pot and driven?

Be honest, I will.

No.

But I have the seen the results of many who have.

[marty351]

I have, and it was like space invaders.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by PG2

No.

But I have the seen the results of many who have.

Explain.

[asagaai]

From my perspective and experience of investigating thousands of car accidents in NSW, alcohol is by far the biggest causative factor in motor accidents. Far more than dope, usually if dope was involved was combined with alcohol.

Particularly awful some of the cases of parents intoxicated on alcohol and other illicit drugs who had crashes and maimed and mauled their children for life. I remember one case of a young girl whose mother drunk and high rolled her car and her daughters leg ended up being partially severed and degloved by the rolling roof. Surgeons over 17 surgical procedures tried to save leg-would have been better off to amputate.

Another involved a boy whose "mom" high on heroin and alcohol and a head on and the young boy had head injuries and his right ear ripped off-made fun of at school- Mr Spock- we arranged for plastic surgery and a reconstructed ear...

Thing is, in mines and heavy industry- there is drug testing for alcohol and dope because both are considered to impair cognitive capacity and it is unacceptable in OHS setting to allow person with cognitive impairment to attend work and possibly operate machinery.

And in our society, people can drive a 1855 kg odd vehicle at 110 kph, and at 50 kph with pedestrians around- that in my mind is operating machinery with potential for danger and I think we should not allow cognitive impairment of the operator by alcohol, dope or other illicit drugs.

I know if I drive with 2 beers odd, or 1 red wine, that edge is off my driving, and actually I do not enjoy driving because I enjoy driving when my mind is crystal clear and everything feels sharp.

Perhaps there should be a 0 alcohol tolerance for everyone, just like for P platers- then you just would never even consider drinking the legal limit and under and drive- you would accept no alcohol and driving and make other arrangements.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by asagaai

From my perspective and experience of investigating thousands of car accidents in NSW, alcohol is by far the biggest causative factor in motor accidents. Far more than dope, usually if dope was involved was combined with alcohol.

I know if I drive with 2 beers odd, or 1 red wine, that edge is off my driving, and actually I do not enjoy driving because I enjoy driving when my mind is crystal clear and everything feels sharp.

Perhaps there should be a 0 alcohol tolerance for everyone, just like for P platers- then you just would never even drive and drink- you would accept and make other arrangements.

Which underlines the results shown in Russ's post.

What I find ironic is that alcohol is not only legal to buy, consume and drive whilst under the influence of, but that there are provisions supplied that allow me to roll into a drive thru bottle shop and make that purchase to consume whilst driving.

[asagaai]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Which underlines the results shown in Russ's post.

What I find ironic is that alcohol is not only legal to buy, consume and drive whilst under the influence of, but that there are provisions supplied that allow me to roll into a drive thru bottle shop and make that purchase to consume whilst driving.

But what I am trying to say is that ANY drug that causes cognitive impairment is not a good thing when the person impaired is in "control" of a dangerous weapon.

Fact that alcohol is worse than dope and there is an inconsistency in terms of alcohol/dope, does not mean society should open the taps and allow a 1 joint policy etc for drivers, rather than considering whether to rather tighten the drink driving laws.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Which underlines the results shown in Russ's post.

What I find ironic is that alcohol is not only legal to buy, consume and drive whilst under the influence of, but that there are provisions supplied that allow me to roll into a drive thru bottle shop and make that purchase to consume whilst driving.

It's illegal to have open alcohol in a vehicles, even if it's the passenger that is drinking. The driver can blow 0 and it's still illegal. So how are their provisions in place to allow you to drink while driving?
Drive through bottle shops are just a convenience thing for people who don't want to stop at a shopping complex on their way home from work. There is nothing about drive through bottle shops that encourage you to drink and drive.
If you think drive through bottle shops are encouraging you to drink and drive than maybe it's you with the issue. I have been to drive through bottle shops countless times and have never drank and drive.

[BENT_8]

Ok for the record I'm going to be completely honest with you all even though I will be flamed for doing so.
I smoked pot for 25 years and drove daily whilst under the influence for 23 of them.
I have held a rating 1 for 20 of them and have only ever had 1 at fault accident in that time.
I was distracted whilst trying to demist my windscreen one wet winters night as I left Wagga heading for Narrandera and drove clean over the roundabout on the way out of Wagga. No other vehicle was involved and I continued the drive home to Adelaide.
I had not consumed anything for 2 weeks prior to it as I was on holiday and had no access to it interstate.

People who have never smoked pot in their lives regard me as the safest driver they know and often handed me the keys to do the driving if going somewhere knowing quite well that I had smoked prior.
Does that make it right, HELL NO!
Am I proud of it, HELL NO!
What I am is honest enough to admit it and didn't hurt anyone in the process.

What it does suggest is that due to my ability to function normally whilst under the influence, I was no more a danger than anyone else on the road.
I put that down to either 23 years of luck or more likely, my regular use and my bodies tolerance as a result.

The irony is that since I gave it up I have been diagnosed as having mild depression, so instead of driving around with a detectable illegal substance in my system that doesn't effect my ability to drive, I now get around with 100% legal anti depressants in my system that do, go figure.

See its like speeding, we all protest that 3 k's over doesn't kill even though that's what the Government spruik and the speed camera's enforce and with this being a car forum it gets regurgitated as revenue raising BS almost weekly, but if this was Australian Pot Smokers Forum the same would be said for the testing of pot on drivers. Just because I smoked a cone 3 hours ago doesn't mean I'm a menace to society now, but if I was pulled over by plod I would be fined as such due to the residue left behind when in actual fact I could be completely straight.

Flame away, but before you do remember an old biblical saying, let he without sin cast the first stone.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Ben73

It's illegal to have open alcohol in a vehicles, even if it's the passenger that is drinking. The driver can blow 0 and it's still illegal. So how are their provisions in place to allow you to drink while driving?
Drive through bottle shops are just a convenience thing for people who don't want to stop at a shopping complex on their way home from work. There is nothing about drive through bottle shops that encourage you to drink and drive.
If you think drive through bottle shops are encouraging you to drink and drive than maybe it's you with the issue. I have been to drive through bottle shops countless times and have never drank and drive.

Lol, me thinks you're a little naïve if you don't think people crack open a tinny before they get out of the driveway...
That's like Govco saying speeding is down because of camera's when we all know its a different story between camera's.
You're only guilty if caught.

Any encouragement to have alcohol available at your drivers window should be discouraged considering the findings posted earlier in this thread.

[Pis-ton broke]

in my crazy youth i smoked and drove on two occasions, and imo its heaps more dangerous that driving a bit ****y. so if i smoke a spliff on saturday , i can get busted on monday? that is wrong in my book,
i thought it was legal in the A.C.T.? what happens there?

[Junkyard-Dog]

Someone I know very well used to be a big time stoner when he was about 19-20 and he regularly drove under the influence. He used to convince himself that it didn't affect his driving but in retrospect, it did. It wasn't serious impairment (like being drunk) but the impairment was still there to some extent.

People will always try to convince themselves that they are in the right or that they are not the problem but you have to be realistic about things. Just because it's the less of two evils, doesn't mean it isn't wrong.

[asagaai]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Flame away, but before you do remember an old biblical saying, let he without sin cast the first stone.

Bent 8- probably will not be many stones thrown your way-and that is not because we are all stuck on a desert island made of fine beach sand.

But-I think a number of members will resonate with the knowledge of having done lots of stupid stuff in younger years (and my daughter last night still saying that I am still doing stupid stuff when I announced I am going with my best mate on a NZ alpine rock/ice/snow mountaineering course for 2 weeks to summit 3 peaks), and with benefit of maturity and life realise that what we did
n the younger years was probably unwise.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Ok for the record I'm going to be completely honest with you all even though I will be flamed for doing so.
I smoked pot for 25 years and drove daily whilst under the influence for 23 of them.
I have held a rating 1 for 20 of them and have only ever had 1 at fault accident in that time.
I was distracted whilst trying to demist my windscreen one wet winters night as I left Wagga heading for Narrandera and drove clean over the roundabout on the way out of Wagga. No other vehicle was involved and I continued the drive home to Adelaide.
I had not consumed anything for 2 weeks prior to it as I was on holiday and had no access to it interstate.

People who have never smoked pot in their lives regard me as the safest driver they know and often handed me the keys to do the driving if going somewhere knowing quite well that I had smoked prior.
Does that make it right, HELL NO!
Am I proud of it, HELL NO!
What I am is honest enough to admit it and didn't hurt anyone in the process.

What it does suggest is that due to my ability to function normally whilst under the influence, I was no more a danger than anyone else on the road.
I put that down to either 23 years of luck or more likely, my regular use and my bodies tolerance as a result.

The irony is that since I gave it up I have been diagnosed as having mild depression, so instead of driving around with a detectable illegal substance in my system that doesn't effect my ability to drive, I now get around with 100% legal anti depressants in my system that do, go figure.

See its like speeding, we all protest that 3 k's over doesn't kill even though that's what the Government spruik and the speed camera's enforce and with this being a car forum it gets regurgitated as revenue raising BS almost weekly, but if this was Australian Pot Smokers Forum the same would be said for the testing of pot on drivers. Just because I smoked a cone 3 hours ago doesn't mean I'm a menace to society now, but if I was pulled over by plod I would be fined as such due to the residue left behind when in actual fact I could be completely straight.

Flame away, but before you do remember an old biblical saying, let he without sin cast the first stone.

Then you are amazingly, staggeringly lucky, and can in no way use any part of that as an excuse for other people now who some obviously think should be "allowed" to drive while under the influence (and you are, whether you know and admit it or not) of dope while driving.

It's a mind altering substance. It DOES affect your driving skills, but, like being fatigued, you probably won't have any idea it's happening. Look at excuses wheeled out about "I think I'm actually a better driver when I've had a few puffs" and other outright lies like that.
If you don't like the fact that it can be picked up in a test a couple of days later, tough. Don't do it then. Simple as that. People learned not to drink drive, and if drinking not to drive afterwards...why shouldn't potheads learn the same lesson?

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Someone I know very well used to be a big time stoner when he was about 19-20 and he regularly drove under the influence. He used to convince himself that it didn't affect his driving but in retrospect, it did. It wasn't serious impairment (like being drunk) but the impairment was still there to some extent.

People will always try to convince themselves that they are in the right or that they are not the problem but you have to be realistic about things. Just because it's the less of two evils, doesn't mean it isn't wrong.

Perhaps I should clarify my stance, I'm not saying its ok, I'm just highlighting the inconsistencies.
Consider this, I can be a non drinker, can drive down the pub, have a few beers over a couple of hours and be under .05 and therefore ok to drive even though .05 to me is completely different to .05 of a seasoned drinker.
Yet if I'm a seasoned smoker who doesn't feel any effect of the smoke I can be pinched on the spot.
Then consider the findings in Russ's post and tell me who's the bigger risk.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Then you are amazingly, staggeringly lucky, and can in no way use any part of that as an excuse for other people now who some obviously think should be "allowed" to drive while under the influence (and you are, whether you know and admit it or not) of dope while driving.

It's a mind altering substance. It DOES affect your driving skills, but, like being fatigued, you probably won't have any idea it's happening. Look at excuses wheeled out about "I think I'm actually a better driver when I've had a few puffs" and other outright lies like that.
If you don't like the fact that it can be picked up in a test a couple of days later, tough. Don't do it then. Simple as that. People learned not to drink drive, and if drinking not to drive afterwards...why shouldn't potheads learn the same lesson?

Then I must be the luckiest guy on earth hey.

In fact, I'm surprised I can even construct a sentence after 25 years of mind altering substance abuse...

I would suggest driving above a set speed limit, driving tired, eating a burger whilst driving, having a beer or two prior, checking out the girl in the short skirt or acknowledging the beep your mobile phone just made could also impair your driving, but someone as holy as you wouldn't know I'm sure.

[JC]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Which underlines the results shown in Russ's post.

What I find ironic is that alcohol is not only legal to buy, consume and drive whilst under the influence of, but that there are provisions supplied that allow me to roll into a drive thru bottle shop and make that purchase to consume whilst driving.

No, you are not allowed to consume WHILE driving......

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Look at excuses wheeled out about "I think I'm actually a better driver when I've had a few puffs" and other outright lies like that.

That statement pretty much defines a drug addiction. A person who cannot function on the downer of being sober. Kind of like a smoker who cannot get going without the morning cigarette, or like I used to be, I couldn't get going without the morning coffee. Completely different I get it, but it's kind of along the same track.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

That statement pretty much defines a drug addiction. A person who cannot function on the downer of being sober. Kind of like a smoker who cannot get going without the morning cigarette, or like I used to be, I couldn't get going without the morning coffee. Completely different I get it, but it's kind of along the same track.

Yes and no.
Is it an addiction or a habit?

I smoked cigarettes for 6 years, woke up one morning, screwed up the remains of my packet and never touched another one, did I break an addiction or a habit, i'd say the latter as it was easy as that.
Pot was the same, woke up one morning and decided I was over it, did I break an addiction or a habit, again, I say the latter because it was too easy.
Like I said earlier in the thread, for a seasoned smoker its not about the widely believed effect of the substance but rather the habit of lighting one up.

But what would I know, I couldn't possibly be talking from life experience, I'm probably just in denial.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by JC

No, you are not allowed to consume WHILE driving......

Agreed, but allowed and do are two very different things given the opportunity and that's my point.
Why have the opportunity to purchase alcohol from the drivers seat considering the risk factors involved with drink driving.

I get the rules behind it, I'm just highlighting the stupidity of it really.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Yes and no.
Is it an addiction or a habit?

I smoked cigarettes for 6 years, woke up one morning, screwed up the remains of my packet and never touched another one, did I break an addiction or a habit, i'd say the latter as it was easy as that.
Pot was the same, woke up one morning and decided I was over it, did I break an addiction or a habit, again, I say the latter because it was too easy.
Like I said earlier in the thread, for a seasoned smoker its not about the widely believed effect of the substance but rather the habit of lighting one up.

But what would I know.

My aunty who smoked for 30 odd years one day just gave up. She wasn't addicted, it was just what you did. Some people are like that. Others get a full blown dependency. It's different in every person. I used to work with a guy who would rock up to work every morning glazed. The way he got off weed was to move up to pills. Last I heard, he is still in the same industry, but has had all trust removed by his employer, work car taken off him and is doing the bare bones basic jobs.

[BENT_8]

Anyhow, in my best Forrest Gump voice, 'That's all I have to say about that.'

Just thought i'd offer some real life experiences to all the shock and awe in this thread and probably created some in the process, lol.

What i'd be interested in is some real life experiences from some of the countries finest who frequent these forums on the figures of deaths caused by speed versus those caused by pot smokers.
Just so I can roll them out next time someone cries over their speeding fine...lol

Now I'm off to tend to the pink elephant in my cupboard...

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Lol, me thinks you're a little naïve if you don't think people crack open a tinny before they get out of the driveway...
That's like Govco saying speeding is down because of camera's when we all know its a different story between camera's.
You're only guilty if caught.

Any encouragement to have alcohol available at your drivers window should be discouraged considering the findings posted earlier in this thread.

Yeah I know people do that. I know people who have done that. I don't see how the drive thru shops encourage it anymore than any other bottlo that sells take aways.
I have known of people to visit regular bottle shops and still crack one as soon as they get into their car.


I am well aware that weed stays in your system long after the affect has worn off, but how else are police going to test the people who lit one up 20 minutes before driving over the people who did it the day before?
If there was a more accurate test that can pick up people who recently smoked then fair enough, but until that test exists you have to weigh up if it's worth the risk.

You should feel sorry for people who are drug tested at work. They cannot even light it up on their 3 weeks holidays because the **** test can pick it up several weeks later.