Posted on 05/11/2016 8:28:53 AM PDT by fella
Foundation research also shows that legal limits for marijuana and driving are meaningless
Fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington after the state legalized the drug, according to the latest research by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. New research also shows that legal limits for marijuana and driving are arbitrary and unsupported by science, which could result in unsafe motorists going free and others being wrongfully convicted for impaired driving. Washington was one of the first two states to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, and these findings raise serious concerns about drug-impaired driving with at least 20 states considering marijuana legalization this year.
The Foundation examined drug tests and fatal crashes among drivers in Washington, a state that legalized marijuana in December 2012. The researchers found: •The percentage of drivers involved in fatal crashes who recently used marijuana more than doubled from eight to 17 percent between 2013 and 2014. •One in six drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2014 had recently used marijuana, which is the most recent data available.
"The significant increase in fatal crashes involving marijuana is alarming," said Peter Kissinger, President and CEO of the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. "Washington serves as an eye-opening case study for what other states may experience with road safety after legalizing the drug."
In an attempt to enforce drug-impaired driving, some states have created legal limits, also known as per se limits, which specify the maximum amount of active THC that drivers can have in their system based on a blood test. THC is the main chemical component in marijuana that can impair driver performance and affect the mind, and the presence of active THC is generally suggestive of recent marijuana use. These limits are similar in concept to the .08 BAC limit for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Researchers examined the lab results of drivers arrested for impaired driving, and the results suggest that legal limits for marijuana and driving are problematic because: •There is no science showing that drivers reliably become impaired at a specific level of marijuana in the blood. Depending on the individual, drivers with relatively high levels of marijuana in their system might not be impaired, while others with low levels may be unsafe behind the wheel. This finding is very different from alcohol, where it is clear that crash risk increases significantly at higher BAC levels. •High THC levels may drop below legal thresholds before a test is administered to a suspected impaired driver. The average time to collect blood from a suspected driver is often more than two hours because taking a blood sample typically requires a warrant and transport to a facility. Active THC blood levels may decline significantly and could drop below legal limits during that time. •Marijuana can affect people differently, making it challenging to develop consistent and fair guidelines. For example, frequent users of marijuana can exhibit persistent levels of the drug long after use, while drug levels can decline more rapidly among occasional users.
"There is understandably a strong desire by both lawmakers and the public to create legal limits for marijuana impairment, in the same manner as we do with alcohol," said Marshall Doney, AAA's President and CEO. "In the case of marijuana, this approach is flawed and not supported by scientific research. It's simply not possible today to determine whether a driver is impaired based solely on the amount of the drug in their body."
AAA is urging states to use more comprehensive enforcement measures to improve road safety. Rather than relying on arbitrary legal limits, states should use a two-component system that requires (1) a positive test for recent marijuana use, and most importantly, (2) behavioral and physiological evidence of driver impairment. This system would rely heavily on two current law-enforcement training programs: Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE) and the 50-state Drug Evaluation and Classification (DEC) program. These programs train law enforcement officers around the country to more effectively recognize drug-impaired driving.
"Marijuana can affect driver safety by impairing vehicle control and judgment," continued Doney. "States need consistent, strong and fair enforcement measures to ensure that the increased use of marijuana does not impact road safety."
Whether the use of marijuana is legal or not, all motorists should avoid driving while impaired. Just because a drug is legal does not mean it is safe to use while operating a motor vehicle. Drivers who get behind the wheel while impaired put themselves and others on the road at risk.
Four states, including Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Washington, D.C., have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and 20 states have legalized it for therapeutic and medicinal use. Montana and Washington have implemented a per se limit for marijuana at 5 ng/mL; Nevada and Ohio have set a limit at 2 ng/mL; and Pennsylvania's is set at 1 ng/mL. Twelve states have strict per se laws that forbid the presence of any levels of marijuana. In Colorado, a blood concentration of 5 ng/mL or more gives rise to permissible inference that a person was driving under the influence of the drug.
Driving under the influence is never victimless. A toke on your backporch, with some nice music on, is victimless.
Who would have thought that????
Anyone who didn’t see this coming has been smoking too much weed.
The driver of the first legal marijuana caused death in Washington state was let go on grounds that he would have hit the pedestrian even if he had not been drugged on marijuana.
There was just a fatal accident in Tucson where a popular local women was killed by a pot head.
A
GOD BLESS America!
ANYONE WANTING TO USE MARIJUANA ... JUST STAY HOME!!!
Driving in the Evergreen State has definitely gotten a lot more interesting since 2012.
Was there any overall increase in fatal road crashes?
If the outcry against pot is about safety, what about the millions of people using synthetic Rx drugs all day and driving/flying/etc? With these Rx drugs there is no smell or bloodshot eyes like pot.
Why no outcry to create “breathalyzers” for such drugs or ban all people with prescriptions from driving? these drugs are more impairing, addictive, damaging and harder to detect than anything out there. We’ve seen far more high profile people crash cars on Rx drugs than anything. Imagine how many Rx crashes go unnoticed because cops aren’t being told to care?
The “safety” line is BS. People are being fed propaganda bought by big business and the giant “policing for profit” system. There is no purpose or logic in banning pot except for the fact that many people would lose tons of money if it suddenly wasn’t illegal
Big government nanny state report wants more government... surprise, surprise. Also wants you to pay for it.
“Mathematical models have been developed to estimate the time of marijuana exposure within a 95% confidence interval. Knowing the elapsed time from marijuana exposure can then be used to predict impairment in concurrent cognitive and psychomotor effects based on data in the published literature. “
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/job185drugs/cannabis.htm
“Was there any overall increase in fatal road crashes?”
Nope, near record lows
Why are the nanny state prohibitionists never honest enough to report numbers on total traffic fatalities? Until that number goes up (or down as it did in Colorado) all this study shows is that the state now tests for MJ more often.
This was easily foreseeable, and preventable. But they chose to do it anyway, making them fully responsible for the consequences.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
Have the number of fatal crashes involving pot smokers increased because of the effect of the pot, or because there are simply more people smoking pot?
How have the statistics showing the number of fatal crashes involving people who don’t use pot changed in the same period?
Double the people are using the stuff. That translates into double the people on the road who use the stuff and probably double the people involved in accidents who test positive for it. Unlike with alcohol, you test positive for MJ long after you last smoked it and long after it no longer affects your reactions and perceptions.
Stoner advocates claim pot use doesn’t increase likelihood of motor vehicle accidents -
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-good-news-marijuana-20150216-column.html
I call bs on pot head’s argument.
Pot use causes altered an mental state (ie: mellow / spaced out effect) = impaired driving fuctionality involving reaction time and distance motion perception.
RE: “Driving under the influence is never victimless.”
Duh! Dumbass libs.
Well, that was unexpected. /sarcasm
I don’t know what they were thinking - you increase the percentage of people using marijuana and a certain percentage of them will drive while under the influence and some of these will cause accidents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.