Posted on 04/11/2006 9:28:21 AM PDT by davesdude
Marijuana Not a Factor in Driving Accidents
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 29, 1999
The safety hazards of smoking marijuana and driving are overrated, says U of T researcher Alison Smiley.
Recent research into impairment and traffic accident reports from several countries shows that marijuana taken alone in moderate amounts does not significantly increase a driver's risk of causing an accident -- unlike alcohol, says Smiley, an adjunct professor in the department of mechanical and industrial engineering . While smoking marijuana does impair driving ability, it does not share alcohol's effect on judgment. Drivers on marijuana remain aware of their impairment, prompting them to slow down and drive more cautiously to compensate, she says.
"Both substances impair performance," Smiley says. "However, the more cautious behaviour of subjects who received marijuana decreases the drug's impact on performance. Their behaviour is more appropriate to their impairment, whereas subjects who received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner."
Smiley, who has studied transportation safety for over 25 years, drew her results from a "metanalysis" of existing research into the effects of marijuana on driving ability, combined with traffic accident statistics in the United States and Australia. Previous studies showing stronger effects often combined "fairly hefty doses" by researchers with driving immediately after consumption, likely exaggerating the drug's effects, she believes.
While Smiley does not advocate legalizing the drug, she says her results should be considered by those debating mandatory drug tests for users of transportation equipment such as truck or train drivers, or the decriminalization of marijuana for medical use. "There's an assumption that because marijuana is illegal, it must increase the risk of an accident. We should try to just stick to the facts."
Smiley presented her findings at a symposium of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences in Florida in February. Her paper was also published in Health Effects of Cannabis, a publication of Toronto's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, in March.
Your didn't comprehend the article. Either way, if you do not believe A) that experienced drinkers handle their alcohol better than non-drinkers and B) that even "moderate, responsible" drinkers are drinking for the mood altering effects of the drug alcohol, I don't know what to tell you.
come to canada then! you could still enjoy the social side of smoking pot without the harsh penalty of your country!!!
Marijuana is grown and traded by criminals because it was declared, by fiat, to be illegal. If it were not illegal, it could be grown and traded by legitimate people who have a vested interest in quality control.
yep one of the best point of drug legalization...this and the removal of gang/black market violence...
good point !
What i don't understand is that booze has been proven by whatever studies you are looking at, that it is well more dangerous than pot on the road...but still, people are arguing over and over for no reason!! what is the problem??
assume that you ain't gonna change my mind. OK?
what is so wrong about me changing your mind???
Just as one of the worst aspects of alcohol prohibition was gang and black market violence, the same is one of the worst aspects of drug prohibition as well. In and of themselves, drugs are harmful---some more than others, of course, but their perniciousness is magnified a hundredfold by ensuring only criminals produce and sell them.
This is one of the main reasons I can't comprehend those who oppose decriminalizing marijuana. In and of itself, marijuana is not terribly harmful---certainly less harmful than many other legal substances. The major reason marijuana is harmful is because it is linked with crime and the illegal drug trade. Its dangerousness, in and of itself, is minimal. Contrast this to cocaine, meth, or heroin---other popular illegal drugs whose dangerousness, in and of itself, is significant. Certainly the state could make a case for controlling these substances because of their inherent danger wholly aside from their association with the illegal drug trade. You'll notice few, if indeed any, organizations exist to promote the reform of cocaine, meth, or heroin laws . . .
Kinda like Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus when she damn well knew where she should sit.
True, if it were legal.
Yet pot is important enough for you to deal with criminals, and I'm sure the one's you deal with are ONLY MJ dealers, right? They would never give a free sample of crack to a kid hoping to get him hooked. Cause they got a vested interest in taking care of their customers.
Maybe your dealers are ethical, but Drug Dealers as a group are on the list of moral people right between pedophiles and wife beaters.
I think i would really give a lot of money to the one who can refute these points...
In your post #18, you make an explicit comparison between the 2 drugs, then in your post #57, you seem to be suggesting that no comparisons should be made. Sorry, you don't get to have it both ways.
You also seem to suggest that one can consume alcohol without abusing it, but then, somehow, smoking weed is, by definition, abusing a drug. Sorry, you don't get to have it both ways. Alcohol is a drug, too. The legality is not the topic at hand.
I think it is absolute fantasy for one to believe that a couple of drinks in an hour does not produce a "buzz". Maybe if you're drinking 3.2% beer in an Ohio bar on a Sunday (used to be and maybe still is all a bar could sell on a Sunday), but 2 gin and tonics in an hour will catch you a buzz, as will 2 glasses of wine, or whatever.
I don't quarrel at all with the notion that smoking to get wasted, or drinking to get drunk, is abuse on some level. I completely reject (on the basis of ample personal experience) that social weed smoking is qualitatively different from social drinking. The drinker's intent is meaningless, putting alcohol is your system is taking drugs, and it WILL have an effect on your body, just the same as someone taking a couple of hits off a joint (whether you choose to believe or recognize it or not).
Check out this website: http://www.ou.edu/oupd/bac.htm
2 beers in one hour sets your blood alcohol to .02, possible impairment. This fact does some damage to your simplistic theory that there is no buzz for 2 drinks in an hour.
I think I'm consistent enough that I would argue that too, yes.
you are really stuck to only one idea and yours man!! This is what he is trying to say f*ck!! illegal, the drugs are doing more harm than if they were legal! we don't like pusher as much as you don't like them! get them off the street for "whatever" sake! and why don't you answer my mail!
Give me a break...
According to the study you cited, "although the cannabis affected reaction time in regular users, its effects appear to be substantially less dangerous than fatigue or drinking."
It does NOT say that marijuana is not a factor.
Maybe, but I think she either had confidence that she wouldn't be punished severely for her "crime" or she was willing to accept the consequences no matter what. I don't for a second believe she just one day decided on her own she wasn't gonna take this stuff any more. I think she was part of an NAACP plan to engage this aspect of racism from a legal standpoint. America is a better place for it too, but I digress.
If you are gonna make a stand against the law, at least have the courage to accept your lumps. Chances are your case will NOT make it to the USSC and overturn the laws against MJ, and you know that. Why risk so much for a buzz?
I did answer your mail.
But, as I matured, I thought more about it and refrained from a repeat. I often drove stoned when younger. These days, I stay at home and hit a TOBACCO stogie, washed down by a good glass of brandy, port, or some other good accompaniment.
Having had experience with driving stoned, or being in the car with a drunk driving, I will drive stoned any time! I KNOW I will get home, unless some drunk hits me!!!
Dude, what's a joke? I don't know what a joke is but it kinda sounds like "toke". Wow! Who has something to toke?
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.