Posted on 02/07/2014 3:47:32 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
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.
The researchers found that drugs played an increasing role in fatal traffic accidents. Drugged driving accounted for more than 28 percent of traffic deaths in 2010, which is 16 percent more than it was in 1999.
The researchers also found that marijuana was the main drug involved in the increase. It contributed to 12 percent of fatal crashes, compared to only 4 percent in 1999
If a driver is under the influence of alcohol, their risk of a fatal crash is 13 times higher than the risk of the driver who is not under the influence of alcohol,” Li said. But if the driver is under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana, their risk increased to 24 times that of a sober person.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattle.cbslocal.com ...
Yes there is. Just ask a few questions of the driver.
Q. Are you happy I pulled you over?
A. (Giggling) "Oh yes, officer!" = Marijuana use.
A. (Stern look)Of course not! = Questionable about use.
Q. Do you like to pay high taxes for everything?
A. (Giggling) "Yes, yes, yes! YOU sure are handsome copper!" = Marijuana use.
A. Hell no! = Questionable about use.
Etc.
Not to mention they fail to explain how any marihuana related death was possible in 2010 since it was illegal at the time. Don’t they know prohibition works? /sarc
But in all seriousness this is a classic example where the old phrase comes to mind, “there are lies, there are damned lies, then there are statistics.”
I have been a prosecutor and defense attorney for nearly 8 years and I can say without a doubt alcohol is way more dangerous to drive on than marijuana.
There are plenty of people safely driving around while taking hydrocodone or oxycodone because their tolerance prevents the impairment that might otherwise result. Marijuana is not much different.
Also, these statistics are pretty useless and until they show a direct connection between the fatality and the alleged impairment. For instance, if a guy smokes weed and is driving down the street and a little old lady (sober as a priest) runs a stop light resulting in both of their deaths then is it properly included as a “marihuana related death”? I don’t think so.
Lots of agendas going on here.
Most of it has to do with all the government jobs that are attached to the endless losing WOD.
The states that are pushing “medical” marijuana are morally responsible for these crashes.
I wonder how many Freeps here think the government has no authority to enforce healthcare yet think it’s perfectly acceptable for the government to prohibit the use of recreational drugs?
I wonder if any of you even bother to review their own thoughts periodically and adjust for hypocritical positions?
Study shows medical marijuana laws reduce traffic deaths (FR thread)
I drove on pot once over 40 years ago; the time/space distortion from pot was so scary I haven’t done it since and would never attempt it again.
Agreed on all points.
But the real thrust is this: Nobody is saying it should be legal to get high and drive.
Get stoned, get high, do what ever..
Just stay off the roads and out of cars.
Ya, I don’t care if you smoke, shoot up or what ever you want to get high.
Just don’t put my life at risk while you are doing it.
Statistically speaking, if the data is correct, we can confidently conclude:
1. Marijuana doesn’t confer immunity to fatal accidents.
2. Either more people are smoking and driving than in 1999, or they’re measuring or reporting differently.
3. If there actually were a major increase in stoned motoring, the lack of any adverse trend in the overall fatality rate suggests that stoned motoring isn’t a big risk-enhancer.
Statistics for Dummies: note the word “involved” - in a multiple car accident it means all regardless of who caused the accident.
The cancer rate will go up in marijuana states. Then the regulators will pass lows restricting where it can be smoked, banning smoking around children, and all the other laws that have been passed on tobacco use.
It’s named “Driving While Impaired” for a good reason. It doesn’t say driving due to use of marijuana or driving due to alcohol consumption or driving after sniffing drain-o.
But, the best advice still applies.....
If you are even a little bit high, on anything, don’t drive a car!
Is your advice the same for them?
I drove on pot once over 40 years ago; the time/space distortion from pot was so scary I haven’t done it since and would never attempt it again.
The problem with this study is that cannabinols can be detected in the blood up to 30 days after use. The study is more alarmist than anything else....
***********************************
Exactly right , the truth is that with simple blood alcohol testing you KNOW if the person has recently been drinking. With marijuana that person could have been perfectly sober for more than a month.. This alarmist report simply reflects the percentage of adults that use the drug but it proves nothing.
“You may see me tonight with an illegal smile”
According to this bullshit a guy in the back seat who smoked a joint 45 days ago would count as “a fatal car crash involving marijuana.”
+1
Okay, don’t text and drive and only use hands free dialing, and I’ll continue to only get high, curled up in flannel bed roll next to my oversized fireplace watching ‘Family guy’ with my Basset Hound.
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.