Quote:
Originally Posted by higher4hockey
Dont believe what the goverment tells you....
From NORML.com
"Scientific studies on marijuana and driving fail to support the notion that marijuana poses a significant public highway safety hazard, according to evidence compiled by NORML.
In particular, the evidence fails to support proposals by marijuana opponents to impose tough new "zero-tolerance" standards for driving under the influence of marijuana or to disallow on-site use in medical cannabis clubs out of fear for driving safety.
In general, the evidence shows that marijuana is a lesser traffic hazard than alcohol or other drugs. Marijuana appears to be most dangerous in high doses, or when combined with alcohol. On the other hand, drivers with lower levels of marijuana have been found to be no more dangerous, and in some cases arguably safer, than other drivers.
NORML has recently issued a comprehensive report on drugged driving, drug testing, and driving under the influence laws, by its senior policy analyst, Paul Armentano [1]. The report disputes the rationale for proposed "zero tolerance" laws, in which the presence of any trace of marijuana in blood or urine is taken as per se proof of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). Because marijuana can be detected in the system long after any impairment has passed, such laws wrongly misclassify many sober drivers as "intoxicated." Urine tests detect only non-psychoactive metabolites of marijuana, which linger in the system for days or even weeks after use. Blood tests can measure the major psychoactive ingredient of marijuana, THC, which provides a better but still inexact indicator of recent intoxication. Blood THC peaks within the first hour of intoxication, but can be detected at lower levels for a day or more in chronic users.
A growing body of scientific evidence shows that drivers with modest amounts of THC in their system are no more dangerous than other drivers. A 2002 review of seven separate crash culpability studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, "Crash culpability studies [which attempt to correlate the responsibility of a driver for an accident to his or her consumption of a drug and the level of drug compound in his or her system] have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes"[2].
Two other, new accident studies have failed to find any hazard from marijuana. A study of 1500+ patients admitted to a Midwest trauma center published in the Journal of Trauma Injury, Infection, and Critical Care found correlations between use of alcohol, cocaine and opiates with injuries [3 ]. However, their data did not show "any statistically significant independent associations between injury and cannabis," researchers told NORML. "(This) offers a strong rebuttal to the Drug Czar's misleading allegations implying that marijuana is a leading cause of ER admissions," says Armentano.
Another study of road trauma from the Netherlands, which detected the presence of drugs through urine as well as blood tests, found significantly higher accident risks for alcohol and benzodiazepines (prescription tranquilizers) and less certain risks for amphetamines, cocaine and opiates, but no increased risk for cannabis [4].
In the largest U.S. survey of drug use and driving accidents to date, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration found that alcohol was by far the "dominant problem." At the same time it found "no indication that marijuana by itself was a cause of fatal accidents"[5]. The report was delayed and not publicized because it failed to confirm the expectations of administration drug warriors."
I do admit that driving and smoking should been done with experienced users, When I was a newbi to the drug I couldnt drive either.
