Just heard on the news, the first bloke who got done by a roadside drug bus reckons he was innocent.
I was wondering how long it would take.
The problem is they are supposed to be checking for recent (3 hours) drug use but this guy claimed to have smoked a month before and is still showing up positive. Either that or he is lying, who knows.
Now don't get me wrong, I support RBT and reluctantly support this new drug testing too but it's the thin of the wedge no matter how accurate or otherwise the proceedure may be.
Let's put aside the actual issue of taking drugs (or booze) and getting behind the wheel, I believe some drivers stoned off their brain are still heaps safer and more competent than a totally sober person who simply can't drive for shit. A factoid my friends and one which will never be stated on the evening news.
I see it every day as I spend a good 10-12 hours behind the wheel in some of the worst traffic imaginable. They just can't control a car or they have no confidence in themselves or their vehicles. Ever wonder why they take corners in a modern car at walking speed in case it tips over on them?
Bloody frustrating but hey, at least they won't get a ' speeding' fine and we all know that is the only thing that saves lives. But I digress.
Since we now live in a police state, it's easy to imagine what can come next from these newfound powers of stop and spittle.
If you get done for DUI (booze) it's a crim record, big deal. So many people of all walks of life have been done for drink drive it's now acceptable and life moves on. Nobody stopped employing B... N..... because he got caught. Nobody cares.
" DRINK DRIVING, ITS NOT BAD LUCK ITS A CRIME"
yes but it doesn't do much except stuff up your insurance.
Now, getting caught for DUI (drugz) will also incur a fine, some points and a mark on your driving record.
What happens when a person is required to produce their licence record for a driving job?
Having heaps of traffic offences is bad enough (my driving record is only available on CD, too many pages) but if a drug driving offence shows up it will instantly flag you as a drug user to the prospective employer.
" NEXT APPLICANT PLEEZE"
Now if employers can ask for this document on the pretext of maybe letting you drive a company car once in a while, it all starts to turn ugly.
We are then in the same situation as the USSA with drug testing for a job.
They look at your driving record, see a DUI offence and if it's the socially unacceptable DUI (drugs) then they have the perfect reason to pass you over on the basis that you are a drug user.
All because you enjoy a puff and got detected with it on your tongue during an undignified roadside medical proceedure.
Same for speed users, sure it's illegal but if it keeps a truckie awake and on the road (instead of running off and causing carnage) than so be it.
I haven't even touched on the DNA implications of all this, scary times ahead I feel.
For the record I have driven in various states of sobriety and have been a professional driver all my working life so I think I may be close to understanding the subject.
All too depressing, I'm off to pack the teapot with some Tetleys.....
" You're not a team player "
i must be getting old, cant fart without a permit and a catalitic converter now. police state was passed years ago. just waiting for the id tatoo/implant, it cant be too far away.
yep. it concerns me that their mullometer aint up to scratch and may mistake my 20 year body fat reserves as a scoob in the past 3 hours.
i concur in there is bigger safe driving issue argument too. overall drink/drug driving dont worry me too much now as i've moved closer to town and i can ride my motorbike home on the cycleway without touching the road.
oh yea, and when i'm in the beetle, everyone already thinks i'm stoned and drives around me on that basis.
He had a blood test at the hospital apparently and was clear of drugs. The police recognize that the test is not perfect and not reliable...and would also not stand up in court. The media are to blame for blowing it all out of proportion. It is only a TRIAL.
tssnq.com.au
It's true, media love a beatup.
It might be a trial for now, but will soon be permanent.
RBT started as a trial.
So did speed cameras.
And double points
and.......
" You're not a team player "
Sorry Sax,
if its against the law it wrong. I work with guys who have had three DUIs.
I don't think its acceptable to keep them employed where I work, the system I work in may, but I don't.
Stoned off their brains and driving??? thats two times they broke the law. Drinking and driving, thats once too much.
Both times, once too many.
I have drug and alcohol testing at work, why because we do. I have no problems with it, if you turn up drunk, I don't want you anywhere near my kit, turn up stoned, get out as well.
I agree, a lot of folk who have licences shouldn't be let near either a road, or a motor vehicle of any type.
I guess I can see where you are looking at it from, and I guess you know a few people who aren't here anymore as well. A mate was three weeks in ICu because some person decided top talk on the way home, while driving, and was 0.17. She had the nerve to complain a few days later to the media that 'what was a bicycle doing on the road at 630am????'. A mat elost his wife to someone who claimed to have a preexisting condition wher they coughed so much they lost control... what were they doing with a licence in the first place if they had a condition like that???
I agree that the testing should be proper, and I don't think they have it right, yet!.
But regardless, you shouldn't be near a vehicle if you have smoked or drunk. And I do think that it should follow people for at least a while. How else do you make ppl accountable for their actions??
I'll step off my soap box now (and yes, its the only way ppl would see me anyways :P)
'Ah, whatever................'
...and sax'x avatar..... haha
Sax, as a company owner I have been burnt by a drug user whom I supplied with OVER $1000.oo worth of work a week, he gave an assurance (when first employed) that he was "clean", but the truth came out after a month, when he was unable to find $150.oo per week to pay lease on the vehicle, he was unable to maintain it or pay for his fuel either...
He was quite happy to take his Thousand + per week, but that was all for his arm/nose, whatvever..
During his time of employment he blew up a truck motor and an 8 thousand pound whinch motor...
The lesson, "If I had know he was using, before I employed him, I wouldn't have done so" and would have Saved myself several thousand dollars into the bargain...
If truckies can't stay awake for the run, Stop & Sleep..!!!
I drive 7 days a week Without Chemicals..
Perhaps this drug testing will bring about MUCH needed changes in the industry... They did after all, Target a Major Truck route for their first attempt...
Many people are Totally Hopeless "Sober" drivers, if they weren't I'd be out of a job, however, My job has seen me spend Many Hours standing by the roadside waiting for the Fire Brigade to cut the Lifeless corpse out of the reminants of a car being driven by someone that thought they were good at driving drunk, stoned or otherwise... Before driving a tow truck, I worked for the Coroners Office and I had to scoop up the bits and take them to the Morgue... I can Guarantee you, it's not safe to drive while pissed, stoned, wasted or bent... If it were, they wouldn't try to stop people doing it...
Here's One that thought it Was...( I have many more), and see At LEAST one a week....
[Edited on 15-12-2004 by WABaja]
I second Penguin's opinion.
One of our boys got done last week for DUI (alcohol), and he had the nerve to get on his soap box 8hrs prior to his offence about how much he loves his kid and would kill anyone that hurt them while under the influence.
If your going to drink/smoke/inject/snort then walk or save some money and catch a cab.
We don't need to see more of the site like WABaja showed us.
Lee.
some people are like slinky's
they have no useful purpose
but they are fun to watch
when you push them down the stairs
I agree with everyone on this, including Sax. I don't think Sax is condoning inebriated driving, but merely pointing out that a bad driver is often worse than a good marginally pissed driver... I think that a person shouldn't be left to their own devices to decide whether they are to drunk/stoned to drive as they wouldn't have any idea, so there has to be a limitand law of some sort, but the limit is too much for some and not enough for others. I often feel too drunk to drive after 2 beers if I'm tired, so I wait till I feel better. Sometimes I feel pissed and I'm just tired and drive home anyway. i was falling asleep driving home from Valla this year and almost went off the road (no alcohol) so I pulled over and slept for 4 hours. I've never left the road with alcohol in my system before, only when I'm tired. Lots of things kill in accidents. Speeding doesn't kill, it's the sudden stop that usually does it. Read this great post:
http://www.aussieveedubbers.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=17259#pid125903
Driving safely was all covered here.
"Tell him 'We've already got one'"
Yeah
sorry Sax, didn't mean my reply as a disagreement with your post.
As I said, I think a lot of people shouldn't be allowed near a car. I like some of the things that they reckon they may introduce for younger drivers, but then I hear QLD is lowering the age to 16 to get a licence?? :duh......
Too may people think that driving is a right (along with a bunch of other things as well). Its not! Its a privilege, one that many people abuse.
Yes I don't like it when the police target me for anything (fortunately that hasn't happened for a long time), but I see it as a way of making sure I know what I am doing and that I am doing it safely.
'Ah, whatever................'
The issue here is whether a person has full control of their actions.Any substance that interferes with the normal function of the brain to transmit or decypher messages has to be an impediment to driving,or anyother action that we require of our body.Most of us like a drink or a smoke or whatever and thats great It makes us feel good,but we need more than just feelin good or confidence or driving slower to make it safe.To introduce an impaired driver to a traffic environment allready full of idiots is just stupid.
That said the powers that be must make sure that this is a road safety issue and not a witchhunt for people who use substances outside what is acceptable to the law.Whether or not a certain illegal drug is anyworse for a person than a legal one is an old debate and , I think , has been shown to be more a political or moral issue than a health issue.The fact that something is illegal does not nessecarily make it "bad", just wrong in the eyes of some people.
Don't drive while impared by anything:piss ,dope ,sleep ,the missus . the kids ,anything ! Its not fair to anybody.
"Every Australian lives in a different Australia"- we all have different opinions- this is mine.
cheers
:party
Agree Muz,
btw, I am not saying in my post that 16yr olds are dangerous. Just that I find it interesting that they preach about the dangers to young people, then make the age lower.
last post from me on this anyways.
MERRY CHRISTMAS ALL 🙂:tree
[Edited on 15-12-2004 by penguin]
'Ah, whatever................'
not all people are effected the same way and hense can still operate ok, or cant operate so well and stack it. I have driven while in a right whacky state and will never do so again (i hope!) coz i lack concentration over a distance and my reaction time was terrible, another time i only had a few beers, too many yes, but could still drive fine but shouldnt have.
this is gonna be another never ending argument like the 500Hp 1916 engine post !
different tokes for different folks, we aint all the same and all..............blah blah 1916 is much superior...........blah blah ..............500Hp on the wheels.................pills make driving fun ...........blah blah..............
great, i can just see all the cops lining up outside any rave or doof and busting anyone they can. arent they going to have a very profitable saturday night/sunday morning from now on...
sure; my friends my self and even my neighbours dog had pills or whatever...6 hours ago, i daresay its going to show up. if i think someone is too fucked to drive, or too tired to drive, then i dont let them drive. simple as that. people get the hint when their friends refuse to get in the car with them.
ampehtamines and such party favours stay in trace amounts in your bloodstream for about 3 days... imagine getting accused of being high as a kite 3 days after the fact?
and how about this... you get home after a long days work, have a toke, eat some dinner and go to sleep. the next morning a cop pulls you over and tests you and all of a sudden you have a big problem on your hands just because you prefer a particular method of relaxation over another when you finish work of an evening.
I know that its a measure that police are using to keep the idiots that are too high to drive off the roads, and trumps to them because alot (not all) people cant drive well when they are straight let alone when they are high, but this test is flawed. personally i have never been stoned or buzzing 3 days after the fact, and im sure most of you havent either, but according to this new test you are, and that is what makes it VERY flawed.
i think this is more an invasion of privacy, and could no doubt turn out to be a witch hunt depending on *where, when and to whom* police choose to enforce these tests
in the beginning, the universe was created.
this made alot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move.
also... about sax's point that if you are caught dui (drugs) and you get it on your driving record... well thats just discriminatory isnt it? if you get caught dui 10 years beforehand and you go looking for a new job, they are instantly going to think you still use drugs, even if you have become a straightlaced, god fearing new age evangelist who goes to church to atone for their sins every morning.
people change, but their records dont, and so i think its going to turn out to be a witch hunt.
in the beginning, the universe was created.
this made alot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move.
Sorry, but I can't help remembering the unregistered, uninsured, doped up truckie that ploughed through the traffic on Mooney Mooney Bridge last month......
Squiz....
It's about bloody time. I'm all for it. I can still rember the stupid shit I did as a kid in a car off my head.
A change for the better I recon.
all my extended family is fucked on drugs. i've never once touched anything illicit out of fear and promises. whilst im not a user i dont preach anti drug messages to all i meet, but i do prefer people who dont use... as far as the law is concerned, these drugs they are testing for are every bit illegal, even though you may only think it is because they cant control the supply, tax the sale etc, its mainly because people get fucked up.
as far as im concerned, if you get caught with drugs in your system then tough shit. if you want to run the gauntlet and do something illegal then be prepared to play ball with the law when they suit up and pull out the big guns. sure raves wont be as fun without the drugs but how many lives does it save? maybe you may thank the law for stoppin you from becoming a brain dead vegetable some time down the track?
everything dies baby, thats a fact..
maybe everything that dies one day comes back..
put your make up on and your hair up pretty..
and meet me tonight in Atlantic city..
mmmmmmm well iam in two minds about this.
I think it is on the rite track, yes it is a drug and if it effects ur driving, they should test for it, but mabye the way about this is all wrong.
I mean different ppl react differently, take grog for instance, one person may be able to drink, and then drive safely while another can drink the same amount and not be safe at all. Teh saem could said of drugs and other substances including legal drugs. In terms of starbuggies responce about getting caught the next day, after really big nights on the piss, i know iam probably still over the limit, so therefore put driving off until the arvo (i once got the cops to RBT me at 10am after a news year eve, when i was a passenger and would have been done big time if i was driving). its the same for drugs, if your going to use the night before, and don't want to risk of being caught, dont use it, or don't drive.
another way to look at is through simple reaction tests or similar. eg, instead of having booze buses and drug buses, mabye a simple 30sec test of reaction, awareness, and sense would be advisable, eg a persons ability to perform the basic of driving either inhibited or not is tested?
[Edited on 16-12-2004 by BiX]
I have no sympathy for my car, only the wallet that pays for it!
Go hard or go home!!!!
man they gotta apply the rules to the masses so they use the minimum criteria. ie- no drugs, less then 0.05 alcohol in your breath... its easier, cheaper and faster that way then setting individual tests for every dude they pull over... it wont change...
everything dies baby, thats a fact..
maybe everything that dies one day comes back..
put your make up on and your hair up pretty..
and meet me tonight in Atlantic city..
jsut feel for us splitty drivers.... it is already assumed that we are smoking hippies, as the car suggests, even though its b4 my time... bet now im gonna get pulled over even more than b4.😠 if it aint for a look, its to qiz, blow, and now prob.:o
Simply Cruzin'...
It's very simple........
Dope, Speed, ecstasy etc are all illegal drugs.
So if you're Stupid enough to use them and get Caught, SUCK SHIT.
:cry
I cant wait until all these Low Life's get BUSTED.
BAJA NOW FITTED WITH A FULL FLYING REBUILD
bone collecter said it as i would have said it.
In my opinion it is easy. I drink now and don't drive when I have been drinking = I am not committing DUI and cannot be caught.
If you use drugs do not drive = cannot get caught DUI
Yes there are shit drivers and they can be worse than some people just over the limit .05 alcohol, but when a shit driver gets alcohol or drug affected then you intensify the danger. Yeah?
record straight... i have never driven on drugs, or even coming down from them, and i havent been in a car with anyone who has, thats my personal choice. i do have friends that do, but i trust their judgement and driving and they usually have a sober person in with them for any trip longer than across town.
anyone who calls a person that uses/dabbles in the use of illegal drugs a low life, needs to get their thinking straight and stop being so reactionary. just because a drug is legal doesnt mean it makes the user of it any less of a low life than someone who occasionally pops a pill or has a toke. irresponsible use of ANY substance, be it government endorsed or not, is what makes a person a complete idiot... so choose your words carefully.
and a question... would anyone get in the car with a driver who has been up for a few days on caffeine? (dont forget, caffiene is a mind altering substance, a VERY mind altering substance...) would you get behind the wheel if you had been awake for more than a day on caffeine? i sure as hell would not... how dangerous is that???!!!
i support what bix has said, a simple reaction/sense test would take just as little time and would make more sense. But of course, this topic has such a huge grey area that no one method is more right than the other. first step, make a license harder to get and you will weed out the good drivers from the crap ones... it should all start from there, the beginning.
thats my $0.05. its up to you to make what you will of it.
in the beginning, the universe was created.
this made alot of people very angry and is widely regarded as a bad move.
twoguns wrote:jsut feel for us splitty drivers.... it is already assumed that we are smoking hippies, as the car suggests, even though its b4 my time... bet now im gonna get pulled over even more than b4.😠 if it aint for a look, its to qiz, blow, and now prob.:o
ROFL...!!!!!!
Just make sure you never pick up a bunch of Hitch Hiking Rastafarians or we'll have to pass around the hat to bail you out of the lock up...!!! LOL...
😀Why don't they test for Zyrtec or other over the counter medication that people regularly drive after taking?
Some of these medications make people so drowsy they fall asleep at the wheel of become as slow reacting and dumb arse potheads.
These tests have nothing to do with safety or reducing the number of people driving under the influence but once again are all about raising revenue in the easiest ways possible.
The best way to reduce stupidity on the roads is lots of regular marked cops driving around. Do you see dumb shit happening when you see a cop car every couple of minutes? Do you see pissheads or stoners driving around when there are coppers driving around the neighbourhood regularly?
NO YOU DONT!
What reduces speeding better - coppers cruising or slow for 50 meters to avoid the camera?
Testing, cameras etc make money but don't reduce the amount of people being dickheads. Coppers driving costs money but reduces the number of people being dickheads.
Now where are the priorities?
Starbuggy wrote:anyone who calls a person that uses/dabbles in the use of illegal drugs a low life, needs to get their thinking straight and stop being so reactionary. just because a drug is legal doesnt mean it makes the user of it any less of a low life than someone who occasionally pops a pill or has a toke. irresponsible use of ANY substance, be it government endorsed or not, is what makes a person a complete idiot... so choose your words carefully.
If someone is driving a Car around under the influence of Drugs and putting peoples life in peril, then in my book they are LOW LIFE'S... once more in case you can't understand it.
LOW LIFE'S
BAJA NOW FITTED WITH A FULL FLYING REBUILD
Kombidog, you would see a lot of that sort of carnage up your way. Let's see what the bodycount is this holiday season after all the 'safety measures' and other bandaid road management solutions.
I guess they are just substituting common sense and education with lucrative and inefective legislation in order to be seen to be doing something.
What is really disturbing to me is not the random testing of drivers for drugs, itself a good idea obviously. No, what is sad is that it started in Australia. The free country is not so free anymore and we are once again leading the world in loss of personal freedoms, privacy and dignity.
The term Un-Australian gets bandied around a bit but I think it applies here. I mean, if other advanced countries can tackle their road problems without endless legislation and nanny state type policing, then why can't we?
To the employers among us here who love the idea of exposing somebody who takes drugs, I ask you, what if you have users in your employ who work well and you don't know they have a few recreationals?
What you don't know won't hurt you huh?
I mean, it's possible that some of the best people in your business are pot smokers....terrible thought, it's illegal that stuff (apparently). But do you sack them if you find out or do nothing if their work is good and it really makes no difference?
Sure, some drivers can't handle a car or truck after a toke or stay cool and rational after a line or 4 but what about the driver who is actually a better, more corteous, more careful or paranoid driver after a smoke? If it slows the vehicle down (possibly at the expense of reaction times) then that is a factor. If you run a fleet of trucks, do you want stressed out or tired operators destroying vehicles and pushing hard or a more gentle approach?
There are many variables and side issues involved in this discussion and as usual much of the common sense will be buried by bullshit and misinformation.
Me, I'm just glad to have started a decent sized thread!
" You're not a team player "
