Impairment due to narcotics vs. alcohol

[Broomstick]

Probably because they're a mind-altering substance, which can make you a danger to society at large in unfortunate circumstances. The only way the obese would be a danger to society at large is if they all decided to jump from skyscrapers.

That's a load of bullshit, and you know it. Smoking marijuana does not make you a danger to society unless you seriously buy the government's ridiculous "reefer madness" propaganda. The only drug that really qualifies under those circumstances is PCP. Marijuana and heroin don't make you more aggressive or impair your judgment anywhere near the degree that alcohol does.

They certainly can - and it's no more safe to drive a car while high on pot than drunk on alcohol. Pot, heroin, etc. all fuck up your judgement to one degree or another, and typically your coordination as well.

If the personal automobile didn't exist then maybe your argument would have some merit, but that's not the world we live in.

Hell, people on cocaine probably are better-coordinated and less aggressive than drunks.

Bullshit.

Cokeheads are a LOT more belligerent, short-tempered, and agressive than drunks.

[Durandal]

They certainly can - and it's no more safe to drive a car while high on pot than drunk on alcohol. Pot, heroin, etc. all fuck up your judgement to one degree or another, and typically your coordination as well.

But not to the degree that alcohol tends to. Pot has a built-in defense mechanism against such activity by making the user lazy and unmotivated.

If the personal automobile didn't exist then maybe your argument would have some merit, but that's not the world we live in.

My argument is that, even without cars, the government would still probably have banned marijuana, heroin, etc ... because it wants to act like Mommy and Daddy for its citizens. The "driving while impaired" part is just one aspect of the War on Drugs, one which it could easily survive without.

Hell, if you're going to go after drug users because they might drive cars, then I don't see any problems going after fat people because they might have and raise children.

[The Kernel]

They certainly can - and it's no more safe to drive a car while high on pot than drunk on alcohol. Pot, heroin, etc. all fuck up your judgement to one degree or another, and typically your coordination as well.

*cough* BULLSHIT *cough*

Anyone who thinks it is equally dangerous to be behind the wheel when stoned as when drunk is either someone who has never done drugs or an idiot (or in your case, probably both).

If the personal automobile didn't exist then maybe your argument would have some merit, but that's not the world we live in.

By that logic NyQuill should be against the law.

Bullshit.

Cokeheads are a LOT more belligerent, short-tempered, and agressive than drunks.

That's funny, I don't recall a national problem with cokeheads getting hopped up on coke and beating the shit out of random people.

[LordShaithis]

I used to smoke weed at a rate that averaged out to maybe once every six months, whenever I was with friends and the opportunity arose, basically. Haven't done it in years, but way back the very first time, I made the mistake of trying to drive home. And man, was I ever high.

I was literally puttering along at half the speed limit, slowly rolling to a halt two blocks before each stop signal. The trip took three times as long as it should have. Yes, my judgement was impaired and the whole thing was incredibly stupid. Had the hour been earlier or the distance greater, I surely would have been arrested to boot.

But I can say with a fair amount of certaintly that I was much less of a threat than a drunk driver tearing down the road. While my impariment might have caused me to fail to notice a pedestrian, for example, I'm pretty sure most pedestrians would have stepped out of the way and laughed as I slowly rolled past.

[Broomstick]

They certainly can - and it's no more safe to drive a car while high on pot than drunk on alcohol. Pot, heroin, etc. all fuck up your judgement to one degree or another, and typically your coordination as well.

*cough* BULLSHIT *cough*

Anyone who thinks it is equally dangerous to be behind the wheel when stoned as when drunk is either someone who has never done drugs or an idiot (or in your case, probably both).

Excuse, I wasn't aware I had to be a criminal to have an opinion on this subject. Are you saying you meet that qualification yourself?

Absolutely I'm a hardass when it comes to someone altering their ability to think and react then getting behind the wheel of a car. YOU'RE the idiot if you think that shit other than alcohol can't fuck you up and that somehow you're a "safe" driver when high. You're not, however much you protest to the contrary.

If the personal automobile didn't exist then maybe your argument would have some merit, but that's not the world we live in.

By that logic NyQuill should be against the law.

Original formula NyQuil, which contains alcohol and dextromethoraphan, will certainly fuck you up for driving and you could be arrested and prosecuted for driving under its influence.

I don't know where you live, but in all the states I've resided in the DUI laws aren't written specifically for alcohol - they can nail you for being under the influence of anything that can impair your ability to drive.

Bullshit.

Cokeheads are a LOT more belligerent, short-tempered, and agressive than drunks.

That's funny, I don't recall a national problem with cokeheads getting hopped up on coke and beating the shit out of random people.

I wasn't aware we had a "national" problem of that sort with alcohol, either, just some extremely well-publicized incidents.

Back when I worked at the clinic the cokeheads were a fucking belligerent lot, more argumentative and combative as the drunks. While some drunks are "happy", cheerful, and easy going I never saw such a cokehead - they're all jittery, pissed off bundles of nerves. I particularly remember an incident when one of the nose-candy chicks shoved someone else out a second-story window, which sure as hell qualifies as agressive in my book.

You may live in your fantasy land that drugs are somehow "harmless" and not so bad as alcohol, and perhaps there are some people out there who can use casually, but drug addiction - regardless of the drug involved - is a nasty, corrosive condition. Personally, I don't care what YOU do to fuck your brain cells up in the privacy of your own home as long as you don't hurt anyone else. Once you get behind the wheel of a car when high, your potential to hurt someone else just took a big jump. You want to smoke pot? Fine - but don't drive while under its influence.

[Darth Wong]

I'm really tired of this "you don't do drugs so you're not allowed to say anything about the effects of drug use even if you have medical and observational evidence to back you up" mentality. It's a Special Pleading fallacy, where the drug user sets himself up to be immune to criticism from anyone who's not a fellow drug user.

[The Kernel]

Excuse, I wasn't aware I had to be a criminal to have an opinion on this subject. Are you saying you meet that qualification yourself?

Absolutely I'm a hardass when it comes to someone altering their ability to think and react then getting behind the wheel of a car. YOU'RE the idiot if you think that shit other than alcohol can't fuck you up and that somehow you're a "safe" driver when high. You're not, however much you protest to the contrary.

Ahh, and we come back with a strawman argument, how predictable for you.

Now you can show me where I said it was safe to drive high. Of course since I didn't say it, you won't find it. What you WILL find though is yourself saying that driving high and drunk are the same from a risk perspective which is total and complete bullshit and if you continue to disput this you will simply be mocked by everyone that knows better.

Original formula NyQuil, which contains alcohol and dextromethoraphan, will certainly fuck you up for driving and you could be arrested and prosecuted for driving under its influence.

I don't know where you live, but in all the states I've resided in the DUI laws aren't written specifically for alcohol - they can nail you for being under the influence of anything that can impair your ability to drive.

Nice way to dodge the issue, I never claimed that NyQuill didn't fuck you up behind the wheel, in fact that was the entire point of what I said. Learn how to read moron.

I wasn't aware we had a "national" problem of that sort with alcohol, either, just some extremely well-publicized incidents.

That's right, domestic violence caused by alcohol isn't a national epidemic at all. No siree.

Back when I worked at the clinic the cokeheads were a fucking belligerent lot, more argumentative and combative as the drunks. While some drunks are "happy", cheerful, and easy going I never saw such a cokehead - they're all jittery, pissed off bundles of nerves. I particularly remember an incident when one of the nose-candy chicks shoved someone else out a second-story window, which sure as hell qualifies as agressive in my book.

I don't think it's even worth responding to this, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.

You may live in your fantasy land that drugs are somehow "harmless" and not so bad as alcohol, and perhaps there are some people out there who can use casually, but drug addiction - regardless of the drug involved - is a nasty, corrosive condition. Personally, I don't care what YOU do to fuck your brain cells up in the privacy of your own home as long as you don't hurt anyone else. Once you get behind the wheel of a car when high, your potential to hurt someone else just took a big jump. You want to smoke pot? Fine - but don't drive while under its influence.

Strawman and an exceedingly stupid one too considering I never claimed any of it. Par for the course for you though.

I'm really tired of this "you don't do drugs so you're not allowed to say anything about the effects of drug use even if you have medical and observational evidence to back you up" mentality. It's a Special Pleading fallacy, where the drug user sets himself up to be immune to criticism from anyone who's not a fellow drug user.

Don't stawman my argument, that's not what I said at all. You can say all you want about, but to compare driving under the influence of alcohol and driving under the infuence of pot and claim that they are identical from a saftey perspective without having ever tried pot is the height of stupidity.

Like it or not, it is safer to drive high then stoned (not "safe", safer), and the reasons for this related to how each drug effects your body. If you have done either, then you aren't in a great position to understand these effects from a first hand perspective.

[Darth Wong]

Don't stawman my argument, that's not what I said at all. You can say all you want about, but to compare driving under the influence of alcohol and driving under the infuence of pot and claim that they are identical from a saftey perspective without having ever tried pot is the height of stupidity.

They don't have to be exactly identical, you flaming fucktard liar. They only have to both be cases of serious impairment, which puts them past the safety threshold. Hell, two different cases of drunk driving aren't even necessarily identical, moron.

Where the fuck do you get off accusing other people of strawman fallacies when you're pulling bullshit like this? And yes, you DID say that people who don't use drugs aren't allowed to talk.

[The Kernel]

They don't have to be exactly identical, you flaming fucktard liar. They only have to both be cases of serious impairment, which puts them past the safety threshold. Hell, two different cases of drunk driving aren't even necessarily identical, moron.

Where the fuck do you get off accusing other people of strawman fallacies when you're pulling bullshit like this? And yes, you DID say that people who don't use drugs aren't allowed to talk.

Read what I was responding to that Broomstick said. She made the claim that they were identical.

They certainly can - and it's no more safe to drive a car while high on pot than drunk on alcohol. Pot

My whole comment about personal experience directed at her was about this quote. Your comment is meaningless unless you intended to argue this point since that is ALL I claimed you needed firsthand experience with both to know.

And btw, I don't think even you with you lack of experience with either drug would agree that they are equal to someone behind the wheel; after all they both affect your body in drastically different ways.

[Darth Wong]

My whole comment about personal experience directed at her was about this quote. Your comment is meaningless unless you intended to argue this point since that is ALL I claimed you needed firsthand experience with both to know.

Which is more bullshit since she is simply generalizing that they are both beyond the threshold of driving safety. You are interpreting the quote in a deliberately pedantic way, even though a pair of DRUNKS aren't even necessarily identical in impairment (note: SECOND fucking time I've made this point).

And btw, I don't think even you with you lack of experience with either drug would agree that they are equal to someone behind the wheel; after all they both affect your body in drastically different ways.

Totally irrelevant to the fact that neither is safe.

[theski]

Maybe the Drugs/Booze debate should be split from the OP?

[Hyperion]

To start with, I am not advocating driving high/stoned or drunk. However, I do want to say some things based on personal experience.

1) I will not drive drunk. I have done so only once, and that was a trip of about 2 blocks and I never exceeded 10mph, my logic on this was that if I could not get my car back home in that distance in that state, I was definitely not going to make it back on foot either. I got home fine, but I won't ever drive further or faster than that while drunk, period (preferably not at all).

2) I'll freely admit I use pot both medicinally (to treat my nearly untreatable bipolar disorder, and greatly minimize the symptoms of schizophrenia that I have. It also greatly improves my eating habits, I have a very hard time eating due to nerve problems.), and recreationally with friends.

No one is going to tell me pot is worse than alcohol, period. When someone tells me something *good* that alcohol does for you, I will be greatly surprised. Pot mellows out and calms down most of the people who use it, very few freak out in one way or another, and almost none react violently when high, unlike with alcohol. The impairment is also far different. Alcohol pretty much shuts your cognitive functions down and destroys your motor control while drunk, to the point where you can't even move if you have enough. Pot on the other hand will affect your coordination and judgement, but you can be blazed right out of your mind after smoking a 40 with a couple friends, and still walk under your own power unassisted, and still somewhat carry on a conversation with sober people. In my experience it is still possible, albeit extremely unadvisable to drive in such a state, but it is possible to do it over short distances relatively safely depending on how you react to pot. I for one do quite well with high mental function tasks while high or stoned, I can concentrate far better. In general I'm safe enough to drive moderate distances <10 miles at 40mph or lower when stoned, but I know plenty of people who shouldn't get within 10 feet of the driver's seat of a car even after a couple hits. Pot's effects are not very consistant with people, which is probably part of the issue being mentioned here.

As a note, the biggest effects I notice when driving baked is the tendency to lose navigation: eg: going around the block for half an hour without realizing it, or getting totally lost in familiar territory. With me I notice a tendency to go slower, but not overly so, usually about 5-10mph below my normal speed in a given area, so generally around the speedlimit rather than above. And the biggest things I notice are a tendency to not react "right" at intersections, like stopping at green lights, stopping at stop signs and failing to move for another 15 minutes or so, but in some ways I'm safer driving a little high because I actually stop for stop lights (My eye is not drawn to red at all, which is a major problem when sober, I blow stop lights and signs all the time because I never see them even when looking at them. When high, my eye is drawn to *any* light or abnormal color, so I actually see them, I just might not react right.) I do not stop short, speed, or go overly slow when high, in general I drive normal. But, that is me, I have friends who speed worse than ever when high, and I have friends who end up on the wrong side of the road, or drift all over the road while high. Depends on the person.

Regarding the use of pot vs. alcohol recreationally, I personally feel that pot is a far better social drug. Alcohol has unpredictable emotional effects in people. I myself can instantly switch from being a happy fun-loving laughing drunk to an utterly miserable bawling wreck just about instantly for no reason at all. I have noticed even normally very peaceful and calm people becoming confrontational and angry to the point of causing fights for literally no reason while drunk. Sure a lot of people just get kinda loud and annoying, and others get very quiet and subdued then pass out when drunk, but the unpredictability and simply the immense lack of control that comes with being drunk makes it extremely hazardous in my book. I've noticed typically once the real drunkenness sets in, all social communication and action goes right out the window for most groups of people, basically like a bunch of animals most of the time.

Pot is known to generally mellow people out, calm them down, and make them stupid while stoned. Additionally, the subculture that surrounds pot tends to be one of peacefulness, calm, and sharing. Any stoner can tell you that if they run out, odds are a friend will smoke them out if they need it. In my experience a good bong circle draws a group of friends together to talk, laugh, and stone out and have fun. It makes for a nice, relaxing evening IMO. I've had plenty of issues with groups of drunks at ren fairs, private parties, even at nightclubs, but I've never had a problem with group of stoners or at a bong circle.

As an additional note, drunks are anything but intellectual. Stoners tend to get rather intellectual and observant at a certain level of getting high, though this tends to be replaced by staring at milkdrop on the computer or staring at spots on the wall for hours once everyone gets thoroughly stoned. Some of the most interesting and enlightening conversations I've had were in bong circles.

As a final note, pot is the single reason I'm even still alive. It almost perfectly stabilizes my mood state. I have not had a bipolar cycle since I became a daily toker, I used to cycle every 4-6 weeks, and typically would become so manic or depressed, even on my meds, that I was a hazard to myself and those around me (insane reckless driving, suicide attempts, etc.). My memory has also improved, but that is due to the pot cutting down greatly on the background "noise" in my head, this also helps with my concentration. It has also had many beneficial social and other health benefits for me. This is my experience, everyone's experience with it varies.

That's my view on this. I'm not a debater, and I realize this post probably has flaws in it from the debate standpoint, and these are simply views, observations, and opinions, please take them as such.

[SCRawl]

To start with, I am not advocating driving high/stoned or drunk. However, I do want to say some things based on personal experience.

Snip

The big point here isn't that driving while stoned is equally bad as driving drunk. The point is that both are inherently unsafe, as you pointed out from your personal experience. Just because one might be slightly less unsafe than the other isn't much of an argument. Many of the things you claim to do while driving under the influence of drugs make you a dangerous driver. It's only a matter of time before you get into an accident.

To make an (incredibly oversimplified) analogy: a .45 to the head will cause a lot of damage; a .22 to the head will probably cause less damage. Both are potentially deadly.

[Darth Wong]

Once you get past a certain threshold, you are an unsafe driver, period. This is like arguing that someone with a BAC of 1.5 times the legal limit is safer than a driver with a BAC of twice the legal limit, when they're BOTH just plain unsafe drivers and neither should be allowed on the road.

[Stravo]

Once you get past a certain threshold, you are an unsafe driver, period. This is like arguing that someone with a BAC of 1.5 times the legal limit is safer than a driver with a BAC of twice the legal limit, when they're BOTH just plain unsafe drivers and neither should be allowed on the road.

Thank you Mike. Precisely. I wouldn't want to be on the road with someone who was drunk OR high. Fact of the matter is we're now debating degrees of impairment ignoring the fact that the driver is impaired no matter how you look at it. Whether you're driving too slow or too fast doesn't matter a whit to me in terms of driver safety.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Thank you Mike. Precisely. I wouldn't want to be on the road with someone who was drunk OR high. Fact of the matter is we're now debating degrees of impairment ignoring the fact that the driver is impaired no matter how you look at it. Whether you're driving too slow or too fast doesn't matter a whit to me in terms of driver safety.

Are not a lot of accidents caused by people driving too slowely? I think that's a road hazard too, is it not? Whenever I get into this argument with people (about impairment), they go off on the tangent tht you are also "impaired" when you listen to music, open a window, etc. They just keep going on and on.

[Darth Wong]

Thank you Mike. Precisely. I wouldn't want to be on the road with someone who was drunk OR high. Fact of the matter is we're now debating degrees of impairment ignoring the fact that the driver is impaired no matter how you look at it. Whether you're driving too slow or too fast doesn't matter a whit to me in terms of driver safety.

Are not a lot of accidents caused by people driving too slowely? I think that's a road hazard too, is it not? Whenever I get into this argument with people (about impairment), they go off on the tangent tht you are also "impaired" when you listen to music, open a window, etc. They just keep going on and on.

That "potheads drive slow, so they're safe" bullshit really pisses me off too. Don't they think that a fucking car going half the speed limit can still easily crush a pedestrian by running through a crosswalk or a stop sign? Don't they realize that, as any cop will tell you, a lot of drunks drive really slow too?

[Alex Moon]

That "potheads drive slow, so they're safe" bullshit really pisses me off too. Don't they think that a fucking car going half the speed limit can still easily crush a pedestrian by running through a crosswalk or a stop sign? Don't they realize that, as any cop will tell you, a lot of drunks drive really slow too?

It's not just dangerous to pedestrians. A car going to slowly is some areas can be a dangerous impedement to other drivers, say on the highway.

[Stravo]

That "potheads drive slow, so they're safe" bullshit really pisses me off too. Don't they think that a fucking car going half the speed limit can still easily crush a pedestrian by running through a crosswalk or a stop sign? Don't they realize that, as any cop will tell you, a lot of drunks drive really slow too?

It's not just dangerous to pedestrians. A car going to slowly is some areas can be a dangerous impedement to other drivers, say on the highway.

Some car comes around the corner and you have this jack ass pot head driving his jollopy at a crawl and BANG rear ending, in some cases I've seen some nasty bits of road rage from drivers trying to get around a slow driving car.

Slow or fast you are no longer driving competently. You are impaired. Simple.

In many ways this reminds me of the abortion debates where some people cannot give an inch on their pet topic (in this case pot is OK) because it might mean they're somehow conceding something in the larger scheme of things.

[aerius]

I've played driving simulation games on my computer while under the influence of various drugs, the results weren't pretty. I've mountain biked in a forest after doing various drugs, it's great fun but there's no way I rode as well as I did while sober. While I'm for the legalization of drugs, I still believe that driving under the influence of ANY drug is irresponsible and criminal.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

My opinion on the whole matter is this: DUI is never good no matter what the intoxicant is. Legalizing pot does not give anyone carte blanche to smoke a blunt then hit the road. I don't and wouldn't consider it to be any less of a victory if weed was completely legalized tomorrow, yet cops still arrest people they see driving under the influence. That's the responsible thing to do. Take them downtown, let them sober up in the tank, confiscate their dope for the duration of their stay, then put a strike on the driver's license and a summons in court. Then mail the pot back (I say this to prevent someone from getting their car out of impound, then start rolling and smoking as they drive away).

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

That "potheads drive slow, so they're safe" bullshit really pisses me off too. Don't they think that a fucking car going half the speed limit can still easily crush a pedestrian by running through a crosswalk or a stop sign? Don't they realize that, as any cop will tell you, a lot of drunks drive really slow too?

It's not just dangerous to pedestrians. A car going to slowly is some areas can be a dangerous impedement to other drivers, say on the highway.

Some car comes around the corner and you have this jack ass pot head driving his jollopy at a crawl and BANG rear ending, in some cases I've seen some nasty bits of road rage from drivers trying to get around a slow driving car.

Slow or fast you are no longer driving competently. You are impaired. Simple.

In many ways this reminds me of the abortion debates where some people cannot give an inch on their pet topic (in this case pot is OK) because it might mean they're somehow conceding something in the larger scheme of things.

Yes, and if some pothead is driving slowly, it implies that their reaction times, their judgement of the road, and hence their accident avoidance abilities have gone to shit, regardless of what they may howl and screech about it.

[LordShaithis]

I can agree with that. Ambling along in a marijuanna haze might not be as bad as rocketing down the road drunk, but both are unacceptable. Blundering into an intersection at 15 mph can still get a shitload of people killed.

[Thirdfain]

I've smoked heavily in my time, and let me just say that it most certainly does fuck with your ability to operate a car. I've driven high once, and it was a BAD CHOICE. I was OK, no one got hurt, but it was definitely dangerous.

Is marijuana a dangerous substance when used properly? Hell no. I think it's a lot less destructive than alchohol, both in terms of it's short-term effects and it's health effects. Does that mean you should go driving a car when you are baked like a birthday cake? No.

[Enigma]

I don't drink nor do I smoke and I agree with the majority that being high or drunk and then drive is a bad idea.

My memory is fuzzy but I do remember that a few years ago that there was an accident involving a pickup with a bunch of teenagers resulting a couple of them killed. From what I remember is that the pickup rolled over and threw some teens from the truck. I think the police attributed it to pot.
If anyone here in Ottawa or the valley cna confirm this, it would be great.