How accurate are these drug tests anyway?
Problem is it’s impossible to ascertain how long it’s been since X drug has been taken with current standardised testing in place. The fluid sample is either positive or it isn’t, and the cutoff range regarding what garners a positive test is very sensitive
I’ll link some literature later regarding the accuracy of the tests.
Furthermore, the impairment induced from substances like methamphetamine last around 24hrs, the 4 hour rule wouldn’t make sense.
These tests have been shown to detect cannabis days, and in rare instances over a week post use. Same goes with MDMA/other substances tested. But cannabis is particuarly prone to testing error
From what I understand, only a hair test can detect drugs for weeks to months. A saliva test can detect to a max of up to 2 days probably.
As stated, I will link literature/case reports soon. Currently outside on a nature trail.
1 Like
Ok, so I suspect the root of the law is similar to that of drink driving.
But a lot of cases, as you said, are being dismissed. So check out what the rationales the judges are giving instead. If they’re based on new literature, then you can probably expect an amendment in the future.
Punishments are more severe in comparison to low-mid range drink driving.
Not the majority at this point, though pressure is slowly mounting. I’d think our current scheme will go on for another 5-10 years prior to being dismantled. What’s absolutely absurd is that those on medicinal marijuana (even preparations with very low/trace amounts of THC) aren’t exempt from penalty.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dta.2687
It should be noted the northern territory requires an oral fluid swab + a blood test, hence the chances of drivers being penalised absent of impairment is significantly lower.
You sure? Look at the statute.
I’ll look at the rest later.
The penalties associated with drink driving are equatable to the penalties associated with driving with a trace of an illicit substance in ones system.
The penalties associated with actually driving under the influence of cannabis/whatever are far harsher. This is in part related to the fact that cannabis is illigal, alcohol isn’t.
That being said, laws should be based upon harm associated with an action induced upon the greater populace. There is no harm in driving with a trace of X, Y or Z in ones system. We have literature indicative that these “traces” have no correlation with/aren’t associated with impairment.
I will link literature later regarding the differentiation in risk factors associated with numerous substances as compared to alcohol. There is an adequate body of literature covering this topic.
Furthermore, what about LSD (is it possible to test for this?), Ketamine, GHB etc. These are all substance of which would be incredibly dangerous to operate a vehicle under the influence of… Yet they aren’t tested for.
Hell they don’t even check for cocaine in Vic, Wa, NT, QLD and SA. It appears the substances they test for are uniquely associated with areas of lower socioeconomic status and/or the substances used by adolescents/young adults adults as opposed to middle aged men.
To note, I’ve personally never driven under the influence and never would.
This would be equatable to drunk driving, which I believe is covered in the upper limits by definition in certain parts of Australia.
Drunk driving pertains to driving with a BAC of above 0.05 here. Driving with a trace of cannabis absent of impairment is associated with a penalty akin to blowing a BAC between 0.05 and 0.1.
Driving under the influence of cannabis is akin to blowing above 0.15 in terms of the penalty induced. The punishment is disproportionate in relation to the level of impairment incurred. I’d have to consume a ton of cannabis to induce a level of impairment equatable to .15
A 100kg male would have to consume roughly 11 standard drinks back to back in order to blow .15
Agreed. But what I’m saying is the rationale is similar though the levels are in dispute.
I’ll check out what the other links in a bit.
1 Like
Ok, so first of all, we need to acknowledge the different sections pertaining to “drug driving”.
Now this guy is obviously talking about someone driving while impaired and repeat offenders since he’s talking about taking away licenses and people losing jobs.
He also doesn’t think the level of intoxication from cannabis is sufficient enough to mentally impair a person compared to other drugs or alcohol.
So, yeah, it’s pretty much dependent on literature, judges and demands for change in legislation.
Told you this legal shit is boring lol.
QLD penalties associated with trace narcotics in ones system whilst operating a vehicle
" * disqualify you from driving for between 1 to 9 months
- fine you up to $1,868
- impose a maximum term of imprisonment up to 3 months."
It’s similar in the majority of states
Trace = loss of license
No transportation = loss of job
I also believe (although I could be incorrect) offences absent of impairment will show up on a police record. Many employment applications ask if you have been convicted of a crime more significant than a minor traffic offense. An admission/if an offense comes up on a background check stifles employment opportunities
The penalty incurred is dependent on how lenient the judge is.
This covers Western Australia:
64AC. Driving with prescribed illicit drug in oral fluid or
blood
(1) A person who drives or attempts to drive a motor
vehicle while a prescribed illicit drug is present in the
person’s oral fluid or blood commits an offence.
(2) A person convicted of an offence against this section is
liable —
(a) for a first offence, to a fine of not more than
4 PU; and
(b) for a second or subsequent offence, to a fine of
not less than 5 PU or more than 10 PU; and, in
any event, the court convicting the person shall
order that the person be disqualified from
holding or obtaining a driver’s licence for a
period of not less than 3 months.
Four penalty units? In my state I think it’s closer to twelve for a first offence. First offences in many states are also associated with license disqualification. Over the past few years laws associated with drug driving (esp indications of trace narcotics) have been tightened in many states.
Same goes for drink driving, however with drink driving there is rationale as opposed to penalising those with trace amounts of cannabis in their system.
Edit: you are correct, from looking at the statute covering WA they appear to be far more lenient than NSW, QLD and VIC.
1 Like
Well, it’s in the statutes. Driving while impaired is pretty serious though:
64AB. Driving while impaired by drugs
(1) A person who drives or attempts to drive a motor
vehicle while impaired by drugs commits an offence,
and the offender may be arrested without warrant.
(2) A person convicted of an offence against this section is
liable —
(a) for a first offence, to a fine of not less than
16 PU or more than 50 PU; and, in any event,
the court convicting the person shall order that
the person be disqualified from holding or
obtaining a driver’s licence for a period of not
less than 6 months; and
(b) for a second offence, to a fine of not less than
30 PU or more than 70 PU or to imprisonment
for 9 months; and, in any event, the court
convicting the person shall order that the person
be disqualified from holding or obtaining a
driver’s licence for a period of not less than
2 years; and
(c) for a third or subsequent offence, to a fine of
not less than 40 PU or more than 100 PU or to
imprisonment for 18 months; and, in any event,
the court convicting the person shall order that
the person be permanently disqualified from
holding or obtaining a driver’s licence.
Are the drink/drunk driving penalties also harsher there?
I’d have to look, probably.
I’d be interested to see the statute covering the Northern Territory. Rules/regulations in general over there tend to be more lax.
NSW and QLD generally tend to be more/the most conservative and fine happy.
1 Like
Yeah, look at the statutes, not the websites from law firms telling you what the “potential” penalties" are lol. Fucking sharks, all of them.
1 Like
I think qld.gov.au (one source recently listed) is fairly reliable.
For NSW as of 2019 first offence appears to = license disqualification for 3-6 months and 572-2200$ fine. This is related to the detection of trace narcotics. Impairment incurs a far greater penalty.
I believe mandatory minimums do exist. Cases are thrown out at times, but you need to be able to afford a good lawyer + go through all the legal proceedings required.