Police ask for help finding stoned drivers

I find the headline of this story an amusing double entendre.


Ken's picture
Ken on February 10, 2005 - 11:09 Permalink

I don’t get the double entendre.

Stoned connotes marijuana.
My evaluation of degree of impairment as follows:
1. Combinations of drugs must be the worst
2. Alcohol or depressants.
3. LSD & Hallucigens
4. Heroin I guess
5. Presriptions with ‘don’t operate heavy stuff advice’
6. Marijuana
7. Tobacco
8. Distractions: phones, kids, spectacles, etc.

I don’t want to drive on roads with impaired drivers.
Public transit would probably be a better investment than expensive training for police. If they can’t detect drug impairment doesn’t that indicates how mild it is? Is there a documented case of a drug impaired accident? Isn’t this a really small problem with a really expensive solution (training in Reno, Nevada)?

My final point is urine tests for marijuana detect use within the last thirty days, that is too broad a period to justify a charge isn’t it?

Ken's picture
Ken on February 11, 2005 - 13:02 Permalink

I just got the double entendre!
It’s because the stoned drivers got lost isn’t it!
It was high time I figured it out.

Check out the all new sunmail.ca