Newspaper has concerns and questions driver drug tests!

[Jess Stone]

Test could snare innocents

 

INNOCENT people could be charged and convicted under new roadside drug testing laws, a local solicitor has warned. Lismore solicitor Stephen Bolt and Mullumbimby solicitor Cameron Bell will join forensic science expert Associate Professor Michael Dawson tonight and tomorrow in talks about the new laws, arranged by local drug and alcohol rehabilitation centre, the Buttery.

 

Dr Dawson is the head of the University of Tech- nology, Sydney’s Department of Chemistry, Materials and Forensic Science. Dr Dawson has raised concerns about the laws, which allow police to take saliva samples from drivers to test for cannabis, amphetamines and ecstasy, pointing out that in Victoria people later shown to be innocent had been paraded publicly after testing positive to drugs in a roadside saliva test Dr Dawson said he was also concerned about the laws penalising anyone who tested positive, rather than on their level of in- toxication.

 

NSW Roads Minister Eric Roozendaal defended the laws, saying driving under the influence of drugs put lives at risk.

 

Mr Bolt said that if saliva tests commanded the same status in court as random breath tests innocent people could be penalised because of reported problems with the accuracy of saliva testing.

 

Even without errors, people might test positive to cannabis, and be convicted of drug-driving, simply by being in the presence of someone smoking the drug.

 

The saliva tests did not look for opiates such as morphine, which heroin converted into in the body, because they would then also pick up opiates in common medications such as Panadeine.

 

However, Dr Dawson said driving ability was reduced regardless of whether the drug in question was legal and that the new testing regime ought to test for all drugs within its range.

It could then use blood tests and/or sobriety tests, such as computer simulations to show whether a driver was intoxicated.

Article : Northern Star Newspaper

Also the Northern Star had an editorial on this subject questioning RDT, however they don't include it on their web site ,but you can read it on the homepage at Drug Test Scam. Thank goodness some are starting to question these dubious draconian laws !

Edited December 4, 2006 by Jess Stone

[generic_hippie]

SO I went along to this first meeting in Nimbin last night, interesting, but IMHO a little premature.

 

Premature?

 

Yes, premature in that the Police operational policies have yet to be put in place, so quite frankly there is little we can discuss accurately beyond the legislation.

 

None of the questions raised regarding procedures or possible ways to beat the testing apparatus were able to be answered.

 

One thing that was discussed remained with me because it covered one of my main concerns; that of dna collection by the state associated with my drug use.

 

Apparently this has been specifically legislated against.

 

The other strongest thing that remains with me the morning after is this statistic from the Victorian experience, there were over 13 thousand drivers tested during the 12 month trial down south, of those there were only 19 convictions for cannabis driving recorded.

 

19/13000+

 

Those are certainly odds it seems one could live with through minimal disruption to my life or lifestyle.

[tony2wheelsgood]

However, Dr Dawson said driving ability was reduced regardless of whether the drug in question was legal and that the new testing regime ought to test for all drugs within its range.

 

It could then use blood tests and/or sobriety tests, such as computer simulations to show whether a driver was intoxicated.

 

total bollox. some slimy politico trying to make a name for themselves and jumping on the bandwagon. i wonder if they'll apply the same criteria to alcohol.

if they could tax it it would be legal tomorrow.

[Ms Green]

I mean how can anyone try and bung this on when there is no level set or even what they are actually testing for whether its for your actual driving or your ability to drive under the influence of Cannabis.I think people wouldn't have to much of a problem if there was a level actually set or if its a case of just not having a smoke a few hours before you go out?Its just crap at least if your on booze you can drink up to a certain level and have your own breath tests so why can't we have the same?

[medMUser]

How about a bit humor to lten da mood?

 

“Woman’s door broken down in police goof”

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53105

 

Here’s another: “Police raid house for garden foliage”

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53105

 

Ending the drug war is starting to catch on, finally. Can’t lie to the people forever.

 

http://www.google.com/search?q=drug+war&am...wswithviews.com

 

 

A lotta peeps are Q-ing the madness. They just do not get much coverage.

 

Be safe evveeyy one!!!

 

mM