How accurate are new roadside drug tests?

[Jess Stone]

How accurate are new roadside drug tests?

 

By Carolyn Tucker

 

Lawyers are lining up to question the accuracy and purpose of new roadside drug tests, claiming there is insufficient scientific evidence to justify the government’s random approach.

 

Launching the new roadside tests last week, Police Minister Judy Spence said there would be zero tolerance for those who climbed behind the wheel under the influence of marijuana, speed, ice or ecstasy.

 

Ms Spence said those were caught would face fines of up to $1050 and lose their licence for up to nine months for a first offence.

 

But some in the legal community, who prefer not to be named, suggested the new laws appeared to be more about detecting drug use in the community than getting unsafe drivers off the road.

 

President of the Council for Civil Liberties Michael Cope said for the first time in Queensland, it would become an offence to have certain illicit drugs in your system, regardless of whether those substances were causing any driving impairment.

 

"As far as we are concerned there is no established mechanism for relating the amount of drug in your system to impairment, which will vary significantly from one individual to another," Mr Cope said.

 

"There are also other issues abut the testing equipment potentially producing false positives, including for the use of common prescription drugs."

 

Mr Cope said research conducted in Canada found drug testing had returned false positives for 100 legally prescribed drugs.

 

Mr Cope said there was also concern that some drugs, such as cannabis, could linger in a person’s system.

 

Sunshine Coast defence solicitor Chelsea Emery said she believed there were still a number of unanswered questions about the new laws and there was little reference to what levels of a drug would determine any impairment.

 

"It’s known that cannabis metabolites stay in your system for about four weeks, even though the substance which gives the drug high is long gone.

 

"Does this mean you could smoke cannabis at a party – or even ingest second-hand smoke – and be random drug-tested weeks later, and then charged with an offence?"

 

source ..... SunshineCoastDaily

[loylty gets u nothing]

i thin in the brisbane paper on sunday

they were saying that 19 peeps have been caught for drug driving

of those 19, 1 person had been aprehended for smoking pot

but also that person had ice or5 amphetamines in his system with it..

 

and all the +s are coming back from the lab very positive

take care

bil

[bufo marinus]

Excellent, excellent

I was hoping these sort of questions were going to be raised especially in regards to zero tolerance policy.

Michael Copes comments are spot on in regard to this state effectively having achieved random drug testing across the community

Nice work Peter Beattie you weak dog, introducing stealth testing on your fellow man. This once again shows how arrogant this bastard of a politician was

Hey Jess good to see you posting again here and another good article

[freddie]

But some in the legal community, who prefer not to be named, suggested the new laws appeared to be more about detecting drug use in the community than getting unsafe drivers off the road.

 

The new laws are also about trying to frighten people into giving up altogether. I am starting to think that the lack of clear information on how long it is after your last smoke that you can still test positive is deliberate. Its either that or they are incompetent and don't really know.

 

I hope lawyers can sort this out. It hsn't happened in other states though.

[Indycar]

Launching the new roadside tests last week, Police Minister Judy Spence said there would be zero tolerance for those who climbed behind the wheel under the influence of marijuana, speed, ice or ecstasy.

 

Seems all is cool if ya got a cocaine or smack habit 'n take to the roads then.

 

Nothing new from the Queensland Government. As long as i been on this planet, they've introduced legislation without properly researching the pro's 'n con's properly...

 

[pipeman]

why aren't they testing for prescription drugs?

 

why isn't anyone doing testing on driving impairment on prescription drugs?

 

where is the correlation, anywhere in the world, between drug use and accident rates????

[sunnycoaststoner]

a quote from a friend who has a brother who is in the force " it wont last, it is mainly a big scare tactic to frighten people from using drugs and driving, in an attempt to curb the road toll in queensland for the holidays. "

[Gee]

why aren't they testing for prescription drugs?

 

why isn't anyone doing testing on driving impairment on prescription drugs?

 

where is the correlation, anywhere in the world, between drug use and accident rates????

 

3 very good points. i'd be more comfortable driving stoned than on something legal like No Doze which is essentially to stop your body going to sleep even though it's your body saying it's tired. maybe they should be testing for that?

[Bungee]

The thing I don't like about this is that the cops say they've gotta randomly test drivers for drugs coz drugs are bad, but the police unions won't allow the cops themselves to be randomly drug tested, despite the fact that the cops don't just drive but carry guns. (druggies with guns, scary scenario).

 

I don't like having one law for us and a different law for the cops.

[hugecola]

I remember when I was young there was a round-a-bout near my house where the local cop was found lying on the bonnet of his car drunk and stoned!!! Hahahahaha!

 

I've seen the road side tests in action but haven't been tested yet - touch wood!