Is Marijuana Causing More Car Crashes in Washington?

[Zippyjuan]

http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/21/is-marijuana-causing-more-car-crashes-in

Increases have been noted in states which have legalized it. Regular users need higher levels before they are "impaired" than an occasional user so a threshold over which one is "impaired" is impossible to establish.


The presence of THC does not necessarily indicate impairment.

Data released by the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) this week indicate that the number of drivers involved in fatal crashes with active THC in their blood jumped from 38 in 2013 to 75 last year. As The Seattle Times notes, the reasons for that increase are not entirely clear:

One obvious reason is that state-regulated pot stores opened in 2014, providing access to legal weed. But the first few stores didn't open until July, and their supply was scarce. Seattle, allotted 21 stores by state officials, saw only one shop selling pot until late September.

What's more, there were more marijuana-involved fatal crashes in the first half of 2014, before stores opened, than in the second half of the year.

Contrary to comments by Staci Hoff, the WTSC's director of data and research, the presence of active THC does not necessarily indicate that a driver was impaired by marijuana at the time of the crash, let alone that marijuana caused the accident. Noting that 85 percent of "cannabis-positive" drivers involved in fatal accidents had active THC (as opposed to an inactive THC metabolite) in their blood last year, Hoff concludes that "most of them were high." That is not a safe conclusion to draw, because (as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration points out) there is no reliable way to relate THC blood levels to impairment.

About half of the 75 drivers who tested positive for active THC had blood levels higher than five nanograms per milliliter, which is Washington's definition of driving under the influence. But that standard is highly controversial because regular users, who develop tolerance and accumulate THC in their fatty tissue, may exceed five nanograms all the time, even when they are not impaired. So while some of the fatally injured drivers may indeed have been "high" at five nanograms, it is not reasonable to assume that all of them were, let alone that the drivers below that arbitrary threshold were.

The picture is further complicated by the presence of other drugs. The Times notes that "half the drivers with active THC in their blood also were under the influence of alcohol, and the majority of those were legally intoxicated." Alcohol has a much more dramatic impact on driving ability than marijuana does, and the two together have a greater effect than either alone. The Times adds that the WTSC's analysis "doesn't account for prescription drugs in the marijuana-positive drivers."

Although marijuana's contribution to traffic accidents is hard to pin down, it is possible than an increase in cannabis consumption following legalization would lead to more stoned drivers on the road, resulting in more crashes. Alternatively, if more pot smoking is accompanied by less drinking, the net result could be fewer crashes, since alcohol impairs drivers a lot more than marijuana does. It is not clear yet whether either of those scenarios is materializing in Washington.

WTSC data show the total number of traffic fatalities rose by 6 percent last year (from 436 to 462) after falling the previous six years (including 2013, the first full year in which recreational use was legal, although state-licensed pot stores were not open yet). The number of fatalities from accidents in which the driver tested positive for marijuana (which does not necessarily mean he was impaired by marijuana) rose by 55 percent (from 64 to 99). Meanwhile, the number of fatalities from accidents in which the driver was deemed to be impaired by alcohol fell by 13 percent (from 127 to 111). That number had declined or remained steady in the previous six years, except for a 14 percent increase in 2009.

The 6 percent increase in total fatalities is consistent with the idea that legalization raises the number of dangerously impaired drivers. But that increase occurred entirely in the first half of 2014, before the pot shops started to open, which is a bit of a puzzle. By comparison, Colorado, where state-licensed marijuana merchants were open for business throughout 2014, saw only a 1.5 percent increase in total traffic fatalities that year. To get a better idea of what is happening, we will need more years of data, plus comparisons to trends in other states that have not legalized marijuana.

[phill4paul]

To get a better idea of what is happening, we will need more years of data, plus comparisons to trends in other states that have not legalized marijuana.

In other words....

Boogity













Boogity.

[Warlord]

Zippyjusn spinning for the govt

[acptulsa]

Leave it to Reason to post a question as a title that the article can in no way answer.

Leave it to Reason to act as though the legalization of a thing which was in more than common use for decades could, should or would make a difference to anything at all but incarceration rates and tax revenues.

[dannno]

Since marijuana legalization, highway fatalities in Colorado are at near-historic lows
By Radley Balko August 5, 2014

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/08/05/since-marijuana-legalization-highway-fatalities-in-colorado-are-at-near-historic-lows/

[Warlord]

im sure he will ignore that danno.. zippyjuan is just trying to wind us up

[Zippyjuan]

Little break from the Trump threads. Motor vehicle deaths have been declining nation wide.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg/700px-Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

[dannno]

Little break from the Trump threads. Motor vehicle deaths have been declining nation wide.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg/700px-Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year


Besides new safety features in cars, it's probably because more people are smoking weed instead of drinking, it's a nationwide trend as cannabis becomes more available in states that have legalized, it also becomes more available in those that haven't.

In the article you posted, it said that the number of fatalities with THC in their system went up from 38 to 75 in Washington. How many alcohol fatalities were there this year and last year? Did the number go down significantly?

[Zippyjuan]

Besides new safety features in cars, it's probably because more people are smoking weed instead of drinking, it's a nationwide trend as cannabis becomes more available in states that have legalized, it also becomes more available in those that haven't.

In the article you posted, it said that the number of fatalities with THC in their system went up from 38 to 75 in Washington. How many alcohol fatalities were there this year and last year? Did the number go down significantly?

They did decline- as they have for several years.


Meanwhile, the number of fatalities from accidents in which the driver was deemed to be impaired by alcohol fell by 13 percent (from 127 to 111). That number had declined or remained steady in the previous six years, except for a 14 percent increase in 2009.

[DamianTV]

Biased statistics are biased.

Those statistics are based on the presence of THC in the blood systems, which does not necessarily mean impaired driving. As long as govt looks at stats based on THC, they are not seeing reality, they are seeing what they want to see, which is only a means to tell the people why they need govt. And thats what Zippy bolded in the article. They need to be able to see truly impaired by pot to come up with an accurate statistic.

Like Todd said, boogity boogity.

[Uriel999]

I'm going to put it like this.

I fully advocate legalization of all drugs.

But if you get fucked up on anything and then get behind the wheel you in the wrong.

I think every responsible agrees not to mix booze/drugs with firearms.

A vehicle is just a 1-2 ton bullet.

I'm not saying "there should be a law..." I'm saying that is a shitty thing to do.

Resolving these things shouldn't come from government, people need to police themselves.

Don't let your friends drive drunk, high, etc.

Just get an Uber!

[dannno]

I'm going to put it like this.

I fully advocate legalization of all drugs.

But if you get fucked up on anything and then get behind the wheel you in the wrong.

I think every responsible agrees not to mix booze/drugs with firearms.

A vehicle is just a 1-2 ton bullet.

I'm not saying "there should be a law..." I'm saying that is a shitty thing to do.

Resolving these things shouldn't come from government, people need to police themselves.

Don't let your friends drive drunk, high, etc.

Just get an Uber!

What's your definition of "fucked up"?

I drive better high than I do sober, so do a lot of people, and many studies have proven that people tend to drive more safely high assuming they have taken a small to moderate dose. Dosage is highly dependent on the individual as well.

So that doesn't mean you should smoke a fat joint or a blunt and drive, though some people can do that fine too.. and your first several times getting high you probably shouldn't drive at all. But at some point, you get used to what's going on and small to moderate doses of cannabis can actually improve driving.

I know people who drive fine when they are drunk - to a point - but I don't encourage that because the problem is that alcohol tends to make people more ambitious, and when they drink a lot they think that they aren't messed up and they can drive. Cannabis does the opposite, it makes you more cautious. If you're too high at your friend's house, you can usually just sit back for an hour or so and be fine to drive, unless you are taking edibles.

I definitely advocate safety and responsibility, but this whole idea that if you ingest any amount of herb, no matter who you are, you shouldn't drive is ridiculous.

Alcohol is the worst drug to drive on because it changes the viscosity of the fluid in your ears to the point where your balance becomes impaired. So it doesn't take a lot of alcohol to cause some impairment. Few, if any other drugs do the same. So impairment is a different issue with drugs, although too much of most drugs will cause impairment at some level, but it is dependent on dosage and a different animal than alcohol.

[Uriel999]

What's your definition of "$#@!ed up"?

I drive better high than I do sober, so do a lot of people, and many studies have proven that people tend to drive more safely high assuming they have taken a small to moderate dose. Dosage is highly dependent on the individual as well.

So that doesn't mean you should smoke a fat joint or a blunt and drive, though some people can do that fine too.. and your first several times getting high you probably shouldn't drive at all. But at some point, you get used to what's going on and small to moderate doses of cannabis can actually improve driving.

I know people who drive fine when they are drunk - to a point - but I don't encourage that because the problem is that alcohol tends to make people more ambitious, and when they drink a lot they think that they aren't messed up and they can drive. Cannabis does the opposite, it makes you more cautious. If you're too high at your friend's house, you can usually just sit back for an hour or so and be fine to drive, unless you are taking edibles.

I definitely advocate safety and responsibility, but this whole idea that if you ingest any amount of herb, no matter who you are, you shouldn't drive is ridiculous.

Alcohol is the worst drug to drive on because it changes the viscosity of the fluid in your ears to the point where your balance becomes impaired. So it doesn't take a lot of alcohol to cause some impairment. Few, if any other drugs do the same. So impairment is a different issue with drugs, although too much of most drugs will cause impairment at some level, but it is dependent on dosage and a different animal than alcohol.

Danno, I've been there done that, seen the studies and maybe have a about 5 solid good years of personal "research" into the matter.

I understand and agree, yeah a few drinks, or a few hits from the bong and you are probably okay but I've seen enough car wrecks while people were not sober, that I'd simply say sober = better when it comes to driving.

I'm not a prude dude, and everybody is different and has their limitiations but safety is paramount to not harming others.

[phill4paul]

Danno, I've been there done that, seen the studies and maybe have a about 5 solid good years of personal "research" into the matter.

I understand and agree, yeah a few drinks, or a few hits from the bong and you are probably okay but I've seen enough car wrecks while people were not sober, that I'd simply say sober = better when it comes to driving.

I'm not a prude dude, and everybody is different and has their limitiations but safety is paramount to not harming others.

To the point of harming others that cause no harm? Because that is where we are at. Forced blood draws. And the harm that comes to those that create no harm. Road blocks. Fines, court costs, community service, state licensed (and lobbied) mandatory "treatment." Loss of job and future prospects of.

No. Just no.

[acptulsa]

Little break from the Trump threads. Motor vehicle deaths have been declining nation wide.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg/700px-Motor_vehicle_deaths_in_the_US.svg.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

You think your job is tough, imagine the hell I gave the shills who were trying to sell the 55 mph speed limit as a safety measure. You know, that unconstitutional 'do it or we cut off your highway funding' "federal speed limit" which is in no small part responsible for that peak between 1973-1981 or so.

People were so bored behind the wheel they were getting hypnotized and driving off the road. Or they were spending more time looking for cops than all other road hazards combined. Now, those shills got roasted.

There was this little government-funded study called The Sullivan Report that got leaked by a magazine for independent truckers named Overdrive...

[Uriel999]

To the point of harming others that cause no harm? Because that is where we are at. Forced blood draws. And the harm that comes to those that create no harm. Road blocks. Fines, court costs, community service, state licensed (and lobbied) mandatory "treatment." Loss of job and future prospects of.

No. Just no.

You're right, I'm not for any of that shit dude.

I said for people to police themselves, aka friends/groups keeping each other from causing trouble.

You know you can say something is morally/ethically wrong and dangerous and not say the government should be involved right?

[pcosmar]

In other words....

Boogity













Boogity.

Boo

Just bought some Washington Weed,, on sale at my favorite store in Longview. Was there last weekend.

Didn't notice a lot of wrecks. But it was really windy driving back through the Gorge. It's windy here a lot.

I suppose if I got blown off the road it would be blamed on the pot?

Tough luck.. this stoner drives just fine in adverse conditions.. Pot relieves stress.

[Chomp]

Marijuana causes hallucinations in some people. It may cause car wrecks due to side effects, hallucinations.

[acptulsa]

Marijuana causes hallucinations in some people. It may cause car wrecks due to side effects, hallucinations.

Yes. And some people cannot control themselves around alcohol, too. Thus Prohibition was impłemented as a substitute for liberty and self-control.

And didn't do anything but create organized crime.

What you say is true. But sweeping legislation is a greater threat, and a greater evil than that.

[pcosmar]

Little break from the Trump threads. Motor vehicle deaths have been declining nation wide.



Perhaps due to increased Marijuana use,, making safer drivers?

[tod evans]

Marijuana causes hallucinations in some people. It may cause car wrecks due to side effects, hallucinations.

Oh good grief...

You'd be wise to not repeat everything you read.

[pcosmar]

Yes. And some people cannot control themselves around alcohol, too. Thus Prohibition was impłemented as a substitute for liberty and self-control.

And didn't do anything but create organized crime.


it also created the Police State. to enforce a bad law.

[Ronin Truth]

At what speed, 3 MPH? :D

[acptulsa]

At what speed, 3 MPH? :D

This.

Anyone who smokes enough weed to hallucinate is highly unlikely to use the throttle pedal. Like, at all. They might not even make it up the first hill they encounter.

[Chomp]

Yes. And some people cannot control themselves around alcohol, too. Thus Prohibition was impłemented as a substitute for liberty and self-control.

And didn't do anything but create organized crime.

What you say is true. But sweeping legislation is a greater threat, and a greater evil than that.
Prohibition is always a trouble maker. Many agree. But drinking and driving is no excuse. So with weed and driving. People got to be designated. You did alcohol or weed, don't drive. Be a pedestrian during your fun.

[dannno]

This.

Anyone who smokes enough weed to hallucinate is highly unlikely to use the throttle pedal. Like, at all. They might not even make it up the first hill they encounter.

Experienced stoner Jane tries to drive after accidentally downing a dozen weed cupcakes in the movie Smiley Face:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8Spo5fNX-M

[dannno]

Prohibition is always a trouble maker. Many agree. But drinking and driving is no excuse. So with weed and driving. People got to be designated. You did alcohol or weed, don't drive. Be a pedestrian during your fun.

No.

Statistically, I probably drive safer than you when I'm stoned. There is a spectrum of stoned, and at a certain point I choose not to drive, but that's my choice, not yours. I encourage people to be responsible, but this zero tolerance policy is bullshit.

[acptulsa]

Be a pedestrian during your fun.

If you smoke enough, walking is likely to be faster.


...but this zero tolerance policy is bull$#@!.

There are people on this earth with enough natural ability and presence of mind that they probably do a better job shitfaced than 80% of the population do sober as a judge.

The problem with laws are they must be one size fits all. And of course they never do.

[Chomp]

Experienced stoner Jane tries to drive after accidentally downing a dozen weed cupcakes in the movie Smiley Face:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8Spo5fNX-M
Yep. Got drunk or got high on weed, don't drive or you do time.

[acptulsa]

Yep. Got drunk or got high on weed, don't drive or you do time.

And then there are the ADHD and bipolar cases who are about 90% less likely to road rage on medication than sober. Where's the justice in the law for them? Are our southwestern cities in any way designed to give them an alternative to driving?

[dannno]

Yep. Got drunk or got high on weed, don't drive or you do time.

You didn't fucking read what I wrote, maybe if you smoked a joint you would calm down, focus and think more clearly..

She ate 12 pot cupcakes, that's 24x (24 times) the amount you need to get stoned. Those 12 cupcakes were designed to get 12 people really fucked up. If you take 24 vicodin or 24 shots or 24 lines of coke, I agree it's a really bad idea to drive. Cannabis is one of the few substances that you can take that kind of dosage and not end up in the hospital, because it is particularly benign. You will be resting for a while, but you will be ok.

Like I said before, alcohol is a special case because it makes people think they are more sober than they are, when they are actually fucked up. They will drive because alcohol makes people feel prideful, they might not even feel drunk and all and they are stumbling all over the place. I do my best to help people make good decisions with regard to driving and alcohol. A couple drinks is fine, three is ok if you space them out and wait a little, four is ok if you space them out a wait a while, much more than that and it is better not to drive that night. You can't go by how you "feel", you have to know and be aware of how much you have had to drink and when. Some people are more responsible than others when it comes to drinking and driving. I tend not to put myself in the position to drive after drinking more than one drink unless I've waited a long time.

Weed does the opposite, it makes you feel more fucked up than you actually are able to operate at.. The point of the video is that people who are too stoned will not drive on their own volition.. They don't need the law. Where I am, about 10+ years ago the medical cannabis industry exploded and there were more weed stores than starbucks. Cops quickly realized that these people were not causing problems driving on the road, and they continue to focus on drunks. Medical patients are not hassled unless they display severe intoxication. Most people who are stoned don't display any intoxication.

And like I said, I probably drive safer stoned than you do sober, so stop telling other people what to do.

[Chomp]

And then there are the ADHD and bipolar cases who are about 90% less likely to road rage on medication than sober. Where's the justice in the law for them? Are our southwestern cities in any way designed to give them an alternative to driving? Inadequate motorists must be subject to moral laws likewise drunks and on high. But, tragically, there no moral laws in this falling land of ours, in dealing with all those inadequate people who abuse all things. We got bad laws by our totalitarian politicians aimed against us, not those brutes.

[tod evans]

Inadequate motorists must be subject to moral laws likewise drunks and on high. But, tragically, there no moral laws in this falling land of ours, in dealing with all those inadequate people who abuse all things. We got bad laws by our totalitarian politicians aimed against us, not those brutes.

Keep talkin'.......

[acptulsa]

Inadequate motorists must be subject to moral laws likewise drunks and on high. But, tragically, there no moral laws in this falling land of ours, in dealing with all those inadequate people who abuse all things. We got bad laws by our totalitarian politicians aimed against us, not those brutes.

One size fits all laws always target the harmless with the harmful. There is no other way. It cannot be otherwise, unless and until we design those laws to deal solely with those who are actually guilty of harming others.

We cry and wring our hands and call for laws that will prevent tragedies, instead of punishing those who cause tragedies. Yet the original tragedies continue to happen. The big difference is the other tragedies--caused by a justice system determined to do injustice--that begin to happen.

When will we learn to be civilized? It's actually simple. Will Rogers told us eighty years or so ago--'You cannot have true civilization until you learn to recognize the rights of others.'--Will Rogers

Recognizing the rights of others does not mean punishing them for every little behavior that some casual observer might think might be a risk to their safety. That is not the road to safety, it's the road to tyranny.

And no one--no one--is safe in a tyranny.

[Dr.3D]

So smoking tobacco might be the cause of all the accidents. If you test everybody who was in an accident, you might find they have been using tobacco.

[tod evans]

So smoking tobacco might be the cause of all the accidents. If you test everybody who was in an accident, you might find they have been using tobacco.

The new tobacco legislation will fix all that........:rolleyes:

[dannno]

So smoking tobacco might be the cause of all the accidents. If you test everybody who was in an accident, you might find they have been using tobacco.

I would be willing to bet that caffeine has more deleterious effects on driving than cannabis.. all those people hyped up on their espresso latte's jamming on the gas pedal, switching lanes fast and swearing..

[tod evans]

I would be willing to bet that caffeine has more deleterious effects on driving than cannabis.. all those people hyped up on their espresso latte's jamming on the gas pedal, switching lanes fast and swearing..

If the lines at their bistro weren't so long they wouldn't be late and stressed over it...

The only logical answer is government subsidized latte's for the children...

[Dr.3D]

Seems the best answer is to let people be responsible for the accidents they are in, rather than blaming something they may have consumed.

[Chomp]

The new tobacco legislation will fix all that........:rolleyes:
With 21 law in Californication and in NYC. LOL ! I remember MADD's bull feces regarding alcohol. " Drinkers who 21+ are very responsible drivers ". Sick crap. I think you know this org Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD).