Drink and drug driving - proving someone is unfit to drive?
Discussion
Hi all. Having recently noticed a new campaign being launched by the local police force to tackle drink and drug drivers this christmas period, I had a question I couldn't find the answer to and one which they dont mention (they tended to generalise all drugs into one group where they obviously should all be treated accordingly depending on the drug in question).
Where as with alcohol - fairly simple scenario, someone smells of alcohol or appears under the influence, gets breath tested at the roadside and there is a clear cut threshold to prove if theyre legal to continue driving or shouldnt have been behind the wheel in the first place.
But the scenario that left me puzzled - what would happen if the driver admitted to say, having taken a drug a short time before driving, lets say cocaine. Other than the field impairment roadside test, how do they establish if someone is actually unfit to drive through the drug? because as I understand it just having traces of a drug in your system whilst driving isnt illegal, as there is obviously not an established limit that is deemed acceptable for cocaine levels in the blood whilst driving, and I doubt any research has been done to determine what would be 'under the limit' on an illegal drug, or is it just a simple zero policy if they suspect its in your system and a blood test confirms it?
Now before you jump to conclusions i'm not someone who drives about wired whizzing round on cocaine, lol. I was originally interested as it obviously applies to prescription drugs that can effect your ability to drive too - and there is 2 of these that I sometimes take (codeine related medication for pain management which I take fairly regularly, and a benzodiazepine with an extremely long half life, which I take on an as needed basis) obviously from taking prescription drugs for an extended period of time you tend to get used to the effects and tolerance builds up to a point where you can drive perfectly safely on an amount you have learnt is way below what would cause you to be impaired in any way. However, if an officer notices (i'm assuming from the look of my eyes which do tend to become fairly glazed on the codeine medication) that I am under the influence of one of these, would it simply be come back to the nick and have a blood test and then thats it licence gone if they come back positive for the drug? I tend to keep the packaging it was prescribed in to me in the car for these scenarios just in case, and also never take more than the recommended dose at once.
Before I open myself up for some flaming, I might add that I never drive whilst impaired and i'm also one of the types who would rather not drink at all than have 'just the one' and then drive home. I ask all this mainly because of the wording of the 'drink drug driving' campaign information that I have just read - it made it seem like anyone with any traces of any drugs in their system will lose their licence! Seems slightly worrying to me as one of the medications I have to take has a half life of around 12-16 hours, so if i'm on average taking it 2 or 3 times a week, it would mean waiting weeks possibly months for the drug to be completely out of my system.
Don't get me wrong I would personally never drive if I wasn't able to pass the field impairment test myself very easily - something i've gotten quite good at as I regularly test myself to make sure I am safe to drive before leaving if in any doubt at all
I'm sure my neighbours think im a bit mental by now for standing there touching my nose etc. I just want to avoid any hassle of being thrown in a cell for being open about what medication I take / have taken when asked, and then have the book thrown at me for just having traces of something in my system because of their 'campaign'. I guess my main worry is them wanting to do a blood test on me despite me passing the FIT, and then despite me being sober as a nut due to tolerance over the years, my blood levels could show massive amounts of it in my system, kind of like when you see those truckers who blow massively over the breathalyser but since their alcohol tolerance is so large they are completely sober in themselves.
Anyway apologies for the long post, and thanks in advance for any advice, and my confusingly written post which I think I may have to edit at some point!
Thanks all.
Where as with alcohol - fairly simple scenario, someone smells of alcohol or appears under the influence, gets breath tested at the roadside and there is a clear cut threshold to prove if theyre legal to continue driving or shouldnt have been behind the wheel in the first place.
But the scenario that left me puzzled - what would happen if the driver admitted to say, having taken a drug a short time before driving, lets say cocaine. Other than the field impairment roadside test, how do they establish if someone is actually unfit to drive through the drug? because as I understand it just having traces of a drug in your system whilst driving isnt illegal, as there is obviously not an established limit that is deemed acceptable for cocaine levels in the blood whilst driving, and I doubt any research has been done to determine what would be 'under the limit' on an illegal drug, or is it just a simple zero policy if they suspect its in your system and a blood test confirms it?
Now before you jump to conclusions i'm not someone who drives about wired whizzing round on cocaine, lol. I was originally interested as it obviously applies to prescription drugs that can effect your ability to drive too - and there is 2 of these that I sometimes take (codeine related medication for pain management which I take fairly regularly, and a benzodiazepine with an extremely long half life, which I take on an as needed basis) obviously from taking prescription drugs for an extended period of time you tend to get used to the effects and tolerance builds up to a point where you can drive perfectly safely on an amount you have learnt is way below what would cause you to be impaired in any way. However, if an officer notices (i'm assuming from the look of my eyes which do tend to become fairly glazed on the codeine medication) that I am under the influence of one of these, would it simply be come back to the nick and have a blood test and then thats it licence gone if they come back positive for the drug? I tend to keep the packaging it was prescribed in to me in the car for these scenarios just in case, and also never take more than the recommended dose at once.
Before I open myself up for some flaming, I might add that I never drive whilst impaired and i'm also one of the types who would rather not drink at all than have 'just the one' and then drive home. I ask all this mainly because of the wording of the 'drink drug driving' campaign information that I have just read - it made it seem like anyone with any traces of any drugs in their system will lose their licence! Seems slightly worrying to me as one of the medications I have to take has a half life of around 12-16 hours, so if i'm on average taking it 2 or 3 times a week, it would mean waiting weeks possibly months for the drug to be completely out of my system.
Don't get me wrong I would personally never drive if I wasn't able to pass the field impairment test myself very easily - something i've gotten quite good at as I regularly test myself to make sure I am safe to drive before leaving if in any doubt at all
I'm sure my neighbours think im a bit mental by now for standing there touching my nose etc. I just want to avoid any hassle of being thrown in a cell for being open about what medication I take / have taken when asked, and then have the book thrown at me for just having traces of something in my system because of their 'campaign'. I guess my main worry is them wanting to do a blood test on me despite me passing the FIT, and then despite me being sober as a nut due to tolerance over the years, my blood levels could show massive amounts of it in my system, kind of like when you see those truckers who blow massively over the breathalyser but since their alcohol tolerance is so large they are completely sober in themselves.Anyway apologies for the long post, and thanks in advance for any advice, and my confusingly written post which I think I may have to edit at some point!
Thanks all.
solidlad84 said:
Hi all. Having recently noticed a new campaign being launched by the local police force to tackle drink and drug drivers this christmas period, I had a question I couldn't find the answer to and one which they dont mention (they tended to generalise all drugs into one group where they obviously should all be treated accordingly depending on the drug in question).
Where as with alcohol - fairly simple scenario, someone smells of alcohol or appears under the influence, gets breath tested at the roadside and there is a clear cut threshold to prove if theyre legal to continue driving or shouldnt have been behind the wheel in the first place.
But the scenario that left me puzzled - what would happen if the driver admitted to say, having taken a drug a short time before driving, lets say cocaine. Other than the field impairment roadside test, how do they establish if someone is actually unfit to drive through the drug? because as I understand it just having traces of a drug in your system whilst driving isnt illegal, as there is obviously not an established limit that is deemed acceptable for cocaine levels in the blood whilst driving, and I doubt any research has been done to determine what would be 'under the limit' on an illegal drug, or is it just a simple zero policy if they suspect its in your system and a blood test confirms it?
Now before you jump to conclusions i'm not someone who drives about wired whizzing round on cocaine, lol. I was originally interested as it obviously applies to prescription drugs that can effect your ability to drive too - and there is 2 of these that I sometimes take (codeine related medication for pain management which I take fairly regularly, and a benzodiazepine with an extremely long half life, which I take on an as needed basis) obviously from taking prescription drugs for an extended period of time you tend to get used to the effects and tolerance builds up to a point where you can drive perfectly safely on an amount you have learnt is way below what would cause you to be impaired in any way. However, if an officer notices (i'm assuming from the look of my eyes which do tend to become fairly glazed on the codeine medication) that I am under the influence of one of these, would it simply be come back to the nick and have a blood test and then thats it licence gone if they come back positive for the drug? I tend to keep the packaging it was prescribed in to me in the car for these scenarios just in case, and also never take more than the recommended dose at once.
Before I open myself up for some flaming, I might add that I never drive whilst impaired and i'm also one of the types who would rather not drink at all than have 'just the one' and then drive home. I ask all this mainly because of the wording of the 'drink drug driving' campaign information that I have just read - it made it seem like anyone with any traces of any drugs in their system will lose their licence! Seems slightly worrying to me as one of the medications I have to take has a half life of around 12-16 hours, so if i'm on average taking it 2 or 3 times a week, it would mean waiting weeks possibly months for the drug to be completely out of my system.
Don't get me wrong I would personally never drive if I wasn't able to pass the field impairment test myself very easily - something i've gotten quite good at as I regularly test myself to make sure I am safe to drive before leaving if in any doubt at all I'm sure my neighbours think im a bit mental by now for standing there touching my nose etc. I just want to avoid any hassle of being thrown in a cell for being open about what medication I take / have taken when asked, and then have the book thrown at me for just having traces of something in my system because of their 'campaign'. I guess my main worry is them wanting to do a blood test on me despite me passing the FIT, and then despite me being sober as a nut due to tolerance over the years, my blood levels could show massive amounts of it in my system, kind of like when you see those truckers who blow massively over the breathalyser but since their alcohol tolerance is so large they are completely sober in themselves.
Anyway apologies for the long post, and thanks in advance for any advice, and my confusingly written post which I think I may have to edit at some point!
Thanks all.
You obviously have some concerns about the medication you regularly take , best thing to do is speak to your GP , he will be able to advise whether the dose you take will take you to the wrong side of the law or not.Where as with alcohol - fairly simple scenario, someone smells of alcohol or appears under the influence, gets breath tested at the roadside and there is a clear cut threshold to prove if theyre legal to continue driving or shouldnt have been behind the wheel in the first place.
But the scenario that left me puzzled - what would happen if the driver admitted to say, having taken a drug a short time before driving, lets say cocaine. Other than the field impairment roadside test, how do they establish if someone is actually unfit to drive through the drug? because as I understand it just having traces of a drug in your system whilst driving isnt illegal, as there is obviously not an established limit that is deemed acceptable for cocaine levels in the blood whilst driving, and I doubt any research has been done to determine what would be 'under the limit' on an illegal drug, or is it just a simple zero policy if they suspect its in your system and a blood test confirms it?
Now before you jump to conclusions i'm not someone who drives about wired whizzing round on cocaine, lol. I was originally interested as it obviously applies to prescription drugs that can effect your ability to drive too - and there is 2 of these that I sometimes take (codeine related medication for pain management which I take fairly regularly, and a benzodiazepine with an extremely long half life, which I take on an as needed basis) obviously from taking prescription drugs for an extended period of time you tend to get used to the effects and tolerance builds up to a point where you can drive perfectly safely on an amount you have learnt is way below what would cause you to be impaired in any way. However, if an officer notices (i'm assuming from the look of my eyes which do tend to become fairly glazed on the codeine medication) that I am under the influence of one of these, would it simply be come back to the nick and have a blood test and then thats it licence gone if they come back positive for the drug? I tend to keep the packaging it was prescribed in to me in the car for these scenarios just in case, and also never take more than the recommended dose at once.
Before I open myself up for some flaming, I might add that I never drive whilst impaired and i'm also one of the types who would rather not drink at all than have 'just the one' and then drive home. I ask all this mainly because of the wording of the 'drink drug driving' campaign information that I have just read - it made it seem like anyone with any traces of any drugs in their system will lose their licence! Seems slightly worrying to me as one of the medications I have to take has a half life of around 12-16 hours, so if i'm on average taking it 2 or 3 times a week, it would mean waiting weeks possibly months for the drug to be completely out of my system.
Don't get me wrong I would personally never drive if I wasn't able to pass the field impairment test myself very easily - something i've gotten quite good at as I regularly test myself to make sure I am safe to drive before leaving if in any doubt at all
I'm sure my neighbours think im a bit mental by now for standing there touching my nose etc. I just want to avoid any hassle of being thrown in a cell for being open about what medication I take / have taken when asked, and then have the book thrown at me for just having traces of something in my system because of their 'campaign'. I guess my main worry is them wanting to do a blood test on me despite me passing the FIT, and then despite me being sober as a nut due to tolerance over the years, my blood levels could show massive amounts of it in my system, kind of like when you see those truckers who blow massively over the breathalyser but since their alcohol tolerance is so large they are completely sober in themselves.Anyway apologies for the long post, and thanks in advance for any advice, and my confusingly written post which I think I may have to edit at some point!
Thanks all.
dingg said:
You obviously have some concerns about the medication you regularly take , best thing to do is speak to your GP , he will be able to advise whether the dose you take will take you to the wrong side of the law or not.
Its not really that. The codeine based medication I have to take doesn't exactly impair my driving abilities, but they do make my eyes look pretty 'under the influence' if that makes sense, glazed and watery etc which I believe is a common trait amongst other opiate based drugs. I was just concerned an over zealous officer would see this if I happened to get pulled over, (and I would be open about what I had taken) and then march me back to the station where I would be proven guilty just by the drug being in my blood. The article I read from my LA made out that this type of scenario is how it would pan out. Do they have to prove more than just that the specific drug was in the system? or is it now: 'simple you have this drug in your blood so we deem you unfit to drive'. FWIW, the medication says 1-2 tablets up to 4 times a day and not exceeding 8 in total. I only ever tend to take 2 in a whole day anyway but it still makes my eyes look suspect despite having no mental or cognitive impact which is what worries me - from the GPs point of view I am doing things by the book.
OP, the short answer is that you would have to 'fail' a field impairness test, then your blood is taken and analysed. Strictly speaking, it's not a pass or fail test of course. Prosecution to prove unfitness through drugs.
As to "doubting there's any research", you're completely wrong about that - perhaps you should read this thread about the pending legislation:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
As to "doubting there's any research", you're completely wrong about that - perhaps you should read this thread about the pending legislation:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
dingg said:
if your GP has said you're ok to drive on the dose you take , I wouldn't concern myself any further on the issue
It just seems a tad bizarre. As although medicinally I am taking the correct and safe dose, if someone who had no prescription but had taken the exact same substances I had and got pulled over - theyd most likely be taken back for a blood test then banned from driving if what i've read about this 'zero policy' on drugs in the bloodstream is correct, despite (ignoring bodily tolerace) us both having taken the same amount of the drug that supposedly was the cause of being 'unfit to drive'. So although I am legally allowed to take the medication from a medical point of view, where does the line get drawn when it comes to driving? if an officer says 'you look a bit under the influence mate, come back to the station for a blood test' and I explain why, and he says ok we'll do a blood test back at the station just to confirm, how would they decide from my blood results that I was fit or unfit to drive? surely me having a prescription has no bearing on that. I may have completely misinterpreted what I read but to me it seems very similar to the legislation that surrounds handing out s.59 notices. Two people exactly the same stopped by two different coppers, one could be sent on his way perfectly fine and legally whilst the other 'could' have trouble coming his way, and be sent to the station to await blood tests etc.I may have beaten around the bush and took a long time to manage to say what I originally intended here, so apologies for that. If I was pulled over and my eyes looked 'under the influence' but they could see I was clearly still properly sober and completely in control of myself and open about what I had taken, would they still be insistent on me going back with them to the station for a blood test or is this 'drink and drug driving' campaign more likely aimed at the youngens who get trollied then drive about barely able to keep their eyes open?
Gotta say i'm feeling a bit stupid now as looking back I may have just read too much into their article about a new christmas anti drink / drug drive campaign, acting like a zero tolerance policy to any substances in your body was in place.
I only know of one person who was arrested for driving under the influence of drugs. I don't know if there was a roadside test, but the upshot was a trip to the station where the dr then had to examine him and declare fitness to drive. This was about 8 years ago I guess so I don't know how valid it is. When at the station he was taken by the dr to a separate room, spoken to about what he might have taken and when. He was declared fit to drive even though he had been honest with the dr about what he had taken and when.
Thanks for the replies everyone. I think I was just concerned with the likelihood of an innocent driver who isn't unfit getting treated as though they are purely due to their appearance or what they have admitted to ingesting.
I'm going to just keep both patient information leaflets in the car with me along with the boxes they came prescribed in in the future.
I'm going to just keep both patient information leaflets in the car with me along with the boxes they came prescribed in in the future.
Edited by solidlad84 on Monday 1st December 13:56
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff