McBeane Posted June 2, 2010 Posted June 2, 2010 I obviously don't condone driving stoned, but I've done it many times and I'm so paranoid I keep one eye on the speedometer and the other on the road in front of me. It took me an hour to drive from Tonawanda to Blasdell, which I drive to work every day and takes just under a half hour. Riding a motorcycle on the other hand... scared the hell out of me and I'll never ride a bike stoned again lol. As another poster said, I've slowed down for green lights, and gone way under the speed limit, but thats about as bad as it gets, if I'm driving drunk I can't hold the wheel straight at all, which is why i don't drive drunk lol. Couldn't have said it much better myself. I don't ride a bike (yet, hopefully) but everything else you said is pretty spot on. I am much more conscientious about my speed, and usually go a little under if anything. Now when I'm sober, I like to drive way too fast, and having a pretty fast car doesn't help that
CarolinaBill Posted June 2, 2010 Posted June 2, 2010 It is evident that the smoking of marijuana by human subjects does have a detrimental effect on their driving skills and performance in a restricted driving area, and that this effect is even greater under normal conditions of driving on city streets. The effect of marijuana on driving is not uniform for all subjects, however, but is in fact bidirectional; whether or not a significant decline occurs in driving ability is dependent both on the subject's capacity to compensate and on the dose of marijuana. For those subjects who improved their performance, the explanation may lie in overcompensation and possibly the sedative effect of the drug. Whereas the street portion of this study approximated normal driving conditions, it should be emphasized that the context of the driving experience een on city streets was experimental. the design of this study maximal safeguards in terms of a dual control vehicle and a driver observr; in addition, the subjects were proffessionally screened and, with rare exception, they were emotionally stable. Given the experimental setting and set, the safeguards, and the nature of the study sample, idiosyncratic behaviour that might occure under normal driving condition would be less likely to occur in a study such as this. Other identified factors might lead to more stringent conclussions regarding the effects of marijuana on driving.The first is night driving, which may be more stressful. But an even more important unanswered question is the cumulative effect of alcohol and marijuana on driving (64 percent of the study sample reported alcohol in combination with marihjuana before driving). Third, the doses of marijuana used in this study were within the range of social marijuana usage(1); more heroic doses might be taken before driving. Fourth, the effect of marijuana on reactions and decision during high speed is still another unknown. What are the recommendations that emarge from this study? Driving under the influence of marijuana should be avoided as much as should driving under the influence of alcohol. More investigation is urgently required-and high priority should be given to studies that approximate normal conditions of driving and in which alcohol and marijuana are administered to the same subjects. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4414573
Hossage Posted June 2, 2010 Posted June 2, 2010 Honestly I find it has a majorly adverse effect on my driving skills.
Chef Jim Posted June 2, 2010 Posted June 2, 2010 I obviously don't condone driving stoned, but I've done it many times and I'm so paranoid I keep one eye on the speedometer and the other on the road in front of me. It took me an hour to drive from Tonawanda to Blasdell, which I drive to work every day and takes just under a half hour. Riding a motorcycle on the other hand... scared the hell out of me and I'll never ride a bike stoned again lol. As another poster said, I've slowed down for green lights, and gone way under the speed limit, but thats about as bad as it gets, if I'm driving drunk I can't hold the wheel straight at all, which is why i don't drive drunk lol. You do realize that driving way under the speed limit makes you a hazard on the road too.
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 2, 2010 Posted June 2, 2010 You do realize that driving way under the speed limit makes you a hazard on the road too. Exactly Chef. That is why I made the comment about the minimum speed limit on expressways... Maybe he didn't read it.
rackemrack Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 You do realize that driving way under the speed limit makes you a hazard on the road too. i realize that, thats why i don't condone driving stoned...
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 i realize that, thats why i don't condone driving stoned... But you've done it many times. Great, remind me not to drive near where you live.
Booster4324 Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 But you've done it many times. Great, remind me not to drive near where you live. Only you are criticizing his individual driving. Maybe other stoners are smart (no offense) and drive the speed limit. Maybe even set their cruise control at the speed limit. Perhaps, in his example, he speeds at twice the limit when he isn't stoned. Your thoughts then?
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Only you are criticizing his individual driving. Maybe other stoners are smart (no offense) and drive the speed limit. Maybe even set their cruise control at the speed limit. Perhaps, in his example, he speeds at twice the limit when he isn't stoned. Your thoughts then? The study itself said that the stoners drive slower. Slow drivers are considered a hazard.
Booster4324 Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 The study itself said that the stoners drive slower. Slow drivers are considered a hazard. More so than fast drivers?
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 More so than fast drivers? Point taken, but there have been plenty of people here that say they drive slow when stoned. I think it's safe to say the drive slower than the flow of traffic which is a hazzard.
Booster4324 Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Point taken, but there have been plenty of people here that say they drive slow when stoned. I think it's safe to say the drive slower than the flow of traffic which is a hazzard. Fair enough, although I think the slowness described by the posters is exaggerated. So they really drive probably 5 miles under in all likelihood. If the effect was doing 45 even in a 69, we would hear about it way more. Which is more dangerous in your opinion, 25 over while sober or 10 under while stoned?
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Fair enough, although I think the slowness described by the posters is exaggerated. So they really drive probably 5 miles under in all likelihood. If the effect was doing 45 even in a 69, we would hear about it way more. Which is more dangerous in your opinion, 25 over while sober or 10 under while stoned? 10 under the prevailing flow of traffice is more dangerous stoned or sober. Well maybe not more dangerous but a !@#$ of a lot more annoying.
McBeane Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Point taken, but there have been plenty of people here that say they drive slow when stoned. I think it's safe to say the drive slower than the flow of traffic which is a hazzard. So are you against the vast majority of elderly people driving?
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 So are you against the vast majority of elderly people driving? They are a hazzard.
Booster4324 Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 10 under the prevailing flow of traffice is more dangerous stoned or sober. Well maybe not more dangerous but a !@#$ of a lot more annoying. Fair enough.
McBeane Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 They are a hazzard. Out of curiosity, how many accidents have you seen or heard that were caused only by a driver going obnoxiously slow? Because if that happens, usually someone else is at fault too for not being careful or aware enough. I agree with you on this, I'm just saying it's a two way street.
Chef Jim Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Out of curiosity, how many accidents have you seen or heard that were caused only by a driver going obnoxiously slow? Because if that happens, usually someone else is at fault too for not being careful or aware enough. I agree with you on this, I'm just saying it's a two way street. Linky-link No, federal and state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. According to an Institute of Transportation Engineers Study, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are six times as likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is far more likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80 mph. Me smart, me just went to traffic school for ...........................speeding.
Terry Tate Posted June 3, 2010 Posted June 3, 2010 Motorcycle Cop: [Mike and Steve are borrowing their friend's souped up police cruiser. However, a harsh bump in the road broke the seal on the nitrous system and nitrous oxide has been leaking in to the car. They've just been pulled over] Tell me, officer, do you have any idea how fast you were going? Mike: Well, I got a 426 hemi here, 3/4 cams, nitro boosters, I can get 'er up to as good as 155! Never do, though, of course, unless I'm chasing a cute chick in a Ferrari! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! I guess I was goin' about... 65, tops. Motorcycle Cop: SEVEN! SEVEN miles an hour! And normally, when I stop people, they pull onto the *shoulder*!
rackemrack Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 But you've done it many times. Great, remind me not to drive near where you live. lucky for you i don't get into that kinda thing very often these days...
Recommended Posts