Jump to content

Man high on marijuana crashes car, cuddles pets & smiles at cops


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, transam said:

With puff in the UK, after a positive roadside test a blood test is done at the police station, if over the prescribed limit, you get done the same as drink-driving..

 

correct. however you insinuated that there was an accurate road side test. the roadside breath test can only indicate it is in the system.

 

so my same scenario applies. if i tested positive at a roadside test then went to the police station i would test negative. 

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, stoner said:

 

correct. however you insinuated that there was an accurate road side test. the roadside breath test can only indicate it is in the system.

 

so my same scenario applies. if i tested positive at a roadside test then went to the police station i would test negative. 

 

 

I believe in NZ and Aussie it's a saliva test for drugs.  That's all I know... You test positive and you don't drive. 

 

Don't know if there are blood tests that may follow on afterwards.  With alcohol you are given an option for blood test... But you pay for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Korat Kiwi said:

I believe in NZ and Aussie it's a saliva test for drugs.  That's all I know... You test positive and you don't drive. 

 

Don't know if there are blood tests that may follow on afterwards.  With alcohol you are given an option for blood test... But you pay for that. 

 

correct. same as in canada. those tests however cannot tell the intoxication of the driver the same way a breathalyzer does. only that cannabis is in the system. a blood test will show intoxication levels though. 

 

for years a canadian company called cannabix has been trying to figure this all out. they have been close to a working model for about 7 years now. to show how difficult it is. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Korat Kiwi said:

I believe in NZ and Aussie it's a saliva test for drugs.  That's all I know... You test positive and you don't drive. 

 

Don't know if there are blood tests that may follow on afterwards.  With alcohol you are given an option for blood test... But you pay for that. 

Yes there is a second test if you fail this one you go to court as you all know weed or any other drugs stay in your system for a few days being positive you walk home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/24/2024 at 3:11 PM, snoop1130 said:

Man high on marijuana crashes car, cuddles pets & smiles at cops 

It seems strange not being a Thai national that his Hong Kong nationality was not given in the headlines. 

 

I'm sure if he was British or Swede etc it would have been noted. 

 

After reading the article headline I assumed he would be Thai. 

 

Edited by SAFETY FIRST
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, stoner said:

 

correct. however you insinuated that there was an accurate road side test. the roadside breath test can only indicate it is in the system.

 

so my same scenario applies. if i tested positive at a roadside test then went to the police station i would test negative. 

 

 

No, I never said anything of the sort..........😷

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2024 at 6:32 AM, Jingthing said:

What strain and how much a gram?

Overall driving stoned is safer than driving drunk. 

You will get every alcoholic up in arms , that’s Heresy 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, stoner said:

 

current test methods cannot determine intoxication levels. only that it is in the persons system. this leaves too many variables for accurately testing for cannabis. 

             The current urine tests that one might be subjected to are even worse, they don't even test for THC but for metabolites of it which are not even psychoactive, but can remain present in urine samples for weeks . It is effectively a "lifestyle" test and gives absolutely no indication of intoxication whatsoever.  It merely indicates that the person ingested cannabis some time in the last 3 months,  as an added insult , false positives are very common too.  The fact that people have lost their jobs and had their lives ruined because of this is a disgrace.

               The common threshold for failure is 50 nanograms,  but there are more sensitive tests that can detect the metabolites at 20 nanograms, however  they are rarely used due to false positives. I recently saw a promotional video for a testing lab in which the rep was positively gushing about a new test they had developed which was sensitive at levels of 1 nanogram ! considering that is one nanogram of an inert non psychoactive metabolite, one really can.t help asking   "why for gods sake ?"

                 The fact of the matter is that the effects of cannabis are nothing like the effects of alcohol, especially when it comes to activities like driving which makes the cut and pasted protocols for testing totally inappropriate,  in my not so humble opinion

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Irish star said:

You will get every alcoholic up in arms , that’s Heresy 

The alcoholics will be telling you that its  spelt" Hennessy "

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, transam said:

With puff in the UK, after a positive roadside test a blood test is done at the police station, if over the prescribed limit, you get done the same as drink-driving..

Its actually worse because you end up with a "drugs" conviction on your record, which has more stigma attached to it than a DUI. The possibility of body cavity searches at airports for example in the future is increased, which is not the case for drunk driving

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

Its actually worse because you end up with a "drugs" conviction on your record, which has more stigma attached to it than a DUI. The possibility of body cavity searches at airports for example in the future is increased, which is not the case for drunk driving

Great idea.... should be obligatory for all those with backpacks and dreadlocks!

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2024 at 3:11 PM, snoop1130 said:

The Hong Kong man reluctantly resumed driving but declined Patipan’s offer to accompany him. This decision ultimately led to the crash.

Could have made matters worse if Patipan was a woman, he could have been stroking 2 pussies while driving. Did Patipan offer to drive ? it was not mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Never knew such accident can occur from smoking dope only. Yes I get slower when I'm high on dope, but probably not reckless nor losing touch with reality.

Edited by sumaterani
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, sumaterani said:

Never knew such accident can occur from smoking dope only. Yes I get slower when I'm high on dope, but probably not reckless nor losing touch with reality.

Well being 'slower' would make crossing the road more dangerous!

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2024 at 9:39 AM, Bday Prang said:

            So now one can be determined to be "heavily under the influence" of cannabis purely on the word of a friend?   but one needs to be properly tested at a police station for alcohol?   Seems a little unfair, I call b/s on the whole story. 

            The only things this incident has highlighted is, One, the appalling standard of journalism at the Thaiger, and, Two, The start of medias next wave of anti cannabis fairy stories that I predicted would soon follow the announcement   of the authorities intention  to recriminalize cannabis 

            It doesn't seem to matter how incredulous the story , there is no shortage of people only two willing to believe what they read in the papers or especially on line

             Incidentally as far as I am aware, this is actually the first ever "news" report alleging the contributory involvement of cannabis in a traffic incident, and it is as I said above , based purely on the words of his friend,   

             Now can somebody tell me how many instances of DUI have occured since the legalisation of cannabis , and in how many instances was a conviction secured purely on the word of an alleged drunk driver friend ?

            Is it only me that finds this rubbish an insult to one's intelligence

 

Thailand legalised Cannabis without preparing for it. I doubt the police carry drug wipe kits or take blood samples at police stations. So they probably won't be able to charge him with anything.  It will take a fatal collision to change things.

 

It's very simple with Cannabis & Alcohol, if you puff, you don't drive for a day or two, if you smoke Cannabis every day, you shouldn't ever be in charge of a motor vehicle. If you drink you don't drive.

 

In the UK some police forces test & convict 10 times more people than others, that is because testing is an expensive process.

 

44% of convictions are repeat offenders and some police forces are reporting it's on a par with alcohol.  67% of those convicted of drug driving had one or more previous conviction, typically for theft/burglary or drug-related offences.

 

I am sure Thailand will get its act together, but not this year.

 

 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume that operating a motor vehicle under the influence of Cannabis is illegal.

 

Removing Cannabis flower from the Narcotics list does not mean it is legal to consume and then operate a motor vehicle.

 

 

IMO, the Police have been way too lazy in enforcing existing laws as they apply to "legal" cannabis.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

Thailand legalised Cannabis without preparing for it. I doubt the police carry drug wipe kits or take blood samples at police stations. So they probably won't be able to charge him with anything.  It will take a fatal collision to change things.

 

It's very simple with Cannabis & Alcohol, if you puff, you don't drive for a day or two, if you smoke Cannabis every day, you shouldn't ever be in charge of a motor vehicle. If you drink you don't drive.

 

In the UK some police forces test & convict 10 times more people than others, that is because testing is an expensive process.

 

44% of convictions are repeat offenders and some police forces are reporting it's on a par with alcohol.  67% of those convicted of drug driving had one or more previous conviction, typically for theft/burglary or drug-related offences.

 

I am sure Thailand will get its act together, but not this year.

 

 

Well it will be illegal again next year so things will revert to how they were.     

" It will take a fatal collision to change things."   You seem to almost relish that scenario , 

         

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bday Prang said:

Well it will be illegal again next year so things will revert to how they were.     

" It will take a fatal collision to change things."   You seem to almost relish that scenario , 

         

 

Obviously I don't relish somebody being killed by a stoned driver.

 

I do think it's important that the Thai police gets their act together regarding drug wipes and blood testing.

 

Do you have first had experience of being convicted for a drug related offence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Well being 'slower' would make crossing the road more dangerous!

 

I couldn't disagree but when things are still decently under control then it shouldn't bring any danger to anyone; likewise we should better not ban elderly from crossing the road just because they're slower than us, aren't we? probably the mistake is on the over speeding drivers who is fast with honk but too slow with his brake.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Pattaya420 said:

ppl who never smoked should not comment 

According to some commentary by a Thai politician I saw yesterday, people who have smoked are likely not fit to!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, jacko45k said:

According to some commentary by a Thai politician I saw yesterday, people who have smoked are likely not fit to!

i do martial arts here, and been big gyms all over, I can tell you that many pro fighters and coaches I meet smoke weed 

Edited by Pattaya420
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Pattaya420 said:

i do martial arts here, and been big gyms all over, I can tell you that many pro fighters and coaches I meet smoke weed 

Not exactly a positive association for me!

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...