Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appearance.

Re: Caught with a small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara


Agreed - but if the legal system were to be overhauled to actually take into consideration that a man smoking 1 spliff 4 weeks ago is safe to drive today then youd have all the do-gooders jumping up and down convinced that Ireland was about legalise the sale of crack cocaine in every supermarket.
 
Re: Caught with a small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

And in school canteens in place of chips !

You hit a very big nail on the head there TS.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

leghorn said:
Illegal in ireland.(even though fags and booze are perfectly legal)
He could have gone over to Amsterdam and had tea and cakes the week before.
Click to expand...
Following this rather perverted logic, if he'd got drunk on the plane back from Amsterdam instead of having the tea and cakes, does that mean he can legally drive and avoid a drunk-driving conviction because the consumption was outside the jurisdiction?
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara


There is a difference between alcohol in someones system and residue (or trace as the original post stated) of spamspamspam in someones system - one may impair the ability to drive, the other doesnt.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

truthseeker said:
There is a difference between alcohol in someones system and residue (or trace as the original post stated) of spamspamspam in someones system - one may impair the ability to drive, the other doesnt.
Click to expand...
Based on what research or authority?
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

mathepac said:
Based on what research or authority?
Click to expand...

I dont need research or authority for this piece of common knowledge.

Are you suggesting that 1 spliff 4 weeks previously (which would show up as a trace in a test) would impair someones ability to drive - 4 weeks later?

If you would like a link to back this up (despite it seeming common knowledge to me perhaps this is not the case for everyone):
http://eldd.emcdda.europa.eu/html.cfm/index19034EN.html


Your comparison about being drunk on the plane from Amsterdam does not campare the same thing.
If he got drunk on the plane back from Amsterdam and then drove 4 weeks later having imbibed no alcohol in between then should he be done for drink driving on the later date? Thats a comparable situation.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

I'm with you on this truthseeker, it's an anomaly in the present Road Traffic legislation that drug driving is prosecuted without consideration given to the quantities which should be reflected in the penalties as is the case with drink driving.

I'm not condoning either action but I'm pointing the present unsatisfactory state of the legislation.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

Completely agree with Truthseeker on this.

The problem is that to propose a reasonable attitude to the particaulr drug use, risks the hysterical reaction of some who would see that as encouraging general and widespread drug use.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

truthseeker said:
I dont need research or authority for this piece of common knowledge...
Click to expand...
The preferred citation of the factually challenged.

Here's another piece of "common knowledge" - spamspamspam is legal in the Netherlands, as implied in this post -
leghorn said:
Illegal in ireland... He could have gone over to Amsterdam and had tea and cakes the week before.
Click to expand...
The Dutch authorities are soft on enforcement but that's not the same as possession, cultivation, importation, sale, etc. being legal in the Netherlands. None of the laws have been repealed there and proposals for legislative reform in relation to spamspamspam have slowed down since 2004.

As per my previous post, spamspamspam is a controlled substance here, so the higher the penalties for drivers testing positive for it the better - zero tolerance and the sooner any legislative or judicial "wriggle-room" is closed off the better, IMO. Drivers know the possible penalties on conviction, so on their own heads be it.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

mathepac said:
Here's another piece of "common knowledge" - spamspamspam is legal in the Netherlands, as implied in this post -
Click to expand...


Possibly inferred but not implied... certainly not if you are in any way familiar with Amsterdam.

Mathepac, I think your argument is a little reactionary. We all accept that spamspamspam is illegal in Ireland and if we choose to enjoy it we are fully aware of the potential penalties attached to this.

In the situation described by the OP we are looking at a twist in the law that is unacceptable and should be challenged in court at the first opportunity.

We are not looking for leniency... if someone smokes a spliff and then immediately gets into a car they are as stupid as a driver on 6 pints... but the physical effects of spamspamspam only last a few hours, and if an individual is driving the day after (or, as has been discussed, up to four weeks later for trace amounts) then a blood test will show up the substance but not demonstrate and incapacity.

It's this inconsistency that needs to be addressed.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara


I agree.

Just from a practical viewpoint - it seems silly to heavily penalise someone who is not actually 'under the influence' of an illegal drug but who may have traces left in the bloodstream some time after use.

Zero tolerance is an unfortunate reaction of those who are ignorant to the impact of various different drugs on the body. They cannot all be lumped into the same boat as each other (or as alcohol for that matter) - as they do not all have the same effect or last for the same length of time.

For a simple analogy its a bit like the penalty being the same for someone who shoots someone in the arm with a standard gun and someone who blows someone and their home away with a rocket launcher. Both items are illegal but both have very different impacts and effects.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

Leon76 said:
My brother was caught with a small quantity of spamspamspam in his car over a year ago.

The Garda at the time brought him to the local garda station where a blood sample was taken.
Click to expand...


Would it be safe to assume that your brother may have drawn himself to the attention of the Garda in some way, i.e. was it really the case that the traces were in his system from some weeks ago?
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara



While I agree whole heartedly with the sentiment I think the analogy is a little clumsy.

... and having tried to think of one, I don't think an efficient analogy can be drawn.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

PetrolHead said:
While I agree whole heartedly with the sentiment I think the analogy is a little clumsy.

... and having tried to think of one, I don't think an efficient analogy can be drawn.
Click to expand...

It is a clumsy analogy - but I cant think of a better one off hand either
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

RSMike said:
Would it be safe to assume that your brother may have drawn himself to the attention of the Garda in some way, i.e. was it really the case that the traces were in his system from some weeks ago?
Click to expand...


I too would like to know, Was the OP's brother stoned at the time of driving and why was he pulled over in the first place and searched.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

I was making the assumption that if the blood test showed only trace in his system (as per original post) then he wasnt stoned at the time of the arrest.
Perhaps the OP could clarify.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

Arrgh! - How annoying! Why didn't you quote me properly? These were two different statements in the original.
I certainly was NOT impling that spamspamspam is 100% legal in the Netherlands.I went out of my way not to mention the legal status of spamspamspam in the Netherlands because it is such a minefield.

So much for your 'common knowledge' remark.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

truthseeker said:
I was making the assumption that if the blood test showed only trace in his system (as per original post) then he wasnt stoned at the time of the arrest.
Perhaps the OP could clarify.
Click to expand...

If he was stoned or not is somewhat of a side issue. the fact that you can get 4 years off the road for a trace of it in your blood is shocking. I'll be thinking twice the next time I get offered a pull on a J or a go on the crack pipe.
 
Re: Drug Driving: small quantity of spamspamspam in car, failed blood test, court appeara

DavyJones said:
the fact that you can get 4 years off the road for a trace of it in your blood is shocking.
Click to expand...

I agree - and Id imagine that a LOT of drivers would be off the road if the guards decided to test every driver for a trace.

DavyJones said:
I'll be thinking twice the next time I get offered a pull on a J or a go on the crack pipe.
Click to expand...

Crack pipe? Thats fairly posh. Do you not just use a dirty bit of tinfoil and a rolled up note like the rest of us
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register