POLICE CAN'T DETERMINE MARIJUANA IMPAIRMENT

Re: Family Wants Name Cleared, Jan. 13.

It is ridiculous to think police officers who have far less medical
training than doctors can determine by use of some roadside tests if
someone is "impaired" by drugs.

It must be obvious to everyone by now police are are just trying to hold on
to their huge budgets. This "drugged driving" legislation currently
sneaking through Parliament will give police the opportunity to profile
young drivers and people with brown skin or long hair.

We have all seen people's ability to drive "impaired" by alcohol,
prescription drugs, loud stereos, rowdy kids, passengers or pets in the
car, CD players, cigarettes, huge coffee cups, cell phones, inexperience,
blood-sugar imbalances, old-age, fatigue and just plain old stupidity. To
choose one drug as an "impairment factor" is arbitrary and discriminatory.

Cannabis affects every user differently. If any impairment occurs at all,
it is usually gone in 20 to 60 minutes. But THC can be detected in urine
and blood for weeks after the last puff.

To be booked for impaired driving simply because there is a trace of THC in
your system is much like having one beer tonight and getting nailed for
impaired driving five days from now.

Add the fact that study after study from Europe has shown cannabis users
drive slower and more cautiously than non-users, and the notion of cannabis
as a "major contributor" to traffic accidents seems ridiculous.

Where are the official numbers? What official study was ever done in
Canada? Just where do police get these statistics?

Russell Barth

Educators for Sensible Drug Policy

Ottawa