Determining if you're driving stoned: What police will look for
»Play Video
VANCOUVER, Wash. – When possession of small amounts of marijuana becomes legal in Washington in three days, there will be a DUI limit of five nanograms of THC that you can have in your blood.
But how will police officers detect that in drivers?
There will be specially trained officers to figure out how much THC is in a driver's blood. They're called Drug Recognition Experts or DREs for short.
They've actually been around for a long time. But now that some of the stigma of having pot is being lifted, more people may be willing to smoke it and get behind the wheel stoned.
There are about a dozen police officers in Clark County trained as DREs to recognize the signs of when people are high on pot, cocaine, heroin and prescription medications.
Officers like Ryan Martin with the Vancouver Police Department can tell if someone is high on pot or other drugs based on a series of eye tests. For example, if drivers can't cross their eyes, they’re likely high. There are other tests, too, that require the driver to hold his balance while counting at the same time.
"We're looking to see if there's any sway while your foot's up; we're looking to see if your arms come out for balance; we're looking to see if you put your foot down, and we’re also looking to see if you start hopping because you start to lose your balance," said Martin. "So there're four clues, and what the studies done by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (show), two clues of impairment are enough to suggest that somebody is impaired."
He said someone’s perception of time is also affected while under the influence of marijuana. That's because time tends to slow down for people high on pot so their counting slows down. People on meth speed their counting up.
Officers will also test to see if drivers can follow directions to find out "their ability to focus on what you told them to do," Martin said.
There aren't any devices that exist like a Breathalyzer to test people along the roadside for pot and other drugs. But if a driver fails a DRE's roadside test, the driver will be brought to the police station for a lot more testing, including a blood draw. But the blood test results take six to eight weeks to come back.
Plus: "If the person is not cooperative and not willing to provide a blood sample, then we can get a blood search warrant," Martin said.
But getting the search warrant takes time.
Even if the blood sample shows a lower level than the five nanograms of THC, someone can still be charged with DUI if the officer believes the tests show the driver is impaired. That’s also how it works with alcohol and the .08 limit.
Checking a drunken driver is much, much easier. It takes two to three times longer to test and process a driver who's high on drugs.
Washington voters passed Initiative 502 last month. It will allow anyone 21 or older to have up to an ounce of pot.
This new law will keep a whole platoon of lawyers gainfully employed for a decade as the courts sort out what constitutes impaired driving on marijuana. Field sobriety tests can be effective IF they are backed up by a breathalyzer (alcohol) or blood test. That may not prove to be the case with THC. One thing is certain though - lawyers will be the big winners on this one.
Law enforcement is going to have to come up with something better than an educated guess from their own personnel before they ask citizens to consent to giving a blood sample. I seriously doubt judges are going to be particularly motivated to attach their names to blood search warrants either. I think some diligent research studies need to be conducted on the impairing effects of marijuana on a motorist. If marijuana DUII law is deemed necessary; there will need to be a testing device of similar convenience and accuracy to the current breathalyzer. This method theyâre enacting will certainly create a legal quagmire.Â
"Determining if you're driving stoned: What police will look for" - start with Oregon plates
Oh, and look for Taco Bell wrappers on the car floor.
I'd fail the test no matter what - my balance is terrible, so is my concentration. What do you do when you have muscle/nerve/balance problems and ADD? Maybe I shouldn't drive?!
 @Anna Garrison Bring a doctors note?
At what point is it necessary to cross your eyes to drive safely?
Â
Normally if I cross my eyes when I am taking a hit off my chillum, as it is onlt 3.5" long, but then again they may remain crossed for some time afterwards. Only when my pain level jumps though.
First the police should have to prove a correlation between smoking weed and bad driving. This whole presumption that anyone driving stoned is a danger is just a presumption of guilt without substance....they may as well start charging anyone who consumed caffeine for a presumption of aggressive driving and a predisposition to reckless endangerment.
 @Icarus For god's sake.  Have you never been around a stoned person?  Reaction time and judgement are impaired.  If a cold impairs your ability to drive, then marijuana most certainly will.  Personally I support legalization, but trying to canonize marijuana to do it is ridiculous.
 @Kphrog  @Icarus Depends what type they're using; is the THC moderated by CBN/CBL? You've shown correlation, but skipped he causality.
Â
Back in Iowa in the early 2000s, the little town of Newton, IA was giving out good driving "tickets", with the reward a 20oz travel mug that could be filled for free for a year at a local chain (Kum & Go). I got two, both while high. Did I mention they were given by the DREs? Their training is BS, and/or the notion you can't drive safely while high is BS. Pick at least one.
 @Icarus We wouldn't want any Federally funded reports on studies about this coming out now, would we? (Hint: they've already been done -- and got pretty well buried)
 @brendanÂ
Â
Yes, the government will fund another RAND study because RAND can be depended upon to reinforce the objectives of their patrons...they are the FOX news of unbiased research...and RAND will find that driving while stoned is as dangerous as driving while being stabbed to death.
Â
Before there was the charge of DWI...or drunk driving.... drunk people were charged with reckless driving and everybody knew that alcohol was a factor in accidents and it was reported. There have been any number of cases where erratic driving was connected to Meth and even a few connected to Cocaine and Heroin. The police have to make a long stretch and manufacture a metric tonne of panic to justify an arbitrary 5 nano-grams for impairment.Â
Â
People have been smoking and driving for decades and there is no longitudinal evidence that Marijuana significantly impairs the ability to drive.
 @Icarus What that concept comes down to is ability to *recognize impairment -- and correct for it* something you can not do on alcohol, but is possible with many other drugs, pot being one of them. The worst thing they noticed was lateral deviation/tracking - ability to stay centered on the lane/road, not the swerving of drunk driving, but the gradual weaving back and forth between the lines. Correct for that, and you're all good. (And distance//following, same issue, different axis). May I also add I've had a CDL and have driven over 500k miles without a single accident or citation. I also trained new drivers for Class B/Pass/Air (and held HazMat and tanker as well myself with Motorcycle). Some people simply drive better than others and know what to correct for. My fav thing to do is go down 26 out of Beaverton - without using my brakes by using planning ahead and gears. If you're following a blue Volvo down the hill, no, my brake lights do work, I just don't *need* my brakes all the time.
 @Icarus Yup. can't wait, hope the first person arrested for it pulls that study up (and its previously referenced studies). With luck, there'll be several lawyers dying to take the case pro bono just to make case law.
 @brendanÂ
Â
I think that we agree that the whole "impairment" issue is something that the police are trying to hype so that they can generate more revenue and hoodwink the public with regard to the demon weed once again.
 @brendanÂ
Â
The results of that study indicates that Marijuana users are likely to perceive a greater imparement than is actually present...therefore....smokers become more cautious rather than drinkers who become less cautious.Â
Â
From the summary of your study:Â "Results confirmed those of the previous study. Car following performance was only slightly impaired. ...... THC did not impair driving performance yet the subjects thought it had."
Â
The greatest danger indicated in that study was associated with alcohol.
 @Icarus I mean like this one: http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving/01.php "It appeared that the effects of the various administered THC doses (100-300 g/kg) on sdlp were equivalent to those associated with bacs in the range of 0.03-0.07 g%. Other driving performance measures were not significantly affected by THC. Plasma concentrations of the drug were clearly related to the administered dose and time of blood sampling but unrelated to driving performance impairment."
Did the State pass the new pot law just to make money from people with bad balance?
 @PointblankÂ
Â
No the citizenry proposed then passed a law to make money from people who make bad decisions.
Ok so have any of these highly trained Proffessional Police Officers who are supposedly Qualified to Judge Imparment ever experienced the actual effects of the Drugs they are qualified to check the public for imparement of? If not how can they even have a clue what they are doing, Oh wait they do not have to have a clue as long as they generate revenue for thier agency and prove how needed they are to justify thier budgets.
 @swede760Â
Â
Actually if you know who is who, you can join an elite group of volunteers who each year get drunk and smoke pot on the governmentâs dime (not kidding).
Â
To train officers to determine potential level of intoxication, each year (or some years twice) officers who train lead trainees through the steps to learn how to identify key points in intoxication levels in a group of volunteers who are administered measured amounts of intoxicating substances and put through field sobriety tests.
Â
The volunteers then give blood at each step and that blood is tested to determine levels of the substance in the blood.
Â
Even trained officers are regularly given a test (same subjects but a different scenario from my experience) to determine if they need remedial training or not.
Â
The beauty is you can also be a âsober baselineâ subject as well. Free reign to give your local sheriff the what for without repercussions.
Â
That's easy....just look for lots of boxes of Vanilla Wafers in the car. Â
 @Jalarti Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Vanilla Wafers
So the Local Revenue Service has a new Tax to impose. Does anyone believe it will be Justly applied?
 @swede760Â
My question, if you put down on your 1040 income from selling legally, can that be used federally to prosecute you? Technically your tax form is a form of affidavit and is admissible in at least civil court.
Â
Would it then be âsaferâ to not claim income you made while selling legally at the state level
@Repoman Good point. I am still quite curious to see how this will play out as the feds seem to be rather noncommital as to their position. Perhaps they are waiting to strike or, just maybe, they will try to respect the rights of a state.
 @33  @Repoman The feds seem "noncommital"? If you think this, you should pay attention to the news in California where the feds in conjunction with local authorities have been raiding medical marijuana clinics and grow facilities with impunity for years. They are definitely not laid back and all "states rights" they are adamantly opposed to legalization and derive huge amounts of their income from seized property.Â
 @Repoman Of course the obsolete Marijuana laws at Federal level make Anyone who possesses, manufactures or sells marijuana a criminal. Though they say they do not target growers with under 100 plants it is still against federal law. Now it is an even bigger offence to lie on your taxes though you have to give a form of employment, I would think that claiming you are a proffessional Horticulturist or even back yard farmer would be good enough with out incriminating yourself. During prohibition we had the IRS Revenuers and now we have several Revenue Services such as the ATF, DEA, FBI, Federal Marshals Service as well as Sate Police, County Sherriffs and City Police. To top that all off the Government has the Coast Guard back to performing Revenue Collection through smuggling interdiction. Yes the Coast Guard was Originally the US Revenue Cutter Service and was combined with the US Life Saving Service and later the US Light House Service to form the Coast Guard and thier main mission was changed to Rescue and Recovery. Anyway my point is that we have all these so called Public Safety Officers who in reality are just collection agents for thier respective agencies. If you pay them up front they should have no reason to prosecute you if you use your head.
Shiiit I can't even balance on one foot while sober...
Â
I don't even smoke pot and it seems like these tests are bogus, like anyone could fail them simply on accident. Â I can't cross my eyes when I get a migraine for pete's sake.
Â
I would never authorize them to draw blood from me, especially if I was sober, ESPECIALLY if I had nothing to hide. Â I love to make their jobs just a little bit harder for pestering someone like me when they should be out fighting real crime.
 @IxyaviÂ
Â
It's really not about "passing and failing", itâs about how you pass and fail.
Â
While under the influence there are a number of involuntary and autonomic responses that indicate impairment. Just not being able to stand on one foot, or recite the alphabet backwards (one I would have issue with) will not result in an impairment citation.
Â
Failing that (in a particular way) and other items (like eye twitching, or eye wondering) will result in further testing and if you continue to fail (and show impairment signs) you will be required to submit to data testing (like breathalyzer blood test etc).
Â
Thatâs why there is a series of classes law enforcement take to become fluent in the signs of impairment. If it were as simple and not being able to stand on one foot, all officers would be able to issue the complete test.
 @Ixyavi well said.
driving 7 in a 35 is a good start
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/MISC/driving/dot78_1d.htm
Additionally, Blood Tests Do NOT determine Impairment. We must begin determining whether a person Is impaired Honestly, factually and in a Reality based model.Â
There are Impairment Field Testing Equip available. Simple consumption testing fails to improve safety. Every "body" responds differently to different substance. Chemo, for instance shows a function level equal to a person w/a BAC of .05. Lack of sleep, stressors such as a major life event: Death, Birth, Divorce etc can cause distraction/impairment..So if we are serious about actually Improving safety then lets get serious about proper determination of actual impairment.http://www.bowles-langley.com/job-safety/
 kokobyrd. You are absolutely right, there is no known test that correlates blood level of THC and impairment. The police have chosen a blood level of THC metabolite that provides no evidence of impairment. So how much marijuana does a person have to smoke to test over the (arbitrary) limit? Another thing about marijuana is that the substances tested to estimate impairment last days and weeks long after the impairment effects have worn off. This amount of THC in the blood law enforcement says is the threshold of impairment 5 nano grams =0.000000005g/ml. This amount of metabolite has been found in persons that have not used marijuana for 48 hours. I believe using the 5 nano gram measure will insure that almost every medical marijuana user will test over the legal limit and subject to imprisonment effectively outlawing the use of medical and recreational marijuana. All I have to do is smoke one joint and stay in the house for about 5 days to ensure I am not "over the legal limit." As I see the state may decriminalize possession of marijuana but still outlaw its use.
Â
Â
 @kokobyrd
Â
That is why you can get cited for DUI, or DWI.
Â
DUII (Driving under the influence of intoxicants) is one citation.
Â
DWI (Driving while impaired) is another.
Â
You can be cited for both individually, or in combination.
Ok, then what purpose do the statutes serve (only revenue?) that address DUII if one is not charged w/DWI? The only consideration should be Public Safety and if one only has a a presence of any substance in their system but is otherwise Not impaired, these laws fail common sense and purpose--except for generating revenue. Sorry, I'm confused...and if these laws are Not improving road safety then why do we allow them to remain on the books? For me, it's a matter of common sense, Tax-Payer ROI and fiscal Responsibility. I see no reason to keep watching friends and family suffer at the mercy of senseless laws.
 @kokobyrd If you look at the federally required drug testing, none of it is about impairment, only presence.  The only test that shows impairment is a breathalyzer.  And the federal tests only look for illegal drugs.  If someone is abusing prescription meds, it doesn't show.  If I were tested and had an ADHD medication, or codeine in my system, the lab contacts me before telling my employer.  If I provide the lab with a valid prescription for that drug, they send my employer a negative result.  I could be abusing the codeine and driving under the influence of it, but it wouldn't matter.  The feds have also lowered the threshold for THC, but upped it for opiates.  These tests also only test for 5 groups of drugs, lots of illegal or abused prescription drugs are not caught by these tests.  But it's okay, the transportation folks are keeping us safe.
Drive safely , courteously and responsibly and then you'll only have to worry about impaired morons texting , talking or on sleep medication, alcohol, pain killers, and forty other illicit drugs (not including stupidity) running into you.
Pot smokers drive slower...my granddaughter's boyfriend needs some. Stone cold sober he thinks he is on a Nascar track and is darn dangerous.
I feel badly for law enforcement. Their jobs just got harder. They are still expected to apprehend any driver who is operating under ANY influence that impairs judgment, yet many will assume possession and consumption are the same thing. This will prove to be very expensive to the state and citizen's of the State of Washington as this is argued out on a case by case basis in the courts.
The crossed eyes thing has to be a joke, right? Some people simply can't cross their eyes! Seriously, has anyone ever heard of ANYONE losing control of their eye-crossing ability under the influence of marijuana?? Please reply if you have heard of such a thing, I would actually like to know.
 @Joe M I just tested (Good gods, I never thought KATU would be an excuse to vaporize, lol), and after a 'bowl' through the vaporizer, and 30 minutes later, and I can cross my eyes. I'm pretty sure the trick is to *keep them from crossing* at this point, roflmao :)
 @Joe M i cross my eyes stoned all the time-it's easy as pie. this test seems to have stepped right off the set of "Reefer Madness".
 @djshimon Hey my eyes cross every time I light my Chillum.
Looks like the wonderful POTHEAD scenarios have now brought us such wonderful things to deal with. Such a blessing POTHEADS create. More things we all need to deal with and the police. Check Everyone for POT in their system. Great job POTHEADS, great job. Your cult ure really knows how to put on a show, don't you? I'm glad for your significant achievements in this society you have brought us all. You should be proud now Huh? What we all wanted, another burdon curse. Now go get your gay marriage certs.
 @Zechariah There will be specially trained officers to figure out how much THC is in a driver's blood. They're called Drug Recognition Experts or DREs for short.
Â
---> They've actually been around for a long time. <---
Â
They've been around since at least the 90s, probably earlier that I know of. You're sitting here basically bitching about something you've been putting up with (unknowingly) for probably 2 decades. The only that changed is now you *know* about it. So much for its impact on your life, rofl.
 @Zechariah Shut dad, you liberty-hating hypocrite. You're drunk.
wow... talk about an angry person...cannibus was put here by the Creator.. it is a natural product when left to mature and be cultivated.. there are no added ingredients , no processing like alcohol or cigarettes, or cocaine or heroin, what could such an angry person have against drying and smoking a plant in it's natural state? This guy wants to 'force' you to live the way he wants you to live. He is to be feared and contained more than pot.
 @JPM Jr WOW, talk about childish back-sass & self rationalizing excuses to justify getting loaded. Obviously your little rebellious undisciplined mind views everything as hostile that doesn't meet your narcissistic philosophy on matters. Just part of being what you are I guess. stay asleep on issue of life, they are too much for you to understand.Â
 @Zechariah  Really Z, I am impartial and you seem full of anger and overly aggressive to me. Just sayin'...
 @Zechariah  @JPM Jr I'm a professional pilot and I agree with JPM. Guys like you are simply full of excrement. Calling my mind "undisciplined" because I think liberty ought to be applied equally doesn't impress me. Your disciplined mind doesn't impress me because it's hypocritical and ignorant.Â
 @Zechariah Wow, if you hate pot THIS much, I don't even WANT to know your thoughts on alcohol and DRUNKS. You could probably go on for days about DRUNKS.
 @Joe M  @Zechariah WOW talk about missing the point and preconceived mindset..Â
 @Zechariah  @Playanekes Sweet Jesus, just stay home and play with yourself, do society a favor. Also, there is no such thing as a mute point, unless the merits of my point were rendered voiceless somehow. It's a MOOT point. May I ask- what have you been drinking/smoking?
 @Playanekes  @Joe M Your  mind is delusional. The point has always been stupidity of potheads  You're Misinterpreting creating avoidance Games. Drunks are potheads twin sisters nothing less and typically as irresponsible in logic. You point is mute.Â
 @Zechariah  @Joe M No, no, he didn't miss the point at all.
Â
You did. He called you out for being a hypocrite. You've not voiced -any- problem whatsoever with legalized alcohol.  Talk about missing the point and preconceived mindset.