Honors student, cheerleader, football-player-dating girl with straight A’s who's HIGH

December 3, 2004 8:04 AM

The Washingtonianwants you to know: Kids smoke pot. And sometimes you can't even tell! "You could have the honors student, cheerleader, football-player-dating girl with straight A’s who may be the go-between for some drug dealer, just selling the stuff at school.” Even in the suburbs! Got your pearls clutched tightly? The Washington City Paper responds.
posted by occhiblu (76 comments total)

[via Media Bistro, by the way]
posted by occhiblu at 8:10 AM on December 3, 2004

Gee ... if your kid is that successful ... shouldn't that point out that pot isn't as bad as everyone says it is?
The only problem I see here is the criminal element attracted by a black market.
posted by Dillenger69 at 8:23 AM on December 3, 2004

I personally know lawyers, kindergarten teachers, third grade teachers, high school teachers, stock brokers, copy writers, editors, policemen, masons and automotive engineers-- not to mention filmmakers and TV editors and writers and musicians and bartenders-- who smoke pot.

No, pot's not that bad. Unless you're Big Pharma and you don't want folks to grow medicine in their own backyards.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:33 AM on December 3, 2004

She picks up a paper-towel roll and demonstrates how teens stick a laundry dryer sheet at the end and exhale through the roll. “Got high and Mom and Dad are coming home soon?” she says. “The house will smell Downy fresh.”

You're damned right it will. I picked up this trick and it kept me safe through two years of college dorm life. It's interesting, though, how tricks and rituals make their way throughout members of a subculture, isn't it? Almost like playground lore.
posted by ruddhist at 8:37 AM on December 3, 2004

Oh, and I carried a near-perfect GPA through both high school and college despite being stoned nearly the entire time. How much I remember from high school and college, well, that's another story...
posted by ruddhist at 8:39 AM on December 3, 2004

You forgot librarians, Fuzzy! Those people are seriously chronic.

It's a good thing the War on Drugs is doing such a great job of drying up the supply of weed available. I think we're on the verge of beating this drug thing for good.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:41 AM on December 3, 2004

pot kills
posted by garfield at 8:42 AM on December 3, 2004

She picks up a paper-towel roll and demonstrates how teens stick a laundry dryer sheet at the end and exhale through the roll

In my day this was called "the Desmond" and it did not work well in dorm rooms. Best system is a ventilation fan.

this is such a non-story. Hell, Al Gore smoke(d) pot.
posted by clavdivs at 8:42 AM on December 3, 2004

-5 awkward misuse of drug slang
posted by rxrfrx at 8:44 AM on December 3, 2004

I was actually most amused by the various "Even the GIRLS!" comments throughout the Washingtonian article. They're cheap harlots, those girls today.
posted by occhiblu at 8:45 AM on December 3, 2004

i can so hear mr. rogers voice reading this.

it has the delightful enthusiasm and naivete of a total square who secretly wants to smoke out of a gravity-bong until they collapse.
posted by plexiwatt at 8:48 AM on December 3, 2004

Oh, right-- Librarians! How could I have forgotten the librarians?

pot kills
posted by garfield at 8:42 AM PST on December 3

So does a cast iron skillet, if you swing it hard enough.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:49 AM on December 3, 2004

Also, is it just me, or was this article atrociously structured? It seemed like the author was building up to some sort of climax based around "Keith" and his friends (I was expecting "Keith" to run over a bunch of nuns or preschoolers while driving high), but instead she just throws on another anecdote about an honors student smoking pot and ends in the middle of it. Seriously, is the rest of the article in the print edition or something? The whole article is pretty shoddy scare journalism, and badly written to boot.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:49 AM on December 3, 2004

Oh my gosh, I was hoping somebody would publish an article that collects every single cliche and myth about marijuana use someday! My faves:

- "If there’s no smoking apparatus, they can use an apple."

- "Keith, who put on a Bob Marley CD"

- "THC levels in marijuana have more than doubled over the last 15 years"

- "Among teen smokers, '4/20' is a holiday."

I won't even go into their little "How can I tell if my kid is high?" sidebar...
posted by idontlikewords at 8:50 AM on December 3, 2004

They're cheap harlots, those girls today.

They probably learned it from watching Paris Hilton:


posted by idontlikewords at 8:53 AM on December 3, 2004

How can I tell if my drug dealer is high?

I also forgot Soldiers. I knew Soldiers who smoke pot, although the ones I knew were mostly all about the cocaine.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:56 AM on December 3, 2004

i can so hear mr. rogers voice reading this.

I dunno, to me Mr. Rogers always sounded pretty stoned...
posted by Tikirific at 8:56 AM on December 3, 2004

"It's no longer just the Potheads and the Stoners. Now it's the Honors students and the Athletes who are Getting HIGH."

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

That line just described my friends and I in 1979. Except that we drank lots of beer and wine too.
posted by bawanaal at 8:59 AM on December 3, 2004

the whole "drugs affect your behavior negatively" thing kinda falls apart if they can't tell if you're on drugs unless they test your blood.

first i was a raving mexican rapist, suddenly i became a slothful and slow-witted societal dropout, now i am invisibly dysfunctional.

w/r/t testing the blood - has anyone read this?
posted by 31d1 at 9:04 AM on December 3, 2004

I dunno, to me Mr. Rogers always sounded pretty stoned...

Agreed. The man was so kind, so gentle, so brilliant and so progressive. I doubt he ever shied away from a fatty. I <3 Mister Rogers.

I have similar convictions regarding Jim Henson as well.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:04 AM on December 3, 2004

"As soon as the adults left the room, he reached into his wallet and pulled out a tiny, glassy envelope full of radiant, nearly bluish-white crystals. He laid out a couple of 'lines' on his desk and rolled a $100 bill into a thin straw. When he sucked the crystals up the straw, he felt a wave of new confidence surge through his body, as if his muscles and will were being fortified by an inexhaustible source of power. The crystals falling like a little pre-Christmas blizzard from his nostrils were not the dingy, impure, adulterated 'stuff' used by ghetto blacks, but 99.999% pure Medellin rock, a little token of appreciation from the terrorists whose evil deeds had been financed by worldwide sales of the illicit drug. Using a 'benjamin' to 'snort' the 'stuff' was an extravagance, but after all, in his new job, he could afford it.

As a flood of chemicals coursed through his bloodstream, his back arched with a rush of pleasure and power, and his head rocked back as his features tautened into a self-satisfied smile. He pondered what visionary schemes he might launch today -- projects that would secure his place as one of the Great Men of history, around whom the wheels of fate turn.

'Ah harrrgh!' he roared -- the old pirate's cry of exuberance, as sparkling crystals dusted his blue suit and red tie. 'It's good to have a mandate!'"

--- not The Washingtonian
posted by digaman at 9:07 AM on December 3, 2004

There's nothing new about honors students getting high. In 1972 I was a senior honors student and National Honor Society member. And I got high every day.

My high school had about 1200 students, of whom maybe 10% smoked pot regularly. But among the National Honor Society members, the ratio was more like 40%.
posted by wadefranklin at 9:17 AM on December 3, 2004

At the newspaper where I work, they drug test the day before your first day of employment but tell everyone "this is the last time so you don't have to worry about it from here on out."

If they tested everyone randomly we'd lose 3/4 of the newsroom and the 1/4 left would be mostly crappy writers.

I don't use marijuana because I don't like spending money on psychoactives, no matter what kind. Though hey, I'm not disinclined toward using free drugs, if there are some generous FL panhandle mefites.
posted by u.n. owen at 9:29 AM on December 3, 2004

Except that we drank lots of beer and wine too.

Wine? Where?

Ahh.. sweet, glorious substance of yore. How I long to hold thee close, savour your sweet (or dry, or in-between) and delicate (or not-so-delicate, depending on the bottling and vintage) aromatic self so close.

So close.

Yeah.. you could say I'm addicted to a drug.
posted by purephase at 9:30 AM on December 3, 2004

You forgot librarians, Fuzzy! Those people are seriously chronic.

Heh no kidding. If you're ever in the mood for something a tad- different, go to a library conference. And I mean a BIG library conference. Make an ALA confab if possible. Take a plane, get some snacks, and just watch. Holy good goddess above you'll be amazed.

The whole librarian stereotype about hair in buns, glasses on chains, and totally strict and virginal went to hell in a handbasket at the speed of light. At one conference I attended a breakout session on web design for library applications. I sat next to a very attractive goth lady. And I mean the whole goth. She had jet black hair, piercings, tattoos in visible places that you could tell led to far more interesting and arousing places. She also possessed a Masters of Information and Library Science degree and specialized in database construction for web delivered content.

Nifty, eh?

There are librarians out there who are original hippies, new hippies, new agers, and the list goes on. I'm not saying we all smoke or smoked pot, but of all the occupational groups who do, we'll probably be found in the top 20. Library cons, if you look deep enough, can become strange Hunter Thompson affairs with a more intellectual bent. Just watch. It happens. And it's fantastic!
posted by GreatWesternDragon at 9:30 AM on December 3, 2004

I like how most of the symptoms in the sidebar are also symptoms of just being a teenager.
posted by bondcliff at 9:32 AM on December 3, 2004

GreatWesternDragon:

Sexy goth librarians, eh? I'm there!
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 9:35 AM on December 3, 2004

"A lot are adding OxyContin to their marijuana"

What a lying peice of shit. Considering the fact that she's on the county payroll, her ass ought to be on the streets today for being a lying, ignorant whore.
posted by 2sheets at 9:45 AM on December 3, 2004

Kids smoke pot.

no one smokes "pot" anymore.

personally, i've always preferred the term reefer.
posted by three blind mice at 9:47 AM on December 3, 2004

How dare kids today smoke pot and drive. I am SO shocked. Is driving drunk too good for them? Kids today -- first home computers, then cell phones, and now pot smoking. I will definitely spend some time worrying about this over a Guinness or two...

BTW, it's nice to know Guinness is in the Spell Check dictionary.
posted by jim-of-oz at 9:48 AM on December 3, 2004

Reefer: Nautical. A person, such as a midshipman, who reefs.
posted by occhiblu at 9:51 AM on December 3, 2004

*Significant weight gain or loss.

I wish for them to point to one, just one person who's lost signficant weight as a result from smoking pot.
posted by geoff. at 10:15 AM on December 3, 2004

" GreatWesternDragon:

Sexy goth librarians, eh? I'm there!"

Hoo man, so am I! When's & where's the next ALA bash??
posted by zoogleplex at 10:16 AM on December 3, 2004

As a graduate of Walter Johnson High School I am happy to see that we finally bested our suburban Maryland rival school (Walt Whitman) at something of consequence (30% daily smokers vs. 25%)
posted by phoffmann at 10:17 AM on December 3, 2004

Man, I wish I was a librarian...
posted by willpie at 10:19 AM on December 3, 2004

There are librarians out there who are original hippies, new hippies, new agers, and the list goes on. I'm not saying we all smoke or smoked pot, but of all the occupational groups who do, we'll probably be found in the top 20.

#1 on that list would be public school teachers. I know about a dozen, and all but one smoke pot like there's no tomorrow...and even the one exception will partake now and then.

And these degenerate drug fiends could be....TEACHING YOUR CHILDREN!!! ABOUT DRUGS!!!
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:21 AM on December 3, 2004

Walt Whitman, for various reasons that would have gotten him arrested today, would have appreciated a highschool being named after him.
posted by digaman at 10:23 AM on December 3, 2004

Man, I wish I was a librarian...

*L* It's not all sexy goth librarians. In fact, it's hardly ever that at all.

Cataloging, in particular, would have you wishing you were dying of the Ebola virus.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:32 AM on December 3, 2004

“Half the party’s doing it now.” He says girls are smoking as much as boys.

Girls are awesome.
posted by orange clock at 10:45 AM on December 3, 2004

The love the stereotypes of this. "Bob Marley CD and rolled up the windows. One of the boys pulled out a bag of marijuana. Someone produced a glass pipe." I bet he lists to the Dead, Phish, and OAR. And DMB. A lot.
posted by asbates2 at 10:45 AM on December 3, 2004

Just another spoke in this cycle... Ever since weed became prevalent enough in mainstream culture that it became clear to every reasonable person that prohibiting marijuana while sanctioning alcohol was utterly nonsensical, the bedrock of the ongoing crusade against pot has been "the kids." It's easy to forget that there was a time when more and more states were passing decriminalization legislation, and activists debated which state would be the first to float legalization. The DEA managed to cling to it's fat-budget contract to fast-track America to the highest incarceration rates in the civilized world largely with the help of parent crusaders, and the straight press has always been a willing accomplice, because teens-crazy-on-dope is the kind of sensationalistic trash the media thrives on.

And so it goes; the weed menace continues to give the DEA justification for its bloated, anti-freedom bureaucracy, drug sentencing laws continue to make a mockery of the concept of justice in the American judicial system, kids continue to have ready access to the acutely more deadly good clean fun of alcohol, the war on drugs continues to gout insane amounts of money utterly failing to ameliorate the negative impact of drugs on society while exacerbating their negative effects, and as an issue of legal reform it has no traction whatsoever in this country. Ain't the 21st century grand?

Well I'm all depressed now. I shoulda known better than to follow that link.
posted by nanojath at 10:49 AM on December 3, 2004

Well I'm all depressed now. I shoulda known better than to follow that link.
posted by nanojath at 10:49 AM PST on December 3

Just blaze.
posted by orange clock at 10:50 AM on December 3, 2004

Metafilter: It's not all sexy goth librarians.
posted by unreason at 10:58 AM on December 3, 2004

Card Cheat, I am a cataloger. And tho not goth, I do carouse with the best of them at user group meetings.
posted by goofyfoot at 11:03 AM on December 3, 2004

“Our kids are very clever,” she says. “They take a soda can, crush it, make one hole, and smoke through it.”

With their diabolical intelligence, these kids run circles around the DEA.
posted by Krrrlson at 11:05 AM on December 3, 2004

Getting high and driving is actually an enormous problem. I do not know of a state that has a way of testing marijuana concentration in a similar way to alcohol testing. With the prevalance of marijuana usage now, it is important for states to develop a way to test for impairment related to marijuana. Right now, police in my area will not arrest someone for Driving While Impaired from marijuana because they know that they will not be able to get a conviction in court. So people drive while high at a rate much higher than they would if there was a way to bust them for doing so.
posted by flarbuse at 11:28 AM on December 3, 2004

This post made me feel all nostalgic for my late teen years.
Ahhhhhh - hot boxing....
posted by uftheory at 11:29 AM on December 3, 2004

Keith felt like everyone was looking at him. His mouth was dry. He got hungry. He stared at a light in the Sharper Image. He laughed. The boys ate at Panda Express and then went to Nordstrom, where they sprayed themselves head-to-toe with cologne.

My God! The Reefer Madness!!! These children must be stopped before they . . . uh . . . loiter again!!!!!

Who the hell works at this Washingtonian, anyway? In my experience - and here I'm counting everything from countercultural rags to business mags - at least half of professional journalists are tokers, ex-tokers, or social smokers, and at least a quarter more are familiar with pot (and its relatively benign nature) even if they don't "blaze" themselves.

With apologies for the shameless self-linkage, here's another take on the pot boom. (The link is to a marijuana-advocacy site, but the feature originally appeared in National Post Business, a free insert in the right-leaning National Post. Not even neocons try to stoke the fires of Reefer Madness in Canada these days.)
posted by gompa at 11:29 AM on December 3, 2004

Metafilter: It's not all sexy goth librarians.

Cheers, unreason! Best laugh I've had all day.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 11:34 AM on December 3, 2004

Heh, as I read this, I was filling out my forms for ALA Midwinter in Boston next month.

So who's coming and who'll be holding? MeFi Librarian Meetup!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 11:54 AM on December 3, 2004

Do you think that the drug warriors realize that they will destroy the U.S. economy if they succeed in eradicating pot usage, since they'd have to put most of the computer industry in prison?
posted by Mars Saxman at 12:07 PM on December 3, 2004

The love the stereotypes of this. "Bob Marley CD and rolled up the windows. One of the boys pulled out a bag of marijuana. Someone produced a glass pipe." I bet he lists to the Dead, Phish, and OAR. And DMB. A lot.

Sure, stereotypes are bad, but come on, between us I think we can agree that that stuff is true. Those people annoyed me in high school, too.


Getting high and driving is actually an enormous problem.

Do you have any figures to back this up? I think driving high is hardly comparable to driving drunk.
posted by ludwig_van at 12:09 PM on December 3, 2004

And my favorite part:

"Keith felt like everyone was looking at him. His mouth was dry. He got hungry. He stared at a light in the Sharper Image. He laughed."

That, like, so captures the true essence of my daily life, man.
posted by ludwig_van at 12:15 PM on December 3, 2004

Marijuana use results in the slowing down of reaction time. The slowing down of reaction time is the very basis of the impairment threshold for DWI. I would certainly agree with you that heavy use of alcohol makes one more dangerous than heavy use of marijuana. But you don't need to consume a large amount of alcohol to slow down your reaction time. That is why the law in most states is .08 and not .18.

I cannot give you figures to back up just how big a problem it is. I know that I deal with many, many people who smoke, and they see no problem with driving. Figures are hard to come up with because the only way to get a reading of how much marijuana is in someone's system is through a blood test. A blood test is generally only done when a person has been injured and taken to the hospital.

It is already illegal to drive when high. I believe every state has a law making it illegal to drive when one's mental and/or physical faculties have been appreciably impaired by some impairing substance. Alcohol is the only substance for which we really have an efficient test. It would behoove us as a society to have an efficient test for marijuana, as it is quite commonly used by folks while driving. The concentration that would make it illegal would be the level at which it impairs drivers at a similar level to the .o8 from alcohol.
posted by flarbuse at 12:29 PM on December 3, 2004

I bet he lists to the Dead, Phish, and OAR.

Wow, is O.A.R. on the A-list now? The frontman is my (met-him-exactly-one-time) cousin.
posted by cortex at 12:31 PM on December 3, 2004

Librarians are revolting! Hotness.
posted by 31d1 at 12:32 PM on December 3, 2004

I'll send some kind bud with my manager, Robocop. No ALA for me this year.

Are there sufficient Mefi librarians to staff a virtual Mefi library? I'd love to assign subject headings to posts.
posted by goofyfoot at 12:35 PM on December 3, 2004

Wasn't there a study recently that found that stoned drivers were a lot safer than drunk ones because they were a lot more careful and aware of their own impairment?
posted by Freaky at 12:38 PM on December 3, 2004

This thread reminds me of the Onion article titled something like "Drug use legalized for white collar workers." Unfortunately I'm too stoned to track it down.
posted by A dead Quaker at 12:39 PM on December 3, 2004

The concentration that would make it illegal would be the level at which it impairs drivers at a similar level to the .o8 from alcohol.

But that's the thing, in my experience it takes some serious smoking of good weed for a person to reach that point. Should it be illegal to drive if you haven't gotten enough sleep the night before? Or to drive and listen to music at the same time? These things can be impairing/distracting, depending on the situation.

I don't disagree that weed can negatively impact one's ability to be a safe driver; there have certainly been times when I've had to wait awhile before I felt safe driving. But smoking a bowl and then getting into a car != driving with a .08 BAC, imo.
posted by ludwig_van at 12:40 PM on December 3, 2004

Keith paid $45 for two grams of marijuana the first time he blazed.... After they shared four bowls...

Come on now. $45 for two grams is either some really super-nice stuff, or they got ripped off. And I think that four bowls shared between two un-seasoned smokers would be a bit much...

I never drank or smoked anything until I got to college. I didn't have the best grades in high school. After my first semester of college I was put on academic probation. Then 2nd semester I started smoking and my grades went up up up, every semester until graduation. Not to say that 'blazing' (hahaha) is to receive credit for that but my smoking weed almost every day didn't hurt. I should include here that my friends and I always made it a point to finish whatever homework or studying we had to do before packing the bowls.

In college we were not allowed to burn incense so our favorite method of concealing the smell was to pop some microwave popcorn and leave the bag open by the door. We'd also make use of plastic pop bottles with holes cut in the bottom and stuffed with dryer sheets.
posted by J-Garr at 12:48 PM on December 3, 2004

Metatalk re this

I heart librarians.
posted by nanojath at 12:52 PM on December 3, 2004

flarbuse,
I can't find the exact link but I remember hearing that there was a study done in England a few months back to show how pot makes people worse drivers. Trouble was the results of the experiment were opposite of their hypothesis; people on pot were involved in less accidents. Turns out that people who were stoned were less likely to engage in agressive driving, speeding, etc. I found something similar here, but it's not exactly what I was looking for.

I think Dennis Leary said that we could solve all of our nation's fiscal problems by legalizing pot. Let's say that an ounce of the finest chronic around sells on the street for $400. With government support that same pot could be grown for let's say $35. The government could add a $200 tax on that ounce and potheads would still be happy.

There's always Bill Hicks, who had a lot to say when it came to drugs. You can read some of them here. (Of course there's something lost not being able to hear Hick's ranting delivery.)

I live in the Virginia, which I imagine is the most conservative state in the US. I once told one of my elders that I thought pot would be legal within the next 30 years. He just laughed.
posted by daHIFI at 1:35 PM on December 3, 2004

daHIFI heck, there's no reason dope would have to cost $35 a pound, you can get bulk cigarette tobacco retail for less than that and I find it difficult to believe weed would be much more costly to produce than tobacco.

In other news, holy hell, are people really spending 100 bucks for a quarter of the good stuff? (Old man nanojath has not been in the life for a long time). That is insane.

Finally, I'm aware of many reports (NSFW if your work doesn't like you visiting drug legalization advocacy sites) asserting that the effects of being stoned on driving are minor, and that tiredness and booze both have worse effects on your driving - I've never seen one where people actually got BETTER. But the fundamental fact is true - alcohol tends to make people drive in a more foolhardy manner and marijuana tends to make people more cautious. I myself am against driving under any degree of impairment... but if I had to elect versus having a very stoned person or a moderately drunk person drive me to the hospital, I'd choose the former in a heartbeat.

Besides, given how driven we are to throw money at intractable problems where drugs are concerned, I'm sure some kind of reasonable test could be managed.
posted by nanojath at 2:42 PM on December 3, 2004

From Psychoactive substance use and the risk of motor vehicle accidents(PDF): "no association was found between exposure
to cannabis and road accidents."
posted by Gyan at 3:20 PM on December 3, 2004

Man, I remember when a dime bag cost a dime, you know what I mean?
posted by turaho at 3:47 PM on December 3, 2004

That article made me want to hit the bong.
posted by Sir Mildred Pierce at 4:56 PM on December 3, 2004

daHIFI, it might be time to consider shopping around, unless you're getting something craaaaazy for your money.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 5:00 PM on December 3, 2004

Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use
by Jacob Sullum, of Reason.

Also, The Truth For Youth
While we're at it, Safe Sex, and fuck it, Evolution.

What else have we here?
Get it Straight, by the DEA.

Reefer Madness.

Please oh please read The Brenstain Bears and The Drug-Free Zone (search for "smoke" and "johnny-smokers". Imagine if blunts grew on trees like in their world?)
posted by MarkO at 5:07 PM on December 3, 2004

Marijuana, administered in a dose of 100 µg/kg THC, on the other hand, did not significantly change mean driving performance as measured by this approach...Thus there is evidence that subjects in the marijuana group were not only aware of their intoxicated condition, but were also attempting to compensate for it. These seem to be important findings. They support both the common belief that drivers become overconfident after drinking alcohol and investigators' suspicions that they become more cautious and self-critical after consuming low doses of THC, as smoked marijuana.

Driving while stoned is nothing like driving drunk, and believe me, I know. However, drinking AND smoking before driving is far worse than either alone.
posted by rooftop secrets at 5:30 PM on December 3, 2004

I had to cringe the entire way through that article.
posted by bertrandom at 5:49 PM on December 3, 2004

I dunno, to me Mr. Rogers always sounded pretty stoned...

Of course he was. What do you think Mr. McFeely's daily "Speedy Deliveries" were all about? Simply educational videos showing the innards of random manufacturing plants?

Hah!
posted by aGreatNotion at 7:31 PM on December 3, 2004

There are librarians out there who are original hippies, new hippies, new agers, and the list goes on. I'm not saying we all smoke or smoked pot, but of all the occupational groups who do, we'll probably be found in the top 20. Library cons, if you look deep enough, can become strange Hunter Thompson affairs with a more intellectual bent. Just watch. It happens. And it's fantastic!

GreatWesternDragon, speaking as someone about to become a librarian, I have to confess that I have my doubts about this ..... but if you're right, which I don't doubt, it makes me feel a whole lot better about the profession.
posted by blucevalo at 8:22 PM on December 3, 2004

You should fear running into your Friendly Police Officer more than causing an accident while driving under the influence of THC.
posted by pemdasi at 10:34 PM on December 3, 2004

Testing for THC and amphetamines has just been introduced in my home state of Victoria, Australia. Thing that disturbs me about it is the fact that people will be charged if any presence of marijuana is found in their saliva swab. So it's not a reasonable test of impairment as such, but since cannabis is illegal it's hard to argue with that I suppose. I've driven stoned a decent amount but stopped doing it unless I had to because I consider it dangerous. Much more so if you just ripped a couple of bongs and jumped in the car - a couple of hours after smoking though, the impairment is negligible for a regular smoker.

There was a large study undertaken by the University of Adelaide and the state's transport authority in 1998, which every stoner who has heard of it loves to quote: "The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free. In fact, the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free." Here's what I think is a pretty recent review of the evidence on cannabis and driving by Monash Uni, in Victoria - original pdf or googled html.
posted by Onanist at 12:42 AM on December 4, 2004

She traded her body for drugs -- and kicks! Marijuana Girl
posted by Ljubljana at 1:40 AM on December 4, 2004