Washington state police train as drug recognition experts - Polidicks

[quote]SEATTLE — Seattle police DUI Officer Mike Lewis hears it all the time when he pulls over stoned drivers crawling along Interstate 5 at half the speed limit. "But it's legal." They're right — sort of. Initiative 502 legalized recreational marijuana use in Washington last year, but if drivers are too high to safely operate a vehicle, they'll still face a DUI charge. Just as state law limits drivers to a .08 blood alcohol content, it limits them to five nanograms of THC, marijuana's active ingredient, per milliliter of whole blood. [...] As drug-recognition experts, or "DREs," they receive two weeks of instruction on picking out impaired drivers and analyzing their behavior for the presence of alcohol or drugs. [...] Seattle police Officer Jon Huber, a regional DRE coordinator and instructor, likens each officer to a "walking, talking, drug-testing machine." [...] The program costs $3,000 per officer, funded by the Washington Traffic Safety Commission, and 30 to 50 "top-notch" applicants are accepted per year, said Sgt. Ken Denton, who works in the impaired-driving section of the Washington State Patrol. The two-week course, which is offered in the spring and fall, is rigorous and includes lectures, quizzes and comprehensive tests. Before they get to the final evaluation, though, training officers must also perform six field-sobriety tests and observe another six by their colleagues. They'll write reports for all 12 tests, which are reviewed and signed by an observing instructor. After the course is completed, each officer must perform four evaluations in front of an instructor every two years to maintain DRE status. [...] Huber, the instructor, doesn't focus on the accuracy of the DRE officer's conclusions, as long as the reports are thorough, and the conclusions are "logical and defensible." After all, he says: "I wasn't high on this; I was high on that" doesn't hold much weight in court. [...] DREs focus on the more "subtle" signs in drivers while on patrol. "You look for a wide turn, crossing the line, taking an extra second or two to realize the light is green," Lewis said. [/quote] [url]http://www.policeone.com/drug-interdiction-narcotics/articles/6383159-Wash-police-train-as-drug-recognition-experts/[/url] This is really cool and is something I wanna be. DRE's are some of the greatest tools on the police force

"wide turn, taking an extra second or two to realize the light is green" really pigs?

Its a pretty big article.. cool read

If you are so stoned you cant drive you are just a moron.

[QUOTE=crazyjames;41814297]If you are so stoned you cant drive you are just a moron.[/QUOTE] ... if you try to drive getting fucked is fine otherwise

Wasn't there a recent study that said that people driving under the influence of marijuana were, on average, just as safe as sober people?

[QUOTE=areolop;41814217][url]http://www.policeone.com/drug-interdiction-narcotics/articles/6383159-Wash-police-train-as-drug-recognition-experts/[/url] This is really cool and is something I wanna be. DRE's are some of the greatest tools on the police force[/QUOTE] "Look at that guy, Driving the speed limit. . .Better tail him" wtf

[QUOTE=Groat;41817263]Wasn't there a recent study that said that people driving under the influence of marijuana were, on average, just as safe as sober people?[/QUOTE] Safe as in "I better be careful or I could go to jail", not safe as in "I better be careful or I could hurt someone".

[QUOTE=stupid10er;41814268]"wide turn, taking an extra second or two to realize the light is green" really pigs?[/QUOTE] Did you really use the word pig non-ironically to describe a police officer..? You also cut the quote, specifically the part about 'crossing the line'.

[QUOTE=plunger435;41817318]Did you really use the word pig non-ironically to describe a police officer..?[/QUOTE] uh yes he did did you misread or something

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;41817310]Safe as in "I better be careful or I could go to jail", not safe as in "I better be careful or I could hurt someone".[/QUOTE] what? Also it makes sense that they need to train officers to do this sort of thing, no idea why it's newsworthy.

[QUOTE=Groat;41817263]Wasn't there a recent study that said that people driving under the influence of marijuana were, on average, just as safe as sober people?[/QUOTE] I still wouldn't drive while high.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;41817310]Safe as in "I better be careful or I could go to jail", not safe as in "I better be careful or I could hurt someone".[/QUOTE] doesn't really make a difference does it

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41817374]doesn't really make a difference does it[/QUOTE] Driving under the influence of anything is silly though, that doesn't just apply to marijuana either.

[QUOTE=plunger435;41817406]Driving under the influence of anything is silly though, that doesn't just apply to marijuana either.[/QUOTE] driving impaired is silly. you can smoke weed and not be impaired

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41817418]driving impaired is silly. you can smoke weed and not be impaired[/QUOTE] Which is presumably why there a set limit to how much you can smoke before it's illegal.

[QUOTE=plunger435;41817447]Which is presumably why there a set limit to how much you can smoke before it's illegal.[/QUOTE] Having a limit is bogus anyway. My friend might smoke a large snap and be on the couch for a couple hours, whereas a seasoned smoker could smoke multiples of the limit in one sitting, and be much more functional than the other person. Plus I'm sure there are dozens of other problems with having an actual cannabinoid test, for example medical users show up with a baseline tolerance when they might not have even smoked that day

[QUOTE=Amez;41817352]what?[/QUOTE] They drive extra carefully because they're paranoid that a single mistake will get them pulled over and in turn arrested for DUI. This compared to regular people who drive slightly less carefully because they're still not likely to get in trouble, and if they do, the punishment is far less severe.

My friend from Colorado told me that the thc limit for driving there is somewhere between .2-.5 but he also told me that for some chronic stoners their thc level would always be in that area even when not high, is this true?

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;41817310]Safe as in "I better be careful or I could go to jail", not safe as in "I better be careful or I could hurt someone".[/QUOTE] You said the same thing but re-worded it to make it sound bad. Im pretty sure people think that way even when they are sober. [editline]12th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MellowHype;41817597]My friend from Colorado told me that the thc limit for driving there is somewhere between .2-.5 but he also told me that for some chronic stoners their thc level would always be in that area even when not high, is this true?[/QUOTE] It could even be in that level after the effects wore off for someone who smoked for their first time the thc blood content is a load of BS. Its just like being hung over you still have a blood alcohol content.

[QUOTE=stupid10er;41814268]"wide turn, taking an extra second or two to realize the light is green" really pigs?[/QUOTE] Just stop. This is great, I'm honestly really happy or this, I didn't know they already made a tool for this.

[QUOTE=Lick;41817505]Having a limit is bogus anyway. My friend might smoke a large snap and be on the couch for a couple hours, whereas a seasoned smoker could smoke multiples of the limit in one sitting, and be much more functional than the other person. [/QUOTE] This logic could apply to alcohol too

[QUOTE=MellowHype;41817597]My friend from Colorado told me that the thc limit for driving there is somewhere between .2-.5 but he also told me that for some chronic stoners their thc level would always be in that area even when not high, is this true?[/QUOTE]This measures blood content. THC levels in your blood are only there until you're not high. THC levels in your fat (what drug tests test for) are there for weeks.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;41817518]They drive extra carefully because they're paranoid that a single mistake will get them pulled over and in turn arrested for DUI. This compared to regular people who drive slightly less carefully because they're still not likely to get in trouble, and if they do, the punishment is far less severe.[/QUOTE] This is close to a related study I've heard about: Apparently it found that while people under the influence of marijuana are impaired, they are aware of this (much unlike drunk drivers) and, on average, drive more carefully as a result. To me this doesn't sound like driving stoned is safe though - driving safely is not only about being careful, after all, but also being able to react quickly to sudden dangers.

[QUOTE=Timebomb575;41825946]This logic could apply to alcohol too[/QUOTE] It could, but nobody cares about legal limits for alcohol, but as soon as it is cross-applied to weed...

[QUOTE=Groat;41817263]Wasn't there a recent study that said that people driving under the influence of marijuana were, on average, just as safe as sober people?[/QUOTE] It's really impossible to judge because it depends on the persons tolerance to THC and how it effects them it can be different person to person. Personally I know multiple people who can drive perfectly fine if not better when they are high. But they have a tolerance. [editline]13th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MellowHype;41817597]My friend from Colorado told me that the thc limit for driving there is somewhere between .2-.5 but he also told me that for some chronic stoners their thc level would always be in that area even when not high, is this true?[/QUOTE] How are they supposed to get a THC limit? they going to rush to a hospital to try and take blood? There is no proper test for it

[QUOTE=DrTaxi;41826419]This is close to a related study I've heard about: Apparently it found that while people under the influence of marijuana are impaired, they are aware of this (much unlike drunk drivers) and, on average, drive more carefully as a result. To me this doesn't sound like driving stoned is safe though - driving safely is not only about being careful, after all, but also being able to react quickly to sudden dangers.[/QUOTE] Being high has never stopped me from reacting quickly to a situation. Even being high as a kite didn't. Being drunk? Fuck that i'm slow and lethargic. They are clearly different drugs in their direct effects on people. [editline]13th August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=plunger435;41817318]Did you really use the word pig non-ironically to describe a police officer..? You also cut the quote, specifically the part about 'crossing the line'.[/QUOTE] it's still not really that great of a qualification to pull someone over for being "impaired". I see a lot of presumably sober drivers make plenty of similar mistakes to that. How is that proof of anything then?

[QUOTE=plunger435;41817447]Which is presumably why there a set limit to how much you can smoke before it's illegal.[/QUOTE] it doesnt work with weed the same way as it does with alcohol tbh

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;41826609] [editline]13th August 2013[/editline] it's still not really that great of a qualification to pull someone over for being "impaired". I see a lot of presumably sober drivers make plenty of similar mistakes to that. How is that proof of anything then?[/QUOTE] Yeah, the simple mistakes are silly, but if someone is continuously crossing the center line, even if they're not intoxicated, they should be pulled over.