Drugged Driving

Statistics and data relating to operating a vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant (DUII), also referred to as drugged driving, drunk driving, driving under the influence (DUI), or driving under the influence of drugs (DUID).

States Which Consider Test Refusal a Criminal Offense

(States Which Consider Test Refusal a Criminal Offense) "Eight States consider a test refusal as a criminal offense. The manner in which refusal is criminalized varies among the 8 States. Refusal is considered a misdemeanor in Alaska, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Ohio. It is considered an infraction in Indiana. In California, refusal becomes a criminal offense if the driver is convicted of DWI after refusal. In Vermont, refusal is criminalized for drivers with a prior DWI.

State Sanctions for Refusing an Alcohol Test

(State Sanctions for Refusing an Alcohol Test) "All but one State, Nevada, have administrative license sanctions for refusing an suspensions and revocations for varying periods of time. The suspensions and revocations include restrictions varying 3 from a 'hard' suspension period in which no driving is allowed for a specified period (in 38 States and the District of Columbia) to a 'soft' suspension period in which drivers can obtain a temporary driving permit for purposes such as work and church (available in 9 States).

Drugged Driving - Policy - 01-05-13

(State Rules on License Suspension or Revocation for Failing Alcohol Test) "Forty-two States either administratively suspend or revoke the driver’s license of an offender who fails an alcohol test. State provisions for administrative license actions vary in terms of revocation and suspension periods, as well as whether a driving permit or a restricted license is available immediately ('soft' suspension or revocation period) or after a specified period of time ('hard' suspension or revocation period).

Drug Testing - DUI - 6-17-12

(Legal Standards Defining DUID) "Nationwide, three different standards have been drafted in legislation defining what constitutes OUI [Operating Under the Influence] drugs: two 'effect-based' laws and one 'per se' law.45 The first effect-based law requires that an OUI drug motorist be rendered incapable of driving due to drug use.46 The second effect-based law requires a demonstration that an OUI drug motorist’s ability to operate a motor vehicle is impaired or that the motorist is under the influence or affected by an intoxicating drug while d

What the research shows about marijuana and driving

"Several meta-analyses of multiple studies found that the risk of being involved in a crash significantly increased after marijuana use13 -- in a few cases, the risk doubled or more than doubled.14-16 However, a large case-control study conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found no significant increased crash risk attributable to cannabis after controlling for drivers’ age, gender, race, and presence of alcohol.17"

Relationship Between Medical Marijuana Laws (MMLs) and Traffic Fatalities in the US

"Our study suggests that, on average, MMLs are associated with reductions in traffic fatalities, particularly pronounced among those aged 25 to 44 years, a group representing a great percentage of all registered patients for medical marijuana use,29 and with increased prevalence of marijuana use after the enactment of MMLs.30 Although increases in marijuana use following the establishment of marijuana dispensaries could reduce the occurrence of alcohol-related mortality by reducing the number of drivers driving under the influence of alcohol, other simultaneous factors

Comparison of Results from Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) and Roadside Saliva Drug Tests in Detecting Cannabis Use

"The SFST was mildly sensitive to the effects of cannabis alone. A dose of 400 ?g/kg body weight THC significantly increased the percentage of participants displaying impairments in OLS compared to baseline performance from 21 to 50 %. THC also increased percentage of individuals showing impairment on HGN from 0 to 15 %, relative to baseline, but this change only approached statistical significance. WAT [Walk And Turn] and the overall score on SFST did not discriminate between THC and baseline.

Comparison of Results from Standardized Field Sobriety Tests (SFST) and Roadside Drug Testing

"Methods Twenty heavy cannabis users (15 males and 5 females; mean age, 24.3 years) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing percentage of impaired individuals on the SFST and the sensitivity of two oral fluid devices. Participants received alcohol doses or alcohol placebo in combination with 400 ?g/kg body weight THC. We aimed to reach peak blood alcohol concentration values of 0.5 and 0.7 mg/mL.

Times for THC Absorption, Bioavailability, and Excretion

Times for THC Absorption, Bioavailability, and Excretion: "Absorption is slower following the oral route of administration with lower, more delayed peak THC levels. Bioavailability is reduced following oral ingestion due to extensive first pass metabolism. Smoking marijuana results in rapid absorption with peak THC plasma concentrations occurring prior to the end of smoking. Concentrations vary depending on the potency of marijuana and the manner in which the drug is smoked, however, peak plasma concentrations of 100-200 ng/mL are routinely encountered.