I’m feeling even better about the victory with my petition to the ONDCP today.
We’ve known that this push to talk about drugged driving was leading to a policy effort, and today’s post at the drug czar’s “blog” makes it clear where they’re going. Pushing for “per se” drugged driving laws in all the states.
For example, when the substance is an illegal drug, there is no need to require a minimum blood level. There is a minimum level with alcohol because it is a legal substance for adults to use. In contrast, if the drug is already illegal to use and we know it affects judgment and reaction time, it is reasonable to say that driving with any level of that drug in the driver’s system poses an unacceptable risk.
Um, no, that is not reasonable. It’s complete nonsense.
But take a look at the tortured way they have to set it up:
One of these challenges is drugged driving. According to a recent NHTSA study, on an average weekend night, one in six drivers tested positive for licit or illicit drugs. The most commonly detected drugs are marijuana, cocaine, and methamphetamines. Several recent fatal collisions involving drugged drivers have garnered much attention. Each of us who uses our Nation’s roads is at risk from the danger posed by drugged drivers. This is a disturbing problem.
Disconnected statements with no relevance to each other. And since they can no longer say “impaired” or “under the influence” when talking about the NHTSA study, it makes it much less compelling.
Of course, the real truth is that the NHTSA study has absolutely nothing to do with any trends in drugged driving, but the ONDCP has absolutely nothing else to use!
That’s the news here â€” the fact that they’re twisting an NHTSA study to fit their agenda, rather than creating an agenda based on actual evidence.