Looming Legal Weed Sparks Roadside Worries in Canada

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Canada’s oh-so-green federal government sure isn’t concerned about one form of air pollution — clouds of marijuana smoke. With the country’s cities already infused with the tell-tale odor of wacky tobaccy, legislation has been tabled to make possession of the drug legal, perhaps by as early as July 2018.

Great news for grass aficionados, but a troubling turn of events for road safety advocates. The jury’s out on whether Canada’s law would spark an uptick in drugged driving, but the proposed methods of testing — and convicting — weedy drivers has raised other concerns. One group has a problem with the Great Green North’s strategy to root out baked motorists.

It would seem the Canadian government is entering the wild and woolly world of weed with a reasonable degree of caution.

On the same day as the legalization legislation, the government tabled another bill targeting impaired drivers. The new measures will “better deter and detect drug-impaired driving,” the government claims, and would see motorists hand over two types of bodily fluids for testing during a roadside stop. Like booze, the bill would set legal limits to the amount of THC in a driver’s bloodstream.

While police officers will still be able to use their judgement to detect impairment — and provide opinion evidence in court — the motorist’s blood and saliva will likely seal their legal fate. In some U.S. jurisdictions, plenty of doubt has attached itself to the results of saliva swab tests. A blood test is meant to overcome the inaccuracies present in the first test.

According to the Canadian proposal, “Qualified technicians would be able to take blood samples from a driver without a doctor’s oversight, allowing for testing sooner after a person is pulled over.” This is supposed to increase the accuracy of the test and free up scarce healthcare personnel. However, the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) has voiced its worry over the testing.

The new law “would require a positive blood test within two hours in order to get a conviction,” the association stated in a recent release. “Evidence from U.S. jurisdictions is that it often takes longer than two hours to complete the process, and also requires the presence of a trained technician to take the sample, putting a tough burden on law enforcement and raising questions about how workable the provision will be.”

After several states legalized marijuana, a study showed levels of bloodstream THC didn’t correspond with a driver’s level of impairment. Because of this, the American Automotive Association has advocated for observation-based impairment detection, where trained officers analyze a number of physiological and behavioral indicators.

It sounds like Canuck cops might be given that say, though it’s doubtful that a driver with blood-tested THC levels above the legal maximum would get a pass, regardless of how sharp they were while standing on the roadside. Another concern is the training promised for police forces.

“While the government committed today to making more money available to train police in drug recognition and to acquire testing devices, it didn’t say how much or when it will be available,” CAA stated. It has the same concern about the limited money promised for public information campaigns.

Don’t expect the so-called “Prince of Pot” Marc Emery to make the job of the government (or CAA) any easier. The marijuana activist and high-profile supporter of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau — who ran on the promise to legalize — just told the media that smoking weed makes you a better driver.

[Image: Jeffrey Smith/ Flickr ( CC BY-ND 2.0)]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 26 comments
  • TMA1 TMA1 on Apr 18, 2017

    Pull over a young male in a Grand Am, there's a pretty good chance you'll find something.

  • Cbrworm Cbrworm on Apr 19, 2017

    My experience, many years ago, was that many 'stoners' typically drove pretty poorly whether or not they were high at the time. People who were really baked, would drive excessively carefully and slowly, to the point of being a danger to others as well as being very obviously impaired. People who functioned at a moderate level of high-ness, the average person would not be able to tell a difference.

  • Redapple2 jeffbut they dont want to ... their pick up is 4th behind ford/ram, Toyota. GM has the Best engineers in the world. More truck profit than the other 3. Silverado + Sierra+ Tahoe + Yukon sales = 2x ford total @ $15,000 profit per. Tons o $ to invest in the BEST truck. No. They make crap. Garbage. Evil gm Vampire
  • Rishabh Ive actually seen the one unit you mentioned, driving around in gurugram once. And thats why i got curious to know more about how many they sold. Seems like i saw the only one!
  • Amy I owned this exact car from 16 until 19 (1990 to 1993) I miss this car immensely and am on the search to own it again, although it looks like my search may be in vane. It was affectionatly dubbed, " The Dragon Wagon," and hauled many a teenager around the city of Charlotte, NC. For me, it was dependable and trustworthy. I was able to do much of the maintenance myself until I was struck by lightning and a month later the battery exploded. My parents did have the entire electrical system redone and he was back to new. I hope to find one in the near future and make it my every day driver. I'm a dreamer.
  • Jeff Overall I prefer the 59 GM cars to the 58s because of less chrome but I have a new appreciation of the 58 Cadillac Eldorados after reading this series. I use to not like the 58 Eldorados but I now don't mind them. Overall I prefer the 55-57s GMs over most of the 58-60s GMs. For the most part I like the 61 GMs. Chryslers I like the 57 and 58s. Fords I liked the 55 thru 57s but the 58s and 59s not as much with the exception of Mercury which I for the most part like all those. As the 60s progressed the tail fins started to go away and the amount of chrome was reduced. More understated.
  • Theflyersfan Nissan could have the best auto lineup of any carmaker (they don't), but until they improve one major issue, the best cars out there won't matter. That is the dealership experience. Year after year in multiple customer service surveys from groups like JD Power and CR, Nissan frequency scrapes the bottom. Personally, I really like the never seen new Z, but after having several truly awful Nissan dealer experiences, my shadow will never darken a Nissan showroom. I'm painting with broad strokes here, but maybe it is so ingrained in their culture to try to take advantage of people who might not be savvy enough in the buying experience that they by default treat everyone like idiots and saps. All of this has to be frustrating to Nissan HQ as they are improving their lineup but their dealers drag them down.
Next