That seems like they should be absolutely blitzed smoking multiple joints especially given the supposed potency these days.

If you can't pass a test like that straight may I suggest that maybe shouldn't have a drivers license.

Are you suggesting that you don't believe ingesting pot and driving should be illegal? Or that there is no affect to ones motor skills after ingesting? If so that's a pretty crazy argument.

As I've stated here many times, I've been around the stuff since the 70's and I have yet to see a normal functioning person who's driving was a affected by smoking a joint.

You ARE smoking some funny dope if you actually believe what you wrote 😂

---

DFL > DNF > DNS

I don't think we are talking about one joint. Much like I can hit the restaurant and have a glass of wine or a beer and drive fine we are talking about dosage here. I've also been around the stuff since the 70s. I can tell you flat out I knew a lot of people who could not/should not drive after getting stoned. If you don't think someone is impaired by pot may I suggest your smoking ditch weed and pretending that it is pot.

It's not a belief, it's fact, in 40 years,I've never seen a normal functioning person who's driving was affected by being high. I'd be far more worried about someone taking prescription opiods.

were you high whilst observing this?
;-)

---

ΜΟΛΩΝ-ΛΑΒΕ
we're doomed

Agreed on all counts. Here's the rub for me, though... Leaving the weed angle out for a moment, think of the average driver out there, and realize that half of them are worse than that as it is. I recall when my boy took his driver's permit test, he was stunned when he first heard you only needed to get 60% or whatever pitifully low bar it was to pass. Many, many of them shouldn't have a DL, absolutely.

To make it easy, let's just pick on old people... If my reaction time is half of my grandmother's when we're both sober, and X # of tokes only impairs my reaction time by 50%, then I'm still not any worse than she is behind the wheel at that point. I always go back to the analogy of some other reasonably skilled neuromuscular activity like golf or billiards; everybody can easily accept the premise that some people are way better at it than others without a second thought, yet with driving there's somehow this default assumption that we're all essentially the same and if I claim I'm way better at it than 99% of my fellow drivers I'm just some kind of asshole. But really, we're all on a spectrum like any other skill, so statistically speaking some of us have got to be way better than the vast majority to begin with ~ and therefore have a far larger margin of impairment to suffer before becoming even below-average. To make the analogy even more extreme, how high would LeBron James need to be before you or I could beat him in a game of hoops?

How's that for Stoner Logic?

In all seriousness, I recall on more than one occasion letting my wife drive us home after I'd had a few drinks (because of course I realize you just sound like a drunk asshole if you insist you're still a better bet to get us home safely that she is sober), and noticing all the way home how much time she spends with the right wheels over the bike lane, cutting lazy turns, following too close, etc. In all the time we've both been driving, I drive way more miles than she has by a wide margin (and spend a lot of it speeding excessively), and yet all but one of our at-fault auto insurance claims have been on her (while the one I had came about when I fell asleep, completely un-intoxicated). She is simply a very poor driver ~ even though in her mind she's a "safer" driver because she drives slower and more cautiously and wouldn't dare drive intoxicated, yet she remains a terrible judge of spatial relationships and processing multiple information streams at once even under the best of conditions. I could spend all day giving examples; it's like she was born impaired. So, in the hypothetical driving test earlier, I'd bet I'd have to be impaired to pretty near the point of losing consciousness before falling below her natural baseline. I think that's where 50+ is coming from, and it's a fair point.

Found the pothead.

Big Tobacco and its denial of the harmful effects of smoking has nothing on these guys.

Just finding me? Where ya bin? And what's a pothead?

This is not surprising, but in the real world, people don't sit and smoke "three or four joints". There is no need to do that with the potency that is out there. Three or four hits is more than enough to do the job.

This is like telling someone to drink a fifth of Jack Daniels and then see how well they can drive. The results wouldn't be surprising.

---

"Honestly, triathlon is a pussified version of duathlon on that final run."- Desert Dude

That's what I was getting at. Seems like they were smoking an immense amount of pot. I use to mountain bike a lot with guys who smoked. I didn't at the time. I don't know how much it impairs people, it certainly isn't anything like alcohol. What I can say is those guys I rode with weren't noticeably impaired while mountain biking, which I would hazard a guess takes a fair bit more psychomotor ability than driving to the quicki mart. I can't imagine if they were drunk, it would be a similar observation.

That may be true, and I don't know how much of each joint they actually smoked, nor do I remember whether or not they mentioned the amount of THC ingested with each joint. The video was edited for time, so we just had to take it on faith that the amounts being ingested were what the narrator said they were. That said, the drivers were all less effective even after the first joint, with slowed reaction times and some weaving. The guys who smoked little to no pot in their daily lives were most affected at lower doses, while the habitual users appeared to do better until additional THC was added to their systems.

I guess for me, the take away on that was, if you're a casual smoker/ingester of pot, you're likely going to be more impaired than you think, even if you only do a couple of hits "on occasion." Conversely, the habitual smokers may be able to handle more before the impact reaches "impairment" levels. I really don't know the science. I'm just relating what we were shown.

---

''The enemy isn't conservatism. The enemy isn't liberalism. The enemy is bulls**t.''

—Lars-Erik Nelson

The Olympics didn't test for it until the 90's as it was deemed not performance enhancing and legal in parts of the world, but they realized that someone can smoke a little weed relax and be able to better concentrate which could enhance performance when tackling some tough trails mountain biking and skiers were found to use it , jumpers using the most which also makes sense, helps you relax your body and fly further.