"Drug-drivers 'stand little chance of being caught out' "

Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.

"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a car
stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to MPs.

Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.

This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a contributing
role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.

The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".

By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."

Mo
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

On Dec 12, 7:24*am, Doug wrote:

Is it any wonder that they injure people? Yet another example of
cyclists being pampered by a cyclist dominated UK system.
"Cyclists who take illegal drugs and then ride a bike stand little
chance of being caught and convicted, according to MPs.
Figures seen by the transport select committee show few drug-
cyclists were prosecuted in Britain in a year.
This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a
contributing
role in many accidents in 2008.
The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".
By contrast with the UK, in Germany few people were prosecuted for
drug-cycling during a similar period..."

UK Radical Campaigns.
*http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to drive.

On Dec 12, 7:24*am, Doug wrote:


By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."


Would you like to be living in Germany?

On 12/12/2010 07:24, Doug wrote:

Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.
"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a car
stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to MPs.
Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.
This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a contributing
role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.
The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".
By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."
Mo
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

Judging on appearances (not necessarily the best criterion, admittedly),
London cyclists - on average - look to me to be more likely to be illegal
drug users than London drivers. That's judging purely on the outward signs of
"lifestyle" (nudge, nudge, say no more, squire). I don't think I could or
would say the same of cyclists in (say) Beverley or Malvern.

The above, of course, is pure personal opinion - rather like any guesses
which have inspired the author of the article you cited. If drug-users are
unlikely to be caught (no matter what they do), any formulation as to how
many there are is simply guesswork and made-up figures.

On Dec 12, 7:24*am, Doug wrote:
Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.

"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a car
stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to MPs.

Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.

This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a contributing
role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.

The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".

By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."

Mohttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.
*http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

The problem is that there is no 'breathalyser to detect drugs other
than alcohol, which is an easy cop for the Police. Maybe if the driver
seems particularly spaced out, they may carry out a drugs test, but
there are no legally specified limits. From what I have seen and read,
cyclists seem more likely to be spaced out on recreational or
performance enhancing drugs than drivers.

Derek C

Derek C wrote:
On Dec 12, 7:24 am, Doug wrote:
Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.

"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a
car stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to
MPs.

Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.

This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a
contributing role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.

The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".

By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."

Mohttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

The problem is that there is no 'breathalyser to detect drugs other
than alcohol, which is an easy cop for the Police. Maybe if the driver
seems particularly spaced out, they may carry out a drugs test, but
there are no legally specified limits. From what I have seen and read,
cyclists seem more likely to be spaced out on recreational or
performance enhancing drugs than drivers.

Derek C

At a recent job interview there was a drugs test for the most common
recreational drugs which only took about 5 minutes to complete, it was very
easy to do consisting of just a quick wipe of forehead and neck sweat on a
special swab, it would then change colour if there were any thing to be
concerned about. I can see no reason that the police could not carry those
kits, just like they carry a breathalyser. I know of several people that
regularly drive while on drugs.

On 12/12/2010 12:43, Mrcheerful wrote:

Derek C wrote:
wrote:

Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.
"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a
car stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to
MPs.
Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.
This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a
contributing role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.
The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".
By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted for
drug-driving during a similar period..."

Mohttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

The problem is that there is no 'breathalyser to detect drugs other
than alcohol, which is an easy cop for the Police. Maybe if the driver
seems particularly spaced out, they may carry out a drugs test, but
there are no legally specified limits. From what I have seen and read,
cyclists seem more likely to be spaced out on recreational or
performance enhancing drugs than drivers.

At a recent job interview there was a drugs test for the most common
recreational drugs which only took about 5 minutes to complete, it was very
easy to do consisting of just a quick wipe of forehead and neck sweat on a
special swab, it would then change colour if there were any thing to be
concerned about. I can see no reason that the police could not carry those
kits, just like they carry a breathalyser. I know of several people that
regularly drive while on drugs.

There is a *big* reason why the police can't do that. There is no legal
compulsion for submitting to the test. Perhaps there should be.

JNugent wrote:
On 12/12/2010 12:43, Mrcheerful wrote:

Derek C wrote:
wrote:

Is it any wonder that they kill cyclists? Yet another example of
motorists being pampered by a motorist dominated UK system.
"Drivers who take illegal drugs and then get behind the wheel of a
car stand little chance of being caught and convicted, according to
MPs.
Figures seen by the transport select committee show just 168 drug-
drivers were prosecuted in Britain in a year.
This was despite drugs having been suspected of playing a
contributing role in 56 fatal accidents in 2008.
The government said it was determined to ensure the police had
everything they need to tackle "this menace".
By contrast with the UK, in Germany 34,500 people were prosecuted
for drug-driving during a similar period..."

Mohttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11970155

The problem is that there is no 'breathalyser to detect drugs other
than alcohol, which is an easy cop for the Police. Maybe if the
driver seems particularly spaced out, they may carry out a drugs
test, but there are no legally specified limits. From what I have
seen and read, cyclists seem more likely to be spaced out on
recreational or performance enhancing drugs than drivers.

At a recent job interview there was a drugs test for the most common
recreational drugs which only took about 5 minutes to complete, it
was very easy to do consisting of just a quick wipe of forehead and
neck sweat on a special swab, it would then change colour if there
were any thing to be concerned about. I can see no reason that the
police could not carry those kits, just like they carry a
breathalyser. I know of several people that regularly drive while
on drugs.

There is a *big* reason why the police can't do that. There is no
legal compulsion for submitting to the test. Perhaps there should be.

then it is time it became complusory, just like a breath test. being non
invasive and quick it would be hard to find reasons not to take the test and
refusal could be the same consequences as refusing a breath test.