Roadside drug-testing passes test

[gb123]

OTTAWA - The federal government says new pilot-project results suggest roadside testing devices can be successfully used to detect drug-impaired driving.

Police officers from seven jurisdictions across Canada collected over 1,140 saliva samples using two kinds of devices between mid-December and early March.

Public Safety Canada says officers reported that the screening devices were easy to use in various weather, temperature and lighting conditions.

The test results are the latest development in the federal plan to legalize recreational marijuana use.

Under recently introduced legislation, police would be able to demand a saliva sample from a driver if they reasonably suspected the person had drugs in their body.

Should the saliva test lead police to believe an offence has been committed, they could order an examination by an evaluating officer or the taking of a blood sample.

— Follow @JimBronskill on Twitter

 

[gb123]

were off to see the wizard ...

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

Should the saliva test lead police to believe an offence has been committed, they could order an examination by an evaluating officer or the taking of a blood sample.

Well a blood test won't tell them anything more than the saliva test. The presence of thc does not indicate impairment. The saliva test is not admissible in court as a determination of guilt - simply refuse to take it. Make them prove IMPAIRMENT not just consumption. Consumption is NOT illegal.

 

[dienowk]

Well a blood test won't tell them anything more than the saliva test. The presence of thc does not indicate impairment. The saliva test is not admissible in court as a determination of guilt - simply refuse to take it. Make them prove IMPAIRMENT not just consumption. Consumption is NOT illegal.

They are slipping a provision in with the companion bill to the cannabis act to make it illegal to refuse if I remember correctly.

 

[The Hippy]

So much for actual freedom in Canada...what are we coming too. When the cops can just for no reason at all pull you over and demand your DNA. Well for me that ruins this country huge.
How about a test at roadside for other prescribed drugs you shouldn't drive on.
Of course not eh....or they'd be catching themselves.....lol
I've never been more sick of this country than I'm am these days.
We are going backwards and just letting the madd type dicks run it all.

 

[The Hippy]

I would expect this ABSOLUTE invasion of our basic human rights to become the standard pull over procedure folks. And we all just it back and take it...I hate the way this country is headed.
Expect in the future to be tested every time you go through a RIDE setup or whenever a cop is not busy and behind you.
This is no different than if they enacted a national finger printing roundup of every citizen. It's actaully worse as they will possess your DNA in some data base somewhere to done with whatever.
Hitler and trudy maggot...same thing to me

 

[gb123]

Public Safety Canada has finally released the results of their Oral Fluid Drug Screening Device Pilot Project from this past winter. The program was intended to help coincide with the government’s promise to legalize cannabis, and was in collaboration with Public Safety Canada, the RCMP, and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators.

The purpose of the project was to test different "oral fluid" devices in the Canadian climate, and to offer training and get feedback from law enforcement on the use and effectiveness of these products. The government has, in the past, tested the reliability of these products. Despite some errors with machinery and some recommendations for refining how data is collected, the government says the results of the study are positive, and will aid law enforcement in handling the expected impacts of cannabis legalization.

The testing took place between December 18, 2016 and March 6, 2017, with 1141 oral fluid samples collected by law enforcement officers across Canada. The results were analyzed by the roadside using two oral fluid drug screening devices, the Securetec DrugRead and the Alere DDS-2. These devices have been used and tested in other jurisdictions, as well.

The report was developed in consultation with seven police jurisdictions: Vancouver Police Department, Halifax Regional Police Service, Toronto Police Service, Gatineau Police Service, Ontario Provincial Police, North Battleford RCMP and Yellowknife RCMP.

From December 13-14, 2016, a training session was held for 24 police officers from these seven districts. Each officer committed to collecting at least 10 oral samples, and training two to five additional officers. Officers who received extensive training on the devices reported better ease of use.

Each police service was asked to conduct between 100 and 170 samples on each device, in total, except for Yellowknife due to a smaller population, which was asked to collect 50 samples on each device. Participating officers had various checklists to gather data on ease of use in various conditions.

83% of swabs were administered by officers trained in Standardized Field Sobriety Testing (SFST), and 55% of swabs were administered by Drug Recognition Experts (DRE). These officers collected samples in more than 25 communities across Canada and, on average, collected 21.5 samples each, meeting the target of a minimum of ten samples per officer on each device.

Drivers tested in the program all submitted samples voluntarily and were not held to any charges based on the results of the test. Volunteers were then screened for any signs of impairment by the police officer who was giving the tests, and any volunteers who showed signs of impairment were not eligible to participate.

Of the samples taken, about 15% registered a positive drug reading. The most commonly detected drugs based on the samples were cannabis (61%), methamphetamines and amphetamines (23% each), cocaine (14%), opiates (9%) and benzodiazepines (3%). The report notes that presence of a drug in the oral fluid does not imply impairment.

Two police services mentioned that possibly three devices appeared defective, which could have given artificially high drug-positive tests.

Of the 148 drug-positive tests, 38 (26%) were positive for more than one drug. The most common combination of two drugs was methamphetamines and amphetamines (15 samples), and either methamphetamines or amphetamines were present in 89% of poly-drug instances. Cannabis was present in combination with other drugs in 42% of poly-drug instances (16 samples).

The report concludes that, with proper training, the devices are reliable and a "useful tool" for Canadian law enforcement and the Canadian climate and environment.

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

They are slipping a provision in with the companion bill to the cannabis act to make it illegal to refuse if I remember correctly.

I figured as much. Doesn't change my mind though, I will refuse and let the courts settle it. Our legal system is based on innocence until proven guilty. By demanding I provide a saliva sample when there is no indication of impairment violates that basic principle. If I was obviously baked I understand, but random testing for a legal substance is not going to fly. They don't breath-test every driver pulled over in a 'counter-attack checkstop' and booze is the biggest danger on the road, why do they think they can do it for pot? Does this saliva test also indicate the presence of opiates? If they have not put the same effort into detecting opiate impaired drivers, they are going to have a tough time explaining how the mere presence of thc is a public safety issue.

 

[gb123]

it will be one fine day in court.
With out any doubt!

 

[The Hippy]

I will also refuse.
Cops swabbing people huh. Sorry but that's what I let the medical field do ...not some roadside pigs like it 1942 all over again. Ont heir whim as they plainly admit. They admit they need suspect nothing...just feel like doing it.
Can't wait until the general sheep public gets swabbed for no reason at all and they realize what they have happen. My Father and grandfathers fought for freedom. Randon drug testing by the government of the population wasn't considered freedom then or now.
I will refuse.

Go fuck yourself trudy maggot liar.

 

[mojoganjaman]

I figured as much. Doesn't change my mind though, I will refuse and let the courts settle it. Our legal system is based on innocence until proven guilty. By demanding I provide a saliva sample when there is no indication of impairment violates that basic principle. If I was obviously baked I understand, but random testing for a legal substance is not going to fly. They don't breath-test every driver pulled over in a 'counter-attack checkstop' and booze is the biggest danger on the road, why do they think they can do it for pot? Does this saliva test also indicate the presence of opiates? If they have not put the same effort into detecting opiate impaired drivers, they are going to have a tough time explaining how the mere presence of thc is a public safety issue.

ummmm...innocent until proven guilty is in the US....in Canada you are assumed guilty and must prove your innocence....lots of folks make this error...hth



mojo

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

ummmm...innocent until proven guilty is in the US....in Canada you are assumed guilty and must prove your innocence....lots of folks make this error...hth



mojo

Not true, although the cops don't seem to understand. The Canadian Charter trumps all other.
In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal".

 

[mojoganjaman]

Not true, although the cops don't seem to understand. The Canadian Charter trumps all other.
In Canada, section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states: "Any person charged with an offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal".

I stand corrected...ty budz...)




mojo

 

[dienowk]

I figured as much. Doesn't change my mind though, I will refuse and let the courts settle it. Our legal system is based on innocence until proven guilty. By demanding I provide a saliva sample when there is no indication of impairment violates that basic principle. If I was obviously baked I understand, but random testing for a legal substance is not going to fly. They don't breath-test every driver pulled over in a 'counter-attack checkstop' and booze is the biggest danger on the road, why do they think they can do it for pot? Does this saliva test also indicate the presence of opiates? If they have not put the same effort into detecting opiate impaired drivers, they are going to have a tough time explaining how the mere presence of thc is a public safety issue.

They are making the argument that driving is a privilege not a right and in taking part of the privilege the police have every right to stop and check you at any point and time (this has already held up in court, hence the legality of ride checks) and they are adding forced testing for booze as well in the bill if I remember correctly (MAAD helped them shape the companion bill, so you know it is shit for us). The saliva tests test for prescriptions (benzo's, opiates, amphetamines, cannabis) and street drugs. The addition of forced saliva testing will need to be challenged in court but there is a very real possibility that the government wins that case due to the whole driving is a privilege thing. I very much hope I am wrong and that the government has the same luck the Harper government had in court but I am very worried none the less.

 

[TheRealDman]

Prove it it works!
Just because the cops say it works doesn't mean shit. Show us scientific eveidence that the swabs work 100% of the time. You know the breathalyzer device had science to prove that it actually does what it supposed to do....accurately measure blood alcohol content. They cannot implement an impairment testing device based on their words only. Show us the science, because you many defense attorneys are gonna demand to see the science in court.

 

[gb123]

They should test COPS ON THE JOB as well.

 

[GrowRock]

So they threw every mmj user under the bus for driving...... why wouldn't they consult people who are using mmj. Never mind it's the guberment and they are on another make work project why is it the guberment can never get it right the first second or third time? So I see this changing problem is all the innocent people being prosecuted in the mean time.....

 

[gb123]

relax...... they have tp prove yer impaired dude,,,
that aint gonna happen

I'm goin to court

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

They are making the argument that driving is a privilege not a right and in taking part of the privilege the police have every right to stop and check you at any point and time (this has already held up in court, hence the legality of ride checks) and they are adding forced testing for booze as well in the bill if I remember correctly (MAAD helped them shape the companion bill, so you know it is shit for us). The saliva tests test for prescriptions (benzo's, opiates, amphetamines, cannabis) and street drugs. The addition of forced saliva testing will need to be challenged in court but there is a very real possibility that the government wins that case due to the whole driving is a privilege thing. I very much hope I am wrong and that the government has the same luck the Harper government had in court but I am very worried none the less.

I know what they are doing, but I will fight it every step of the way. Driving may be a privilege, but I don't give up my charter rights,imo. The test does not determine impairment and therefore is an intrusion into my privacy. Being a cop (public servant) is a privilege and not a right. As the people who pay their salaries, we should be able to demand they perform the same tests everytime they are asked. After all, they carry guns and pose a much larger threat to public safety than someone using cannabis.

 

[The Hippy]

I hate cops...big time.