You steal a camera during MY Workshop? Fuck you, you piece of messed-up shit !

[Shot From Guns]

Except it really doesn't because the "impairment" is not significant enough to make accidents any more likely.

It doesn't matter if it makes them more likely--the point is that there IS an effect. It doesn't matter if it's a good effect, or a bad effect, or a bad effect that can be compensated for (and often is)--IT'S A FUCKING EFFECT.

Honestly, why do you even keep posting here, if you just keep pulling this "I am my own cite" bullshit?

 

[Freudian Slit]

Dio did say that while driving he had to remind himself at times that he wasn't in a video game. I can't say that's a ringing endorsement for driving while high.

 

[pulykamell]

I still maintain that whatever imparment occurs is still pretty negligable even for those more susceptable to it

If I'm supposed to believe your anecdotal experience that smoking pot doesn't affect your driving, why are you supposed to hand-wave away my personal experience? Listen, I know perfectly well that some people drive fine stoned. I've been in cars driven by stoned people before. But the point is get over your solipsistic worldview, not everyone reacts to the same drugs the same way. Trust me, you don't want to get in a car with me when I'm toked up, especially if I'm having a bad panic-attack high (which is why I eventually gave up pot--a quarter of the time it would send me into a racing heart "oh-my-god-I'm gonna-die" panic, with rapid heart beat, depersonalization, and even fainting in extreme cases.) I am not unique in this regard, although it's not the usual experience for most pot smokers.

and anyone who's ever been a stoner or around stoners knows that it's not even close to the same kind of impairment as being drunk.

Of course not. I'm not sure anyone is saying it is.

 

[Inigo Montoya]

I've gone one of them there penis thingys as well, so make that 200%.

Dude...don't bogart!

 

[pulykamell]

Can we accept that pot might impair task management when it comes to navigating a maze, or sorting out different coloured plastic objects into little piles, ie. "WTF am I doing this for?" tasks, but for flying a plane, driving a car, or even mountain-biking, it might actually help your concentration?

I'm willing to entertain the notion that for some people it may help their concentration. There was also a study I read a few years ago that low blood alcohol levels (like in the .03-.04 range) was actually found in one study to improve driving performance, too, for similar reasons.

But I also share the skepticism that it would help all drivers.

 

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Dio did say that while driving he had to remind himself at times that he wasn't in a video game. I can't say that's a ringing endorsement for driving while high.

I said that happened on LSD, not pot. I admit I shouldn't have driven on LSD.

 

[bucketybuck]

Yes, it affects cognition, but that's not the same as impairing it. Since it does not impair the ability to perform tasks, I don't see how it can be said to impair cognition. I would argue that it enhances cognition.

As a non drug taker, can somebody please enlighten me on something. If pot doesnt impair driving or cognition in any way, then why do stoners need to compensate for it when driving? What are they slowing down, and driving more carefully for?

Anecodtes are not evidence.The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents. There's no way out of that box. That's a checkmate for me.

No, I'm saying that hard empirical data trumps anecdotal bullshit. Why the fuck do you think it should be otherwise?

Troll

 

[Frank]

I'm still interested in what the surveillance camera showed.

And, as a former pothead, I'll add that:

1) The idea that being high does not interfere with driving is bullshit. Should pot ever be legalized, an accurate test for Blood Cannibinol Level will be the next major commercial breakthrough. ("How many hits have you had tonight, sir?")

2) The idea that being high turns one into a thief is bullshit. Someone who is already a crook is likely to be a more stupid crook while high, that's all. The OPs description does not seem to be totally out of line with this scenario, but it's because of the hero's personality, not because he was stoned.

But . . . that said, I'll repeat, I'm still interested in what the surveillance camera showed.

 

[Shot From Guns]

Being high compromises your mental function. This dude was high. It certainly doesnt seem to be much a stretch to me that a high person might be more likely than a sober/not high person to use the five finger discount if an easy opportunity arose.

Hell, isnt that almost the definition of being drunk/high? Doing minor stupid shit you'd almost never do sober?

Drugs, including alcohol and pot, lower your inhibitions. That's it. They don't magically turn you into a thief. To steal something while drunk or high, you'd have to already be the kind of person who'd consider stealing something while sober. Most of us wouldn't steal a camera at a class like this because it would be wrong, not because we just don't think we could get away with it.

I just love all the potheads getting all hot and bothered here.

I just love that you're such a fucking retard you can't process the idea that everyone who disagrees with you isn't necessarily a pothead.

 

[storyteller0910]

And you are welcome to doubt it. Meanwhile you have 2 - yes, 2! - people telling you from their own experience that driving under the influence of pot does not inhibit driving ability in any significant manner, and your counter-experience is... what?

Well, I just read an article by Mann RE et al (Traffic Inj Prev. 2010 Apr;11(2):115-22) in which the authors conducted a survey of approximately 7000 (Canadian) adults and found that the odds ratio for collision involvement among drivers who had driven after cannabis use versus drivers who had never done so was 1.84 (notably, the odds ratio for drivers who drove after alcohol consumption versus drivers who never had was only 1.34).

Also found an Australian study (Lenne MG et al, Accid Anal Prev. 2010 May;42(3):859-66). Money quote, from the article's conclusions:

Cannabis did impair simulated driving as evidenced by increased variability in speed, headway, and lateral position, in accord with previous research ([Ramaekers et al., 2000], [Robbe, 1998] and [Ronen et al., 2008]). In most cases these effects were dose-dependent. The decrements in standard deviation of lateral position for high dose cannabis were greater than those observed in the high alcohol condition. [Reaction times] were also slower in the high dose cannabis condition. Performance in the cannabis conditions was associated with an increase in mean headway and a decrease in mean speed. These effects of cannabis were observed at levels similar to those believed to be indicative of performance impairment.

Of the cites in the paragraph above, Ramaekers et al (publishing in Human Psychopharmacology) tried three doses of THC (0, 100, and 200 micrograms/kg) with vs. without alcohol and found that both non-zero doses of THC negatively affected driving performance; according to the abstract, "Performance deficits were minor after alcohol and moderate after both THC doses." I can't get into the Robbe article at the moment. The Ronen article (in Accident Analysis and Prevention) had a very small sample size - only 14 - but nonetheless concluded, among other things, that "a moderate dose of alcohol (0.05% BAC) appeared to impair subjects' ability to drive at a similar level as that observed after smoking the lower level of THC."

This seems pretty clear cut to me. Marijuana use is associated with decreased driving speed but increased speed variability, increased variability of lateral position (ie, swerving), decreased reaction time, and increased risk of collison.

 

[MeanOldLady]

1.) I'm suspicious of the fact that Cartooniverse has never responded to say that he did, in fact, view the security tapes.

2.) Smoking pot has nothing to do with somebody's likeliness to steal shit. This particular pothead happens to be a fucking loser.

3.) Coming to an event fucked up as a client is not remotely comparable to coming to the same event fucked up as a vendor. The person paying for something is only cheating themself; the person being paid would be cheating everyone who gave them money.

4.) Shut the fuck up, Dio.

5.) No, seriously--shut the fuck up, Dio.

+1-followed-by-however-many-zeros-there-are-in-a-zillion.

 

[Bryan Ekers]

Dude...don't bogart!

Well, just remember, when it gets passed to you, hold it in as long as you can to get the full effect.

 

[Freudian Slit]

I'm still interested in what the surveillance camera showed.

And, as a former pothead, I'll add that:

1) The idea that being high does not interfere with driving is bullshit. Should pot ever be legalized, an accurate test for Blood Cannibinol Level will be the next major commercial breakthrough. ("How many hits have you had tonight, sir?")

2) The idea that being high turns one into a thief is bullshit. Someone who is already a crook is likely to be a more stupid crook while high, that's all. The OPs description does not seem to be totally out of line with this scenario, but it's because of the hero's personality, not because he was stoned.

But . . . that said, I'll repeat, I'm still interested in what the surveillance camera showed.

This was pretty much my whole reaction, too.

But I don't think the OP's coming back any time soon...

 

[Cat Whisperer]

Does he watch PBS without pledging?

Oh my God - I do that! I must be a pothead!

 

[Diogenes the Cynic]

The study I cited showed that there was no difference in likelihood of accidents between people who are stoned and people who are not stoned.

 

[Bryan Ekers]

Oh my God - I do that! I must be a pothead!

Well, maybe, but it also makes you a thief. A common thief!

 

[MTCicero]

The study I cited showed that there was no difference in likelihood of accidents between people who are stoned and people who are not stoned.

You know, that's kind of like a Christian pointing to the Bible when asked for proof of the existence of God.

 

[dmatsch]

Drunk is not the same as baked. The comparison is not valid. I was stoned in 90% of my college classes and got straight A's.

word.

Only I got B's because I chased too many women.

 

[JThunder]

The study I cited showed that there was no difference in likelihood of accidents between people who are stoned and people who are not stoned.

And storyteller0910 cited two studies that say otherwise.

Moreover, your original claim was not about driving ability alone. It was about the impairment of cognitive ability and motor skills. The study that you cited fully acknowledged that drivers are impaired while they're on marijuana, even as it posited that they take corrective action while under the influence. So even if we grant that your cite is superior to the ones mentioned by storyteller0910, the fact remains: your own citation proves your claim to be wrong.

 

[Vinyl Turnip]

Drugs, including alcohol and pot, lower your inhibitions. That's it.

It seems to me (based on my own plausibly deniable experiences) that the quality of inhibition-lowering caused by marijuana is significantly different from that of alcohol.

With alcohol, you begin thinking things like "aw, I'm fine to drive!" and "dude, that meter maid totally wants me!" and "guess what, biker gang: y'all just entered a world of hurt!" With pot it's more like "there can't be that many calories in this whole thing of cookies, right?

How can I even think about stealing stuff when the old man at that table over there keeps looking at me? He fuckin' knows, man!