Buzz Kill: California Police Train To Detect Drugged Drivers

SACRAMENTO (AP) — Joseph Brenan, a 40-year-old father of four, was changing a flat tire along Interstate 80 near Sacramento last week when he was struck and killed by a passing motorist who had drifted onto the shoulder of the highway.

The California Highway Patrol arrested Brandon Rotolo, 24, on suspicion of driving under the influence of marijuana and vehicular manslaughter.

The tragic accident is the sort law enforcement officials fear may become more common after California voters in November approved Proposition 64 legalizing recreational pot. When legalization takes effect next year, the state will become the world’s largest cannabis market.

Police across California are scrambling to keep up by increasing training to spot drug-impaired drivers. Their task is made more difficult because, unlike the 0.08 percent blood level for alcohol, there is no presumed level of intoxication in California and drugs affect everyone differently.

But driving impaired remains illegal, no matter the substance.

On Wednesday, police planned a news conference near the Capitol to demonstrate how they currently conduct roadside drugged-driving tests.

Assemblyman Tom Lackey, R-Palmdale, and the California Police Chiefs Association also planned to demonstrate a portable saliva test that proponents said could one day be widely used to screen for the recent use of marijuana and five other drugs.

Lackey, a former California Highway Patrol member, carried a bill two years ago that would have allowed police to swab a suspect’s mouth and use an “oral fluid” device to test for drugs in much the same way officers currently use breathalyzers to test drivers’ blood-alcohol level. The bill died in its first committee.

The devices are being tested in Kern, Los Angeles and Sacramento counties along with states such as Colorado, which also legalized recreational marijuana. Michigan and Vermont recently authorized use of the tests, according to Lackey’s office.

More California police departments are using the saliva tests after a Kern County judge last year accepted the results as evidence in a drugged driving case, said Lauren Michaels, the police chiefs association’s marijuana and drunken driving policy expert.

“It’s an additional tool to be used, but at the end of the day in an arrest you’d get a blood sample to tell the actual levels of each substance,” she said. It currently is a voluntary test in California that drivers can refuse.

Other law enforcement and academic experts said there are too many variables in how marijuana and other drugs are consumed and metabolized to rely on a saliva or breath test. They said the best current method is to train law enforcement officers to spot the signs of impairment.

“The science is still developing,” California Highway Patrol Sgt. Glen Glaser said. “The mere presence of a drug should not make a person feel like they’re subject to arrest if they’re not impaired.”

The highway patrol plans to have every road officer trained in advanced roadside drug detection techniques before Jan. 1, said Glaser, state coordinator of the patrol’s drug recognition expert program. The CHP is busy training officers from other law enforcement agencies as well.

Drunken driving tests mainly test physical skills. Drugged driving screening also looks for cognitive changes among 12 different steps.

For instance, suspects are told to tip back their heads and estimate when 30 seconds have passed; some drugs make time seem to slow down while other drugs produce the sensation that time has accelerated, affecting the users’ perception.

The CHP and other agencies also are cooperating with the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at the University of California, San Diego. The center is analyzing and trying to improve both the human drug-recognition experts and the saliva testing as part of a two-year, $1.8 million study.

Researchers are giving 180 volunteers marijuana with varying levels of potency, then measuring both their performance in a driving simulator and ways of spotting any impairment.

They also are trying to learn if there is a particular presumptive level of marijuana intoxication that impairs driving, said Thomas Marcotte, the study’s chief investigator and co-director of the research center.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Comments

One Comment

  1. http://wtsc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2015/10/Driver-Toxicology-Testing-and-the-Involvement-of-Marijuana-in-Fatal-Crashes_REVFeb2016.pdf
    The data on marijuana impairment is sparse and often inconsistent. More and better studies need to be done. The state of Washington recognized this and worked with private agencies to survey the crash and fatality rates They separate out alcohol, psychoactive THC and inactive THC. What is clear is that the fatality rate specific to cannabis, both active and inactive forms of THC–has increased. Another chilling statistic: Those testing positive for marijuana alone, not alcohol or other drugs, are FIVE TIMES more likely to kill someone other than themselves compared to a driver testing positive for alcohol. In general, those that are drunk usually kill themselves, those that are stoned kill others.
    Until there are tests of function to correlate with a biologic such as blood or saliva, the best line of defense are those professional law enforcement officers trained in drug impaired detection such as RIDE or DRE. Again, data is muddy, but the state of Oregon did not have the dramatic increase in marijuana specific road fatalities. They also have the highest ratio of DRE trained officers per population…in the nation. Perhaps all should study what Oregon did right. Tests of function are desperately needed so as to obtain convictions and remove these dangerous drivers from the road. IMMAD – Impairment Measurement Marijuana and driving is a simple app for a tablet that objectively measures functional impairment. It measures the visual field deficits (HUGE BLIND SPOTS or TUNNEL VISION) that occurs with marijuana use. Marijuana has been shown to significantly impair the eye retinal ganglion cells. IMMAD – Impairment Measurement Marijuana and Driving, measures this. IMMAD and other tests of function need to be further developed and studied so as to have better tools for law enforcement to use in dealing with marijuana impaired driving.

  2. A quote from the summary statement in Washington State report that Dr. Valenti gives a link for: “In 2014, the proportion of drivers involved in fatal crashes testing positive for THC increased, and therefore the number of fatalities involving THC also increased. While this report explains that trend and the characteristics of these drivers, this information is not sufficient to determine if marijuana directly contributed to the cause of these crashes.” Dr. Valenti apparently did not read to the end of the report.

    Dr. Valenti continues to post incorrect and misleading information on every marijuana driving story she can find. Traffic accident fatalities have not changed in Washington State since legalization of marijuana. 2014 is when retail sales of marijuana began in Washington. Number of fatalities with marijuana-impaired driving = 86. 2015, one year after legalization; number of fatalities with marijuana-impaired drivers = 91. Basically the same. Here is a link to the Washington State data:

    http://wtsc.wa.gov/research-data/quarterly-target-zero-data/

    As the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says, “the significant increased risk of crash involvement associated with THC and illegal drugs shown in Table 3 is not found after adjusting for these demographic variables” (i.e., controlling for age, gender and race/ethnicity).

    http://blog.caranddriver.com/marijuana-doesnt-pose-significant-risk-in-car-crashes-nhtsa-says/

    It is certainly possible, of course, for a person to use enough marijuana, particularly if they are an infrequent user, to be impaired. That is why I created my DRUID app (www.druidapp.com), so people can test their own level of impairment and decide not to drive if they are impaired. A fair test of marijuana impairment would include a blood or saliva test that shows *recent* marijuana use–in combination with evidence of impairment (e.g., slowed reaction time and impaired brain function). This is what DRUID does.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS San Francisco

Get The New CBS SF Bay Area Local App
Got Our Weather App?
Listen to Radio.com Anywhere, Anytime!

Watch & Listen LIVE