NSW Bloke’s Drug-Driving Acquittal Casts Serious Shade On RBT Policy

Last year, the bloke was caught on the roads with traces of cannabis in his system. The officer on scene told him the next time he smoked, he ought to give it a week before driving to make sure he was in the clear. 

Later, nine days after he last ingested the drug, he was randomly pulled over a second time. Shock horror: the test found traces of THC were lingering in his saliva. 

Magistrate David Heilpern took this evidence on board and found him not guilty, due to the misleading info given to him. That single action may give credence to a slew of criticisms focussed on the states’ random drug test policies; in particular, NSW’s seeming inflexibility on differentiating between drivers who are absolutely fuckeyed, and drivers who may have scant traces of drugs ingested days ago floating in their bloodstream. 

Speaking to ABC, the man’s lawyer likened the now-avoided punishment to “taking someone’s licence away for having a beer two or three days before driving a car.”

That standpoint has been mirrored frequently of late. In a statement made last month to PEDESTRIAN.TV, Greens MP David Shoebridge said “testing for minute traces of just three illegal drugs [THC, MDMA, and amphetamines] at levels well below those that impair drivers is all about ideology and nothing to do with road safety.”

For the record, Shoebridge is currently pushing for a parliamentary inquiry into New South Wales’ current drug testing regime. 

ABC also reports the arresting officer told the court the choice for drivers was as simple as it is nonsensical: be a driver and don’t smoke pot / be a smoker and don’t drive. Evidently, at least one magistrate thinks we can be a little more sophisticated with our drug policies than that. 

Source: ABC. 
Photo: Youtube.