Smoke says it'll be a long time before ever driving another Sprint Car, if ever.
http://racing.ap.org/article/stewart-unsure-if-hell-race-sprint-cars-again
http://racing.ap.org/article/stewart-unsure-if-hell-race-sprint-cars-again
Generally speaking, once a person dies their body stops metabolizing drugs. So if a person dies pretty close to the time of the incident (homicide, traffic fatality etc) then toxicology tests should be able to indicate what was going on in the body at the time of death/incident. Autopsy samples taken after the person was in the hospital for three days doesn't give too much information about the time of the actual incident. If tests show that a person had levels of active drugs in them that are consistent with impairment, then it is assumed that the person was impaired at the time of the incident. For instance, if it was reported that a dead person was hit by a car and immediately died and their BLOOD had 5ng/mL THC, that it would be assumed that the person was under the influence of marijuana. However, if the blood only had 5ng/mL THC-COOH (inactive metabolite) then not much can be said about marijuana use at the time of the incident.
Remember, terms and word choice are very important here. Under the influence, impaired, and unable to safely operate a motor vehicle can mean different things. If a person has therapeutic levels of drug in their blood, then the receptors in the brain are being activated and there is a physiological response. The question then becomes if the influence of that drug causes impairment (judgement, reaction time, vision/audio etc) and for DUI purposes does that impairment prevent you from safely operating a vehicle (versus sitting on your couch minding your own business).
I'm guessing you haven't smoked a lot of pot.
He could have hit a joint right before he got in the car and, depending on his tolerance level, not been impaired at all. Possibly even less of an effect than smoking a cigarette.
I'm guessing you haven't smoked a lot of pot.
He could have hit a joint right before he got in the car and, depending on his tolerance level, not been impaired at all. Possibly even less of an effect than smoking a cigarette.
I'm guessing you haven't smoked a lot of pot.
He could have hit a joint right before he got in the car and, depending on his tolerance level, not been impaired at all. Possibly even less of an effect than smoking a cigarette.
Just because you have a tolerance for something doesn't mean you aren't impaired.
Just to follow up on this...
There are various types of tolerance. There is metabolic tolerance which typically means that your body increases its ability to metabolize or break down a drug. Usually, it is by the increase of enzymes. Tolerance could also be that your body increases the amount of receptors and more drug is needed to create the same response, as with opiates. Then you have "learned" tolerance as is the case with alcohol. A person isn't less affected by alcohol per say, but they learn to adjust their behaviors for simple tasks like talking slower (no slurred speech) and standing with a wider base (better balance).
As I said before, this is a very complicated topic and one that terminology is very important.
However, I do see where Biff is coming from.
Just to follow up on this...
There are various types of tolerance. There is metabolic tolerance which typically means that your body increases its ability to metabolize or break down a drug. Usually, it is by the increase of enzymes. Tolerance could also be that your body increases the amount of receptors and more drug is needed to create the same response, as with opiates. Then you have "learned" tolerance as is the case with alcohol. A person isn't less affected by alcohol per say, but they learn to adjust their behaviors for simple tasks like talking slower (no slurred speech) and standing with a wider base (better balance).
As I said before, this is a very complicated topic and one that terminology is very important.
However, I do see where Biff is coming from.
My recollection from a past life (not a user; more law enforcement-stuff) is that the GC/MS test applied to most urine samples actually tests for the metabolyte. Is there a way they test for active THC in your system, in a manner analogous to BAC? My untrained impression is that the short answer is no, at least not in a way they can replicate with a field sobriety test. Verdad?