View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

Name your polls, letter writers

Posted: May 4, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: May 4, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

I would like to address briefly two letters to the editor that were published Sunday in The Signal.
The first was from Don Gately regarding the DUI checkpoints.

Don, I don’t think that you are aware or have read the updates printed after the checkpoints.

The one last month netted more people under the influence of marijuana than alcohol. Unfortunately, we have a serious drug problem in the valley, and the too-easy-to-get-medical marijuana card is only fostering this problem.

So sheriff’s deputies hanging down the street from the bars is not going to stop the drug users.

Personally I would love to see a DUI checkpoint every Friday and Saturday night if it keeps these idiots off the street.
With regard to Dan Frye’s letter about the UN and the U.S., thank you, Dan, for listing the poll provider.

I believe that if a letter writer cannot back up with “polls show,” naming the poll and when it was taken, that writer’s letter shouldn’t be published.

Two weeks ago, I read a letter in a different publication that stated that 78 percent of the country approved of a government program that is highly misrepresented by a segment of one of our own political parties.

Obviously this guy was totally lying or completely out of touch with reality; he never mentioned what poll he was citing or when it was taken or how many people were polled.

I have even seen some letters published here with the same arbitrary “polls show” and nothing to back it up with.

So for those of you who do contribute to the letters or opinions columns, keep it honest and don’t hallucinate with your “polls show” propaganda — back it up with the information that can be verified.

 

Comments

ricketzz: Posted: May 4, 2014 6:46 a.m.

How many fatal accidents can be attributed solely to a person being impaired on pot? How many major accidents? Our deputies should have better things to do than harass people in the sanctity of their automobiles doing no harm. A pothead driving is not an accident waiting to happen. A cop with a loaded weapon and a head full of high minded Dudley Dooright crap is.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: May 4, 2014 7:20 a.m.

Sorry ricketzz, these are questions that he will not be able to answer because he has zero REAL information... just his opinion. Pretty ironic since the subject of his rant is about people not backing up their claims with facts or sources.


chefgirl358: Posted: May 4, 2014 8:14 a.m.

Ricketzz, I could not disagree with you more. You must not have seen any really stoned people in the last 20 years because it ain't your parents dope they're smoking nowadays. That stuff is crazy strong and completely impairs users reflexes and timing. They are absolutely AS hazardous if not more so than someone who knocked back several beers.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: May 4, 2014 8:41 a.m.

Marijuana does not effect depth perception and motor skills like alcohol does, regardless of its strength. I would not like sharing the road with either. But if I had to chose, I would much rather be driving next to a stoned driver than a drunk driver any day.


chefgirl358: Posted: May 4, 2014 1:46 p.m.

No maybe not, but it does affect their coordination and reaction time. It's just as dangerous as a drunk, neither one should be on the road.


EgbertSouse4U: Posted: May 4, 2014 2:45 p.m.

Of course neither should be on the road, but I still disagree. For instance, when we read these stories of people going the wrong way on the freeway, it's always alcohol, not pot. Check the Signal archives if you doubt my statement.


tech: Posted: May 4, 2014 3:04 p.m.

Neither are optimal, drunk drivers are more impaired than stoned ones.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/health/driving-under-the-influence-of-marijuana.html?_r=0


therightstuff: Posted: May 4, 2014 3:15 p.m.

Alcohol is worse...according to most polls.


projalice11: Posted: May 4, 2014 5:42 p.m.

"Alcohol is worse...according to most polls."

"Back it up with the information that can be verified."


therightstuff: Posted: May 5, 2014 9:19 p.m.

As usual Lois, you don't get the joke. But speaking of jokes, your president claimed that over 8-million people have signed up for Obamacare. Does he need to back it up with information that can be verified or are you willing to take the word of a guy who lied to you 37 times about keeping your old insurance?


ricketzz: Posted: May 5, 2014 6:30 a.m.

I am really old and I have real world experience. If you are too high to drive you can drink a cup of coffee or a caffeinated soft drink, give it a few minutes and you are good to go. Not so with alcohol.

I would like to know what the State considers impaired, stated in plain English. If blood THC concentration is used, how were the figures determined? I guarantee you that people on Sports drinks or people with smart phones are way more impaired than someone with a mild buzz on.

I volunteer for any credible test of reaction time and coordination. Good driving is instinct and experience as much as it is knowledge. Paranoia is more impairing than any drug.


chefgirl358: Posted: May 5, 2014 10:29 a.m.

Ricketzz that is such bull. What on earth do you have to back up that a coke is going to sober up a stoner?


AlwaysRight: Posted: May 5, 2014 12:54 p.m.

There is no legal limit for marijuana DUI in California. Unfortunately.
It is left up to the observations of the arresting officer to determine
impairment level.


philellis: Posted: May 5, 2014 1:17 p.m.

AR, it is my understanding that limits are being considered.


17trillion: Posted: May 5, 2014 2:04 p.m.

Chefgirl, have you ever smoked pot? --edited.


ricketzz: Posted: May 6, 2014 8:04 a.m.

I try not to use subjective terms like "sober" and "stoner". Caffeine enables "focus"; an essential mental situation when driving. Too much caffeine makes road rage; a very impairing state of mind. It's a matter of picking well and controlling better your poisons. To blanketly dismiss everything but booze and pharmaceuticals is rigid adherence to an unworthy past. People should be encouraged to consider the voluminous literature regarding these matters, to better steer the kids or that alkie across the street. Folk remedies were outlawed by big pharma. Illegal smiles threaten the distilleries (all foreign just about).

"taking a strictly neurological look then i see it as very possible to kill your high.

"Caffeine readily crosses the blood–brain barrier that separates the bloodstream from the interior of the brain. Once in the brain, the principal mode of action is as an antagonist of adenosine receptors.[51] The caffeine molecule is structurally similar to adenosine, and binds to adenosine receptors on the surface of cells without activating them (an "antagonist" mechanism of action). Therefore, caffeine acts as a competitive inhibitor."

The neurotransmitter is most readily associated with arousal. Arousal, like adrenaline and your R.A.S., is what wakes you up and puts your body in motion. weed is a depressant in that it, even if minimally, slows the CNS, while caffeine stimulates and increases CNS activity. So caffeine slightly "arouses us" from the high state, even if only slightly.

So yes it's very possible and reasonable. Its good for combatting the inevitable drowsiness, but depending on the individual it very well may "kill" your high "

http://forum.grasscity.com/apprentice-tokers/207683-does-caffeine-kill-your-high.html



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...