Tech Firm Claims Creation of Legitimite Pot Breathalyzer

There is a LOT of money to be made from the "pot" industry, including gadgets law enforcement can use to test to see if drivers are "impaired" (it's been shown that marijuana does not affect your ability to drive the same as alcohol, but more research should be conducted IMO)

The tech company Hound Industries is claiming they've done it - they've successfully made a device that can test for THC metabolites

With several more states on track to legalize recreational marijuana within the next year, the pressure is mounting for science to develop an effective Breathalyzer that law enforcement can not only use to gauge impairment, but one that accomplishes this goal without scrutinizing every driver showing traces of THC metabolites with a DUI.

"In just one or two breaths, our new scientific approach is able to capture THC, and, through an extraction process, measure the actual level to less than 500 picograms," UC Berkeley professor Matt Francis said in a statement. "This incredibly efficient and responsive technology is necessary to measure THC which requires a method that is more than one million times more sensitive than what is used to measure alcohol in breath."

Ever since states began legalizing cannabis, the issue of stoned driving has been a controversial debacle shrouded in half-baked regulations and unconstitutional practices. Some states, like Indiana, have maintained a strict no-tolerance policy on the issue of drugged driving that has caused many motorists to be charged with DUI simply because a blood test showed that they may have smoked marijuana within the past week. In legal states, the situation is an equally sad state of affairs, as most lawmakers have determined a person who registers .05 nanongrams of THC per milliliter of blood to be legally impaired.

Opponents to the "pot breathalyzer" are saying that the devices will only act as a "detection" device, but not actually proving whether or not the subject is "under the influence":

The scene has become even more dreadful in recent years with flawed pot breathalyzers being distributed to law enforcement agencies for consideration. All of these devices, however, have only been successful in proving a driver was high at some point, but a total failure in measuring immediate impairment. As Paul Armentano, deputy director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, pointed out in his 2013 article, “The Problem with the Pot Breathalyzer,” “breath test technology is simply a detection test, not a per se indicator of whether subjects are "under the influence" of drugs.”

Hound Industries claims they've solved this problem -

“Our ability to measure THC in breath really should shift the national dialogue from one about simply detecting if THC is in someone’s body to a conversation where standards can be developed that reflect actual impairment,” Hound Labs CEO Mike Lynn told Reuters. While it is almost inevitable that some form of easy-to-use weed impairment test will need to be put in place before lawmakers and law enforcement can get comfortable with the idea of legal weed, some experts doubt that marijuana impairment can be tested in the same manner as it is done for booze.

My favorite part of the article:

“To date, no such data exist correlating THC/breath detection levels with behavioral impairment,” Armentano [Paul Armentano, deputy director for the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws] told the Washington Times. “In fact, no scientific study that I am aware of has even attempted to correlate the detection of THC in breath with actual behavioral or psychomotor impairment of any kind.”


This should certainly be interesting...


www.hightimes.com...

This will be a good way for law enforcements to catch more drivers driving under the influence. While marijuana may not affect your ability to drive in the way alcohol does, if they are pulled over for suspected driving under the influence this would be a good way to incarcerate them.

As always though, people will try to make money off of everything. Its how our society works, and if it doesn't harm us, it helps the economy by giving people more stuff to do, which is always a good thing.

Pot suppositories exist.



*backing out slowly*

I never understood this, why can't they simply use the Inebriation Test which has been around forever? If someone is not able to walk the line, touch their nose and all that, it should be enough to decide someone is impaired, whether its pot, alcohol, or pharmaceuticals (which actually poses a way worse risk actually).

a reply to: FamCore

Now that such a device has been invented studies need to be done on acceptable limits and time frames.

a reply to: FamCore

Great another cash cow for the courts milk.

I am all for road side breath testing, but once science and machines get involved the courts sway law makers in their favor.
Take for example drinking and driving, if you get caught and fail a test, it's an open and closed case, you cannot refute the evidence. And in a lot of states and in Canada road side field tests aren't even a thing, they go straight to the machine.
Over the years tho they have put more and more restrictions on how much alcohol you can actually consume, to the point where even a glass of wine with dinner can earn you a ticket, FAR from the actual criminal limit.
Institutions like MADD have also taken advantage of the situation and tailored their studies in their favor, using ALL motor vehicle accidents involving alcohol as 'drunk driving' when realistically only a handful were actually over the legal limit.
I suspect MADD is going to milk this one as well.
It's a touchy subject, but it hits me personally as I was dinged a few years back for consuming two bottles of beer and got a ticket, which lead to civil death as I got a 2 month suspension, and insane insurance premiums.

a reply to: boncho

A long time user can easily pass them, plus you can smoke a little and get a head change, but also be perfectly fine for higher order motor/thinking skills.

Just saying, they will find a way to detect it.

With the current trend of decriminalization, they may detect trace amounts of oils in your jacket, beard, etc. yet it may be a defensible argument that you're just around it due to prescription or straight legal possession.

So your gum shares a pocket with your prescription, and you ate a piece transferring oils from hand to mouth to breathalyzer.

How dare they?!

What would prompt a monster to do such a thing!! I'm boycotting this test!

originally posted by: boncho
I never understood this, why can't they simply use the Inebriation Test which has been around forever? If someone is not able to walk the line, touch their nose and all that, it should be enough to decide someone is impaired, whether its pot, alcohol, or pharmaceuticals (which actually poses a way worse risk actually).

The reason why "road side Sobriety tests" cannot be used to determine how a drunk a person is, is because they have never been used for that. The road side Sobriety tests are only used to gain probable cause to administer a breathalyzer. The breathalyzer or intoxilator 5000 actually measures your BAC. Tests done on the side of the road are only being done to gather more PC. This is why most states make the road side sobriety test mandatory and if you refuse they can still take your license even without a BAC. Even breathalyzers that are used on the side of the road are not admisable in court. Breathalyzers have to be calibrated and operated by a certified user. handhelds are not certified.

It detects pot by looking for the presence of Doritos.

I doubt most are seeing this in the light in which it actually is. This enables employers to offer more relaxed policies and enables them to detect "high right now", which if you are, and are at work, you should be fired, just as if you were drunk.

This will pave the way for legalized pot in every state. The excuses are almost all gone. This should be embraced by all. It's nothing but a win.

a reply to: FamCore

My view: there is no science to back up any of it either way solely because of the governments refusal to research it.

I have paid my taxes, done my part....and they have misspent it. So im loathe to accept the "lack of data" as an excuse.

If Uncle Sam can spend money researching if coke makes Japanese quail more promiscuous, then they sure as hell could have spent some money in other ways.

originally posted by: network dude
I doubt most are seeing this in the light in which it actually is. This enables employers to offer more relaxed policies and enables them to detect "high right now", which if you are, and are at work, you should be fired, just as if you were drunk.

This will pave the way for legalized pot in every state. The excuses are almost all gone. This should be embraced by all. It's nothing but a win.

I don't think that is what it does.

I think it just tells if you have metabolites present via breath vs urine/hair/etc.

well i can only say that driving under the influence of pot is damn silly and obviously potentially dangerous to oneself and others. same as driving drunk. don't do it kids!

i speak from experience.

a reply to: FamCore

Tech Firm Claims Creation of Legitimite Pot Breathalyzer

Pretty sure you don't need one of those to know when someone is smoking...certain hings are good giveaways.

Red Eyes

Cotton Mouth

And only driving 20 in a 40 mph zone.

And let's not forget the smell.

What always got me about "impairment of ability" is that not everyone has the same ability .. Mario Andretti could drink a case of beer and drive better than most of us sober .. if you have an accident then you should get dui/dwi but just a random stop when youve done nothing wrong and are driving fine its like saying you might rob a bank

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He meant what would inevitably follow such tech and is correct. Definitely a step forward.

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
well i can only say that driving under the influence of pot is damn silly and obviously potentially dangerous to oneself and others. same as driving drunk. don't do it kids!

i speak from experience.

Different people handle things differently.....I know a guy who owns his own heavy equipment company and he is a habitual smoker. He smokes all day all night all while dangling thousands of pounds over peoples heads. He has never had an accident and I personally have never seen anyone who can handle heavy equipment like this guy sober or messed up. Lets put it this way, he can pick up a quarter off a concrete surface with an excavator....if you know anything about tractors that is no easy feat.



I dare anyone to try it. A lot of hand eye coordination going on there....

originally posted by: zenartist
What always got me about "impairment of ability" is that not everyone has the same ability .. Mario Andretti could drink a case of beer and drive better than most of us sober .. if you have an accident then you should get dui/dwi but just a random stop when youve done nothing wrong and are driving fine its like saying you might rob a bank

If you are over the legal limit you are more of a risk than anything else on the road.
Over 0.08 BAC and you are just as a hazard on the road as you looking down at your phone.
You can have the skill level as Senna in driving a vehicle, but your reaction times of that skill are significantly reduced once you get to the point of drunk.

a reply to: FamCore

Note to self. Remove investment in Serius radio; move to Hound ASAP.

Good find O P