If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KPTV Portland)   And the surge in fatal DUI marijuana crashes in Washington state begins   (kptv.com) divider line 200
    More: Sad, Washington, Vancouver Police, Vancouver, KPTV, Scotty Rowles, marijuana, Willamette Valley  
•       •       •

17948 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Dec 2012 at 5:40 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



200 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-18 11:43:57 PM
Sounds to me like the pot was incidental, and that this one is really chalked up to "pedestrian error."
 
2012-12-18 11:45:29 PM

nmrsnr: Sounds to me like the pot was incidental, and that this one is really chalked up to "pedestrian error."



Yup.  Darwination ensued.
 
2012-12-18 11:52:21 PM
Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.
 
2012-12-19 12:02:24 AM
oh it was down in Vancouver.  They were really portland people, just driving around in WA that day
 
2012-12-19 12:10:26 AM
Police say the victim was close to two different lit and controlled intersections, but chose to step out into the middle of traffic, which would clearly put him at fault.

However, because Rowles was believed to be under the influence of marijuana, Washington State law says he is technically at fault, according to police.

It's a shame what happened here. The 'victim' lunges out into traffic and an unwitting driver slams into him. Because of something the driver had been doing an hour beforehand, he's now going to jail and will have this stain on his record follow him forever.
 
2012-12-19 12:29:11 AM
And the blaming of marijuana smokers for the stupid actions of others begins
 
2012-12-19 12:36:00 AM

Pocket Ninja: Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.


 
I can't believe that states are legalizing this drug when we still don't know all of these different things about it and what it can do. 
 
2012-12-19 12:42:39 AM

nmrsnr: Sounds to me like the pot was incidental, and that this one is really chalked up to "pedestrian error."



no error, the guy committed suicide by walking out into traffic.
so how do they charge you with dui pot?
blood tests? did he fail the roadside tests?
LOL
 
2012-12-19 12:42:54 AM
Clearly, we need to criminalize driving.
 
2012-12-19 12:44:15 AM
"Police say the victim was close to two different lit and controlled intersections, but chose to step out into the middle of traffic, which would clearly put him at fault. "
 
Yup
dumbass committed suicide. charge his family for cleaning up the accident and let the poor driver go aready.
 
2012-12-19 12:44:33 AM
And how many alcohol related DUI deaths were there in Washington State yesterday?
 
2012-12-19 01:16:20 AM

namatad: no error, the guy committed suicide by walking out into traffic.


What I learned in traffic school is that (at least in MD) the police almost never blame the pedestrian for getting hit, so unless the guy is wearing a sign saying "please hit me" while yelling "goodbye, cruel world" in front of a dozen witnesses, the police will write it up as "pedestrian error" so that no one is at fault. That's why I put it in quotes.
 
regardless, it doesn't seem like the kid would have done any better. Still, don't drive stoned.
 
2012-12-19 01:17:23 AM

nmrsnr: would have done any better sober.


alright, that means bedtime for me.
 
2012-12-19 01:41:15 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: Police say the victim was close to two different lit and controlled intersections, but chose to step out into the middle of traffic, which would clearly put him at fault.

 
However, because Rowles was believed to be under the influence of marijuana, Washington State law says he is technically at fault, according to police.
It's a shame what happened here. The 'victim' lunges out into traffic and an unwitting driver slams into him. Because of something the driver had been doing an hour beforehand, he's now going to jail and will have this stain on his record follow him forever.

 
The logic is that a non-intoxicated driver would be able to react well enough to swerve or stop and not hit the pedestrian. 
 
Is that true in this case?  We don't know.
 
2012-12-19 02:00:45 AM

legendary: And how many alcohol related DUI deaths were there in Washington State yesterday?



The funny thing is is that many (most?) states will consider an "alcohol related traffic accident" to be anything that can even remotely involve booze.  Passenger drunk?  Alcohol-related.  Sealed wine bottle in your trunk? Alcohol related.  Wearing a t-shirt from your favorite brewery? Alcohol related. Mostly it's to get federal grants.
 
I have no doubt that they will start doing the same thing with weed.
 
2012-12-19 02:33:40 AM

nmrsnr: namatad: no error, the guy committed suicide by walking out into traffic.

What I learned in traffic school is that (at least in MD) the police almost never blame the pedestrian for getting hit, so unless the guy is wearing a sign saying "please hit me" while yelling "goodbye, cruel world" in front of a dozen witnesses, the police will write it up as "pedestrian error" so that no one is at fault. That's why I put it in quotes.
 
regardless, it doesn't seem like the kid would have done any better. Still, don't drive stoned.


THIS
I agree. The pedestrian always has the right of way. SORT OF.
Limited access roads are the exception. Dumbasses get killed crossing Lake Shore Drive all the time.
Hello. It is 40mph and every speeds. No or few stop lights. ZERO pedestrian crossing, except for a few spots downtown. And yet tards trying to get to the beach get killed every year.

In the end, drunk or sober, you should never be required to avoid people in the middle of a major street.
With video and time of day, day light, traffic conditions and more, we could better determine who was mostly at fault.
 
but the bullshiat idea that one is 100% to blame in this case is silly.
if the driver had be STONE sober and the best driver in the universe, could he have avoid the tard in the road? Because if not, why is this moron getting nailed.
 
NOW
that being said, should be nailed for driving under the influence ... nothing more
 
 
2012-12-19 02:34:40 AM

legendary: And how many alcohol related DUI deaths were there in Washington State yesterday?


and did they jsut smell pot or did the guy fail field tests ??
 
 
2012-12-19 02:38:44 AM

Pocket Ninja: Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.



3/10 
 
2012-12-19 03:08:45 AM

nmrsnr: namatad: no error, the guy committed suicide by walking out into traffic.

 
What I learned in traffic school is that (at least in MD) the police almost never blame the pedestrian for getting hit, so unless the guy is wearing a sign saying "please hit me" while yelling "goodbye, cruel world" in front of a dozen witnesses, the police will write it up as "pedestrian error" so that no one is at fault. That's why I put it in quotes.
 
regardless, it doesn't seem like the kid would have done any better. Still, don't drive stoned.

 
I was in a crowded parking lot yesterday and this old woman was crossing one of the rows ever so slowly, going diagonally instead of straight across, so she was in the middle for a long time.  I pulled into that row to get a spot and when I stopped to let her pass (SLOWLY) she scowled and started swearing up a storm at me.  I wanted to yell "GET OUT OF THE ROAD YOU OLD BAT!" but I just laughed my ass off because it was so farking random.  I think that made her even madder. 
 
2012-12-19 04:56:01 AM
Ok, look, I have worked a couple accidents (as a paramedic) that were, in my mind, caused by someone smoking and not giving it time to wear off before getting behind the wheel.  Yes, it can and does effect your response time while high.  No, you do not drive better high because you're "more cautious" or "more relaxed."  The effects are a hell of a lot less in duration than alcohol, and a lot more mellow, but it's still an intoxication.

That said, this guy by all accounts wasn't high at the time.  It sounds like, at least from what I've heard, that he gave himself ample time to sober up, and it was in his system fairly incidentally. The person stepped off the curb at the last second, and very few people if any would have been likely able to miss them under those circumstances.  

There is no excuse for driving while high or drunk, no matter the reason.  And if this guy was actually high, then he should be on the hook for it.  But the pedestrian was kind of an idiot, and even a stone sober person would have been hard pressed to avoid them.
 
2012-12-19 04:59:14 AM
According to police in Oregon and Washington, either a) being nervous or b) having a calm demeanor around police officers is AUTOMATICALLY a reason to suspect someone of marijuana use.
 
Ask me how I know.
 
2012-12-19 05:37:15 AM

Shadowknight: Ok, look, I have worked a couple accidents (as a paramedic) that were, in my mind, caused by someone smoking and not giving it time to wear off before getting behind the wheel.



Now while I think marijuana driving laws need to be judged differently than drunk driving laws, I agree that there are some people who get out on the road that are blitzed and just can't drive. They deserved to be charged with DUI, because they are dangerous as they are on the road.
 
My problem is, for every accident caused largely "because" of marijuana intoxication, there are probably ten or more accidents on the road, severe or not, caused simply by age and degeneration in reaction time, sight, and so forth. Yet, for some reason, unless an elderly person runs down a huge crowd of people and tries to drive away, they "get away" with their actions (an acquaintance died in such fashion, and the millionaire driver of the car that drove across the highway for no known reason received a $650 fine). Honestly, I'd personally be more afraid of the 60-year-old driving certain roads at night than I would be the guy who's way too baked, and that's not because I think 1970s Cheech is more "in tune" with the highway than 2012s Cheech. Heck, lots of idiots get in wrecks because they were checking out a pretty girl or changing the radio, yet they only get a small fine, at most. Sometimes people who have taken too many prescription drugs are arrested, but sometimes not the case.
 
I'm not trying to defend driving while high... I'm trying to point out the other issues that are largely ignored by politicians, probably because they know who the voters tend to be.
 
2012-12-19 05:40:50 AM
And, really, I don't see how the lady who almost hit me the other day shouldn't have been charged with a crime (she'd have simply received a minor citation if an officer had seen it), regardless of her sobriety. Mistakes happen, and sometimes the human eye can play tricks on us and we literally miss something right in front of us, but there's no excuse for making a sudden lane change without so much as looking at the lane into which you're attempting to maneuver. In reality, she should have seen me in her peripheral vision, as I saw her as she was changing lanes (so I swerved to the side of the road). Again, perhaps age played a role, or the conversation she was having with her passenger, who knows...
 
2012-12-19 05:42:25 AM
Hogwash.

Marijuana does not interfere with motor coordination, you can drive as well stoned as you can straight.

I don't recommend the practice, but I am aware of people who have piloted fighter jets while high on pot.
 
2012-12-19 05:45:45 AM
Come to think of it, that's the second time I was nearly hit by someone doing the same thing this week. Last time it was some old guy.
 
Hey, what a shock. Old.
 
2012-12-19 05:49:34 AM
Okay... so pot makes it so you can control random pedestrian's minds and make them step out in front of your car before you can safely stop? Never heard of that before.
 
2012-12-19 05:50:16 AM
Did everyone note the lack of logic here?

1. "Marijuana became legal last week, so people are smoking it and driving stoned, having accidents."

2. "That never happened before, because nobody ever smoked marijuana and drove a car when it was illegal."

Yeah sure. Tell me all about it.
 
GBB
2012-12-19 05:55:03 AM

puffy999: According to police in Oregon and Washington, either a) being nervous or b) having a calm demeanor around police officers is AUTOMATICALLY a reason to suspect someone of marijuana use.
 
Ask me how I know.


Dude. How do you know? I mean, how do you KNOW, dude? How does anyone "know" anything, man? You know?

/dude
 
2012-12-19 05:58:14 AM

olddinosaur: Did everyone note the lack of logic here?

1. "Marijuana became legal last week, so people are smoking it and driving stoned, having accidents."

2. "That never happened before, because nobody ever smoked marijuana and drove a car when it was illegal."

Yeah sure. Tell me all about it.


Its the same abuse of logic that lead to prohibition.
Angry men get drunk and beat their wives. If we get rid of the booze, the wife beating will stop.

/The fact they banned weed in the first place suggests that the proper use of statistics was never a part of the argument.
/Always emotion, political hackery is.
 
2012-12-19 05:59:14 AM
BALLROOM BLITZ!
 
2012-12-19 06:00:13 AM
If has has already come off the high it is a different story. But if it it turned out that he was driving while baked than this guy is a farking assdouche, as well as anyone who defends him.

/this is why we can't have nice things
 
2012-12-19 06:01:02 AM
I can't believe that states are legalizing this drug when we still don't know all of these different things about it and what it can do.


er.. perhaps the war on terror...I mean drugs ...has shut down all rational and humane thought and research into these matters.

sky is falling ...the sky is falling
 
2012-12-19 06:02:28 AM
Nobody beleived me when I told them that the Refer Madness media war had been launched.
 
2012-12-19 06:07:56 AM
It's the victim's fault for walking out into traffic, but that does not negate the fact that the driver was committing his own crime by driving under the influence. If pot heads want to prove that the drug is harmless, then they need to step up and know when it's time to blaze and when it's not.
 
2012-12-19 06:09:07 AM

namatad: nmrsnr: Sounds to me like the pot was incidental, and that this one is really chalked up to "pedestrian error."


no error, the guy committed suicide by walking out into traffic.
so how do they charge you with dui pot?
blood tests? did he fail the roadside tests?
LOL


The officer opens a bag of Cheetos and asks the driver to keep his eyes forward for 30 seconds.
 
2012-12-19 06:11:02 AM
Is this the thread where most of Fark reverses their thoughts on DUI (involving alcohol) and starts blaming the "victim" if the DUI involves marijuana?

I've been mercilessly flamed for saying I sometimes drive after a few beers and while I have never advocated doing so or claimed it makes me a better driver I do say you should follow traffic laws like staying within the speed limit, stopping when required to do so, maintaining a lane, etc....

But none of that really matters to a lot of folks. Ooooh, you drove after drinking (regardless of actual BAC). I'm worse than farking Hitler they tell me.

But now that a person who had smoked pot kills a pedestrian, it's suddenly not his fault?

Hey, from the article it sounds like the pedestrian stepped in front of the guy's car and there wasn't time to react - hard to tell though. Even sober people (sober of any substance and also paying attention) might not have been able to avoid the pedestrian.

But if he had been drinking and was just barely touching the limit for drunk driving many people on Fark would be calling for the death penalty.

/yes, I'm drunk right now
//no, I'm not planning on driving until at least Thursday
 
2012-12-19 06:15:15 AM

Pocket Ninja: Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.



... Graphs?  Math?  It's early
 
2012-12-19 06:15:45 AM
Someone in this thread is worse than Hitler.
 
Not going to say who.
 
/It's Happy Hours
 
2012-12-19 06:20:53 AM
marijuana is deadly!
i184.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-19 06:23:27 AM

Wolf892: It's the victim's fault for walking out into traffic, but that does not negate the fact that the driver was committing his own crime by driving under the influence. If pot heads want to prove that the drug is harmless, then they need to step up and know when it's time to blaze and when it's not.


The problem being, of course, that there isn't really an objective way to measure or test whether a person is high at a given point in time
 
2012-12-19 06:24:29 AM

BSABSVR: legendary: And how many alcohol related DUI deaths were there in Washington State yesterday?


The funny thing is is that many (most?) states will consider an "alcohol related traffic accident" to be anything that can even remotely involve booze.  Passenger drunk?  Alcohol-related.  Sealed wine bottle in your trunk? Alcohol related.  Wearing a t-shirt from your favorite brewery? Alcohol related. Mostly it's to get federal grants.
 
I have no doubt that they will start doing the same thing with weed.



You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?
 
2012-12-19 06:27:45 AM
If only the victim was carrying a joint...this would have never happened....
 
2012-12-19 06:35:24 AM

Salt Lick Steady: Wolf892: It's the victim's fault for walking out into traffic, but that does not negate the fact that the driver was committing his own crime by driving under the influence. If pot heads want to prove that the drug is harmless, then they need to step up and know when it's time to blaze and when it's not.

The problem being, of course, that there isn't really an objective way to measure or test whether a person is high at a given point in time


Ah, but there are just as objective ways to measure if a person is too high to drive as there are for being too drunk.

There are actually tests to measure levels of THC in your blood (not just whether there are metabolites of THC in your piss 3 weeks after you last used pot). There is some debate as to what an acceptable level is just as some people argue about whether 0.05 (or 0.08) BAC is too much or too little for a person to drive.

Whatever that legal BAC limit is though (or how many nanograms per milliliter of THC (or however it's measured)), it's still a somewhat arbitrary limit.

There are also field sobriety tests and it is fairly obvious when someone fails them completely or aces them.

It becomes difficult and very subjective when someone just does "okay" on an FST. Okay, so they couldn't stand on one leg with their eyes closed and touch their nose while estimating 30 seconds. They lost their balance at 20 seconds and thought only 15 seconds had passed. Hey, put them in jail for 5 years!!!! 

"What? Only 5 years?" other people will say? They should go to prison for life! They could have killed someone!!111!!!! Th1mk uv the chilluns!
 
2012-12-19 06:35:33 AM

way south: olddinosaur: Did everyone note the lack of logic here?

1. "Marijuana became legal last week, so people are smoking it and driving stoned, having accidents."

2. "That never happened before, because nobody ever smoked marijuana and drove a car when it was illegal."

Yeah sure. Tell me all about it.

Its the same abuse of logic that lead to prohibition.
Angry men get drunk and beat their wives. If we get rid of the booze, the wife beating will stop.

/The fact they banned weed in the first place suggests that the proper use of statistics was never a part of the argument.
/Always emotion, political hackery is.


Cannabis was banned because some very rich, very influential people didn't want hemp threatening the paper industry. So they gave it a scary, foreign name ('marijuana'), and made up all sorts of myths about it. And the politicians and the public fell for it, hook line and sinker.
 
2012-12-19 06:36:00 AM

alienated: Pocket Ninja: Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.


3/10


I found the Russian judge!
 
2012-12-19 06:43:41 AM

GameSprocket: alienated: Pocket Ninja: Smoke from marijuana (aka reefer, aka pot, aka green) has a profound secondhand effect, though. If the driver was smoking reefer in his car, then the smoke might have permeated the windows and ensued into the surrounding air, which could have caused the equivalent of contact highs to innocent pedestrians within a certain definable parameter. Perimeter. Said pedestrians may have then become lethargic and uncoordinated and without being fully cognizant of their bodily actions undertaken such activities like, such as, stepping into traffic and/or becoming vehicular casualties. I know it will not be popular to suggest that side effects from ganja in a legalized locality may include bystander deaths, but it's time to be honest.


3/10

I found the Russian judge!


agreed. While not top ten material, PockeyGanja did a respectable job, there.
 
2012-12-19 06:44:26 AM
I guess if there had never been one single incident before this, one could be considered a surge
 
2012-12-19 06:44:36 AM

Salt Lick Steady: The problem being, of course, that there isn't really an objective way to measure or test whether a person is high at a given point in time


Which has always been my biggest problem with legalizing it. It disgusts me to see so many people trying to pin all of the blame on the victim when the police apparently had enough evidence to arrest the guy for DUI. If this had been booze the lynching party would be going full swing by now. I hope that they throw the book at him as an example of what happens to you when you drive stoned.
 
2012-12-19 06:48:55 AM
A classic case of STFU and dont talk to cops, ever.

People wont ever learn.

I want everyone to keep this in mind when they come out with studies in a few years claiming "6000 marijuana related deaths from legalization!"
 
2012-12-19 06:52:58 AM
Impossible, weed doesn't affect your ability to drive a car.
 
Yes, this is what stoners actually believe.  
 
Displayed 50 of 200 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report