Do you have adblock enabled?
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 38
    More: Sad, Washington, Vancouver Police, Vancouver, KPTV, Scotty Rowles, marijuana, Willamette Valley  
•       •       •

17951 clicks; posted to Main » on 19 Dec 2012 at 5:40 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-19 12:29:11 AM  
8 votes:
And the blaming of marijuana smokers for the stupid actions of others begins
2012-12-19 12:44:33 AM  
5 votes:
And how many alcohol related DUI deaths were there in Washington State yesterday?
2012-12-18 11:43:57 PM  
5 votes:
Sounds to me like the pot was incidental, and that this one is really chalked up to "pedestrian error."
2012-12-19 12:44:15 AM  
4 votes:
"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 12:10:26 AM  
4 votes:
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 05:50:16 AM  
3 votes:
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.
2012-12-18 11:52:21 PM  
3 votes:
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 07:06:56 AM  
2 votes:

Radioactive Ass: 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.


Okay, first of all there are ways to measure THC in blood and it is measured in nanograms (of THC) per milliliter of blood. Link

Note:that there is a lot of debate about where the limit should be set and that this is not just testing for metabolites in your piss days or weeks after having last smoked pot.

Before they throw the book at the driver they should prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it is his fault that he killed the pedestrian and that he was intoxicated and that was what caused the accident

Don't let your emotions (or the MADD/DARE propaganda you were taught in school) guide your bloodlust for revenge. 

Sometimes the "victim" really is at fault and they aren't really the victim. Pedestrians are required by law to not jump in front of cars. There's really not much a driver can do if a pedestrian throws themselves in front of a driver.

Another point: Don't think that people aren't driving after using pot already. People use drugs (legal or otherwise). Sometimes they drive. Sometimes they shouldn't drive. What should we do about them?

Well, they took 15 Xanax and could barely stand up but since they didn't have any alcohol in their system we had to let them go. Do you really think that's the way it works?

It doesn't work that way. If you can barely stand up because you took a legally prescribed drug and were following the prescription you can still get a DUI and sometimes you should get a DUI for doing so. 

So by your logic either anyone with a prescription of any kind should have their license suspended or we should just make prescribing drugs illegal.
2012-12-19 06:35:33 AM  
2 votes:

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 05:58:14 AM  
2 votes:

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 04:56:01 AM  
2 votes:
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 02:33:40 AM  
2 votes:

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 12:42:54 AM  
2 votes:
Clearly, we need to criminalize driving.
2012-12-19 12:42:39 AM  
2 votes:

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 11:00:44 AM  
1 votes:

Hobodeluxe: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: namatad: so how do they charge you with dui pot?
blood tests? did he fail the roadside tests?

You act impaired, fail the field sobriety tests, but blow a 0.0, you get a blood test for drugs.

and even though you may not have been under the effect of the thc, it was still in your system (could be for days if not weeks later) and because of the Draconian tests you'll still be charged.


THC doesn't stay in your system for weeks.
2012-12-19 09:05:11 AM  
1 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: And the blaming of marijuana smokers for the stupid actions of others begins


Huh? You guys too?

We really should start a club or something.

/gun owner
2012-12-19 09:03:22 AM  
1 votes:
If you are stoned behind the wheel, you are buzzed driving, that's a DUI.  Better think about that stoners.
 
/same thing for you idiots that think because that xanax was prescribed that it's okay to drive while taking it
//you have an accident, most police might ask for a blood test
2012-12-19 09:02:23 AM  
1 votes:

Happy Hours: Actually, the way I was taught in Driver's Ed, NOBODY has the right of way. In certain situations, you are required to YIELD the right of way.


You misunderstood what you were taught in driver's ed. Right of way means just that. If you do not have the right of way, you yield it to the vehicle that does. Now, what your instructor meant was you never demand the right of way. If a driver does not yield, you yield to him.
2012-12-19 08:56:54 AM  
1 votes:

Akambe: But that's impossible! Marijuana never hurt ANYbody!
(and yes, the pedestrian did "walk out into traffic," but pedestrians do have the right of way, and the driver's being under the influence almost surely had an effect on his reaction time.)



I'm thinking we'll need to test it with another pedestrian and a stone-sober driver. You be the pedestrian. Not comfortable with that? Then you already know the truth. That guy woulda been hit if Maverick and Goose were piloting that car.
2012-12-19 08:29:50 AM  
1 votes:
So in exchange for the freedom of being able to smoke pot there wil be more demand by groups like MADD for the use of "sobriety" checkpoints. The stoners gain one freedom, we all lose another.

Not a prot smoker, not against it being legalize. Just pointing out the law of unintended consequencies has not been repealed.

MADD is an example for your own good politics/fascism.
2012-12-19 08:16:52 AM  
1 votes:
Heh, stoners taking up for someone stoned behind the wheel.  You'd be slamming the guy if he had a few beers first.
2012-12-19 08:06:00 AM  
1 votes:
kate.tinypineapple.com
2012-12-19 08:02:10 AM  
1 votes:
I hope everyone here realized that this exact same thing happens with alcohol every single day. Some dumbass is at fault, but if the other guy had been drinking the blame get shifted.
2012-12-19 07:58:21 AM  
1 votes:

Fallout Boy: this is why we can't have nice things


Irresponsible people are a constant in any free society.
The reason we can't have nice things is because of media hype and the masochistic boot lickers who try to justify bad ideas.

/Problem with DUI? The solution is enforcement by doing more road side checks and suspending licenses.
/Or ban pot again because the drug war saved so many lives...
2012-12-19 07:29:42 AM  
1 votes:
Oh man, this never happens where weed is illegal.

That said, don't drive high, retards.
2012-12-19 07:13:46 AM  
1 votes:

Ouiji Broad: puffy999:
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.

Older drivers do have issues, but let's keep it in perspective. The 60 year olds are hardly the problem.
[static1.consumerreportscdn.org image 598x318]

/get off my lawn


Ancients do not drive as often.
2012-12-19 07:00:51 AM  
1 votes:

puffy999:
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.


Older drivers do have issues, but let's keep it in perspective. The 60 year olds are hardly the problem.
static1.consumerreportscdn.org

/get off my lawn
2012-12-19 06:52:58 AM  
1 votes:
Impossible, weed doesn't affect your ability to drive a car.
 
Yes, this is what stoners actually believe.  
2012-12-19 06:48:55 AM  
1 votes:
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 06:24:29 AM  
1 votes:

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 06:20:53 AM  
1 votes:
marijuana is deadly!
i184.photobucket.com
2012-12-19 06:11:02 AM  
1 votes:
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 06:02:28 AM  
1 votes:
Nobody beleived me when I told them that the Refer Madness media war had been launched.
2012-12-19 04:59:14 AM  
1 votes:
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 02:34:40 AM  
1 votes:

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 02:00:45 AM  
1 votes:

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 12:36:00 AM  
1 votes:

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. 
2012-12-18 11:45:29 PM  
1 votes:

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



Yup.  Darwination ensued.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report