Shared publicly  - 
Should drug-drivers face the same penalties as drunk drivers?
George Bambridge's profile photoJoshua Melfah's profile photoRobert Morgan's profile photoMichael Peel's profile photo
They should face the same or even worse penalties. End of discussion for me.
"My object all sublime
I shall achieve in time —
To let the punishment fit the crime —
The punishment fit the crime;
And make each prisoner pent
Unwillingly represent
A source of innocent merriment!
Of innocent merriment!"
Yeah they should get worse then drunk drivers
Impaired is impaired. Doesn't matter if it's drink, drugs or prescriptions.
Why on earth do people think they should get harsher penalties?
The fact that they are asking this question implies that there are actually morons out there who say no. They would be at their computers debating this point right now, but they got the munchies and had to make a run to Waffle House. 
What about those who speak on the phone, eat, drive, smoke a cigarette and dropped them, those who are confused, angry, those who argue with his companion, who cares for her children, who are tired, they do not change their tires regularly, and still leave me things that cause accidents involving damage to third parties. No one should go to jail just for using drugs. Must be those that cause harm to others.
Definitely the same or worse penalties, there isn't even a point for debate here! Putting other people's lives in danger is serious, and people shouldn't get away with it!
Same penalties, results are the same in an accident.
Doesn't this kinda depend on whether the drug actually impairs your ability to drive?
I would say give the same penalties as drunk driving. In essence it's the same offence. You have voluntarily impaired your abilities through the use of a drug/substance.
Doesn't it depend what drug it is and how much that drug affects your driving?
Yes it should because if under influence of drinks or drugs you can still kill some one. The law should be changed a life for a life because of the effect on families.
so we gonna have roadside urine tests now :) (i thought that itself was illegal) :/
+Stephen Armitage You could say the same for drinking. I would say that for drunk driving the penalty should be on a sliding scale, depending how far over the limit you are. Maybe they could run a similar scale for drugs. (To be honest I don't know much about drugs and how they affect you. Do you get more 'affected' if you take/smoke more?)
apparently smoing weed heightens ur awareness , as for hard drugs , yes penaltys should be same as drink driving IMHO (what about those on prescription meds)
Drunk driving on its own is probably over-rated. Not that I don't think it's dangerous, but in most cases, those who cause fatal accidents while "intoxicated" are probably under some other form of drugs that either inflames the effect of the alcohol or gives the driver a certain feeling of EMPOWERMENT which alcohol alone might actually not be able to.
+Cirrus McMinor Re the roadside testing, the article mentions portable saliva testing devices. Not sure if that means you can spit at the cops or not ;-)
People seem to forget that alcohol is a drug, so it makes sense to treat other drugs in the same way. Just because a drug is legal does not make it any better or worse than the illegal ones. Most drugs can impair your decision making abilities + concentration. It's a no brainer really!
How can you have safe limits on illegal drugs? Surely the whole illegal thing would be brought up at some point in the testing procedure. Anyway theoretically cannabis would improve your driving
Anything that causes disorientation and impaired concentration is likely to put others at risk and anyone who is so nescient that they drive whilst under the influence of any drugs deserves any forthcoming penalties
Certianly yes!!!!!!! Drugs also dizzy your mind.
talking on the fone while driving is more dangerous
+Lynette White Unless cannabis improves reaction time and awareness, it does not improve driving skills. Driving slower because of the usage does not equal driving safer. :)
Cannabis has the tendency to slow you down rather than increase your alertness. If you want to know whether it is safe to smoke cannabis and drive, first watch a performance of reggae music. Even the dancing is EASY STEPS. As Bob Marley would put it, it's EASY SKANKING!
The last thing you wanna do after smoking ganja is get behind the wheel of a vehicle.
Driving under the influence of either drug or alcohol should carry the same penalty.
well considering alcohol is a type of drug, definitely.
I wonder what will the policeman do if anyone refuses to give their saliva ?! Will they force them to spit or what ? Do you find it legal, in general sense, an law enforcement body to take samples of your fluids, without the absolute guarantee that it will not be used for other purposes than stated... What if your religion bans giving away fluids, blood or organs ? All junkies then will convert to such a cult, claiming 'it is against my believes to spit' ! Also who may assure you the police will not infect you with a virus ?
Doug B
I assume this dosen't include drugs / medicine given to you by a GP, hospital or chemist??
Absolutely, drugs can cause the same problems as alcohol whilst driving. This is needed to make the roads safer for everyone.
It's amazing how many people spew out they're opinions without checking the facts, do some research first please people, don't just repeat the stories the media spoon feed you
+D B I don't think it does, although it should include medications that can cause impared judgement and come with the "Do not drive or operate heavy machinery" warnings. If you take those and you do drive then you should be held accountable too.
Cmon people weed is cool.... 30 mph in 40 zone and 40 mph in 50 zone ...its safe. .i know
Absolutely, they should be
I think +Barbara Nelsen's "impaired is impaired" comment is fine, except that it is already illegal to drive while impaired by drugs.

The change in the law to be 'more like alcohol' means that it is a strict liability test - over the alcohol limit is illegal even if you have a higher tolerance for alcohol. Which is ok if there is a nexus between a limit and impairment, but is problematic if (as implied) a 'zero tolerance' attitude is taken. Then it's bad law (no nexus between harm and crime), which creates an artificial grey area between prescription and non-prescription drugs. It also smacks of paternalism.
I was wondering why people were saying that drug users should be punished MORE than drunk drivers, then it occurred to me, all those people don't see alcohol as a drug, WRONG it is a drug and causes far more deaths on the roads than other drugs or perhaps it's a case of I like a drink therefore it can't be that bad
Well +David Gill old chap, one reason they should get more is that illegal drugs are illegal and beer is not. Or should we make it so?
also more people '' drug drive'' than ''drink drive'' therefore the drug users should get more punishment
drunks are worst. 95% of all drug related deaths are from alchohol and ciggerette. the other 5% is all other drugs combined. the so called legal drugs cause all the problems. but to be fair all should recieve the same punishment.
#Robert Morgan sure that is relevant to the point re driving while impaired.
+Michael Peel, this is how you mention somebody. and i dont really care. i made the comment and then went on my life. im not acctually trying to have a lengthy discussion. its my 2 cents wether relevant or not. its my right as a human.if i wanted to say purple is a loud noise then i can say that too
it is a good thing maybe it will reduce or even lead to the stop of drug addiction
+Robert Morgan, No-one is suggesting you cannot say anything you like. Just don't expect it to be taken seriously if it is off-piste.
+Michael Peel my comment was very relevant it must be that you dont like to hear that the main stream drugs that you take are worst then the illegal drugs. making you worst then lets say a crack addict. i know the truth hurts so you attack my message. typical use of logical fallacies. you are the one who is now not taken seriously. good to see you were up at 3 in the morning commenting, what drugs are you on?
+Robert Morgan. I've done no such thing. I'm extremely ambivalent to the 'concept' of mainstream drugs as you call them. Clearly alcohol and tobaccos are drugs, both of which I subscribe to heavily. I'm rarely up at 3am, simply that Google+ does not understand different time-zones. I write this at 21.30pm British tine.

As to the illegality of drugs, I abhor 'illegal' drugs but would be the first to say that drugs should cease to be proscribed. I readily accept that alcohol & tobacco are drugs - the problem I have is that the moment someone uses an 'illegal' drug they become completely spastic, incapable of having any form of intelligent discourse.
Add a comment...