Are they actually testing it to determine if, when the device says a driver is impaired, the driver actually is impaired? You know, like controlled tests where drivers start out sober and take a scored driving skill test before and after smoking and blow after each run? I am completely dubious that inaccurate testing will make highways less safe while allowing law enforcement to abuse the rights of weed smokers.
If people are truly impaired, they should not be driving. The problem is, the definition of impairment and the nature of THC.
You see, while some people would be unable to function behind the wheel after just a puff or two, there are other people who experience “performance enhancement” from cannabis, and actually drive BETTER when under the influence of a small amount of THC. There are also people who, completely stoned off their asses, are better drivers than the average sober idiot on the highway. While I’m not suggesting that anyone drive around stoned, I think it’s important to note that unreliable tests will only result in lots of acquittals, wasted money, and highways that are not actually any safer.
How about dash/bodycam footage with audio of the vehicle in motion, as well as the suspect performing roadside sobriety tests appropriate for diagnosing THC impairment (like walking a straight line for alcohol) and let a jury decide if their DRIVING and subsequent ACTIONS reflected impairment?
That would be too fucking simple I suppose.