Europe:
Study
Calls
Into
Question
France's
Obsession
with
"Drugged
Driving"
10/14/05
Two years ago, in the midst of a heated anti-marijuana campaign, the French government passed a "zero tolerance" drugged driving law that punished marijuana users with up to two years in prison if they were found driving with detectable levels of cannabinoids in their blood. But now, the Paris newspaper Liberation reports, a government-sponsored study of more than 8,000 fatal traffic accidents has found that marijuana use is much less likely to result in fatal accidents than alcohol use. "The dangers of cannabis behind the wheel, while quite real, are much less than those of alcohol," said Liberation, citing the Highway Safety and Fatal Accidents (SAM) study. "The risk of being responsible for a fatal accident under cannabis alone is weak, though not zero. In any case, the risk isn't worse than that of a driver with between 0.02 and 0.05% blood alcohol content." French law presumes impairment above the 0.05% level. In the United States, that level is typically set at 0.08%. The SAM study found that people with blood alcohol levels above 0.05% were responsible for 2,000 highway deaths, speeders for another 2,000, and cannabis users responsible for 220 deaths. That is about equal to the number of people killed by drivers who had blood alcohol levels of between 0.02 and 0.05%. But while pot-smoking drivers face two years in prison, alcohol impaired drivers below the 0.05% level face no per se penalties. During debate on the drugged driving law in 2003, rightist legislators warned of "the hallucinogenic left, which would have us think that only alcohol is dangerous. Drugs behind the wheel are responsible for more deaths than speeding," said rightist deputies. As recently as this January, current Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, then minister of the interior, claimed without foundation that "17% of fatal accidents were associated with drug use." And Dominique Perben, the new minister of transportation, was also among those making unwarranted claims. "He wanted to make it [the drugged driving law] a battle horse against cannabis," one source told Liberation. "Now the study shows that the government put the cart before the horse; they should have awaited the results before legislating." As for that 17% figure cited by de Villepin, "These figures are false," said one expert. "They are those of the lobby of toxicologists with a vested interest in sale of drug detection tests. Ministers and deputies spouted so much nonsense for two years that they're quite embarrassed." Pot-crazed politicians pose more of a danger to public liberty than pot-impaired drivers to do public safety, said Liberation, lamenting what it called "a double standard" and an "incoherent repressive arsenal." The hypocrisy is so evident that "The anti-pot deputies will be hard-pressed to wave the flag of safety and yet recall that cannabis is illicit and prohibited, while alcohol is freely sold," the left-leaning newspaper noted.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
