Dow+17.46up+0.17%
10,023.42
Nasdaq+7.12up+0.34%
2,112.44
S&P+2.67up+0.25%
1,069.30

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player. Click here to download.
More video on MSN Money . . .
More stoners on roads than drunks? © Aaron Black/Getty Images

Extra7/15/2009 6:55 PM ET

Stoners outnumber drunks on road

Studies find some good news, with both the number of drunken drivers and traffic deaths falling markedly, and some bad, with more than 16% of drivers testing positive for drugs.

By MSN Money staff and wire reports

The number of drunken drivers on the roads has fallen sharply over the past 30 years as laws and enforcement have stiffened and societal views on alcohol have shifted, according to a government survey released Monday. But the survey reported that 16.3% of drivers on weekend nights had tested positive for drugs.

The roadside survey by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found that 2.2% of drivers had blood-alcohol levels of 0.08% (the legal limit nationwide) or higher in 2007. The results represented a steady decline since 1973, when 7.5% of the drivers surveyed were legally intoxicated.

Using new screening techniques to detect substances in addition to alcohol, the survey found that the most commonly detected drugs in drivers were marijuana (8.3%), cocaine (3.9%) and methamphetamine (1.3%). Researchers said the presence of these drugs can remain in a driver's system for weeks, making it difficult to know whether the drivers who tested positive were impaired on the road.

"This troubling data shows us, for the first time, the scope of drugged driving in America and reinforces the need to reduce drug abuse," said Gil Kerlikowske, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Be careful in the weekend wee hours

The survey examined weekend nighttime drivers, collecting breath samples to measure blood-alcohol concentration. For the first time, it also collected oral fluid and blood samples to determine drivers' use of potentially impairing drugs.

Government researchers last conducted such a study on alcohol use in 1996, when 4.3% of drivers surveyed were legally intoxicated. In 1986, 5.4% of the respondents were legally drunk.

The drop-off has coincided with more-stringent efforts by law enforcement and advocacy groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving to reduce drunken driving, as well as the use of breath-monitoring devices for offenders that can lock vehicle ignitions. All 50 states and the District of Columbia have adopted a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08% as the legal limit for drivers.

The study found a higher risk of encountering drunken drivers in the early-morning weekend hours: 4.8% of drivers had illegal blood-alcohol levels from the hours of 1 to 3 a.m. on Saturdays. It also found that 1.2% of drivers were legally drunk from 10 p.m. to midnight on Fridays, while 0.2% were drunk during the day.

Video on MSN Money

The dangers of texting while driving © CNBC
The dangers of texting while driving
Text-messaging on your cell phone while driving can be more dangerous than driving drunk, a study indicates.

Male drivers were 42% more likely to have illegal blood-alcohol levels than female drivers.

Motorcycle riders were more than twice as likely as passenger vehicle drivers to be drunk (5.6% compared with 2.3%). Pickup drivers were the next most likely to have illegal blood-alcohol levels (3.3%).

The survey was conducted at 300 locations around the country as drivers were randomly "directed" into the survey site by police officers. There, alcohol and drug tests were administered by non-law-enforcement personnel, who offered those found impaired a number of options for sobering up -- but not arrest.

Continued: Drivers may not be safer, but roads are

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 363
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:27:58 PM
This is not a surprise. The "next biggest" safety issue and insurance increase factor is illegal drug use by people who otherwise do not break the law with regularity. These drivers are not common criminals using their cars as meth labs, but just those people who believe that their own values and preferences take priority over the law of this country. I do not wish to pay higher insurance premiums and risk my family just so self-centered people have their feel-good dose and then drive.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:01:18 PM
I think this was put out by the Liquor industry. I dont believe there are more pot heads on the road than drunks
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:07:11 PM
I am much more worried about a 35 year old woman driving a big SUV talking/texting on her cell phone or a 70 year old man or woman on the road than a person who smoked some nugz and is driving 5 miles under the speed limit.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:09:21 PM

The problem with many of your arguments is that you missed a key point, at least in the case of marijuana, testing positive for cannaboids does not mean you're impaired, it could have been the joint you smoked two days ago.

 

So if you want to take someones license for driving impaired, do so, but make sure their actually impaired. And I suggest you look up the studies done on marijuana and driving, some of you appear to be brainwashed with irrational fears.

 

The NTSB has found accidents where marijuana was considered a signinificant contributing factor, anohter study done over seas found that marijuana impaired drivers were aware of their impairment and drove more carefully as a result.

 

The only accidients I've been were the fault of someone just being an idiot period, it had nothing to do with drugs, it had everything with them driving a Lexus and thinking they owned the road.

 

Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:11:56 PM
Marijuana can stay in your system for up to 30 days.  This does not mean a person is stoned, it just means that it is only detectable.  People with a high body fat content may go longer.  Other chemical drugs can stay in your system for weeks, again only detectable. Alcohol can deplete in 3 days, but it is only detectable for a week plus some.  If you smoke a joint on Friday and your company tests you on Monday, you're busted.  If you know nothing about the subject when you read a piece like this, do some research before you jump on the bandwagon.  The fuzz just have to justify their phoney baloney jobs, insurance companies have to justify their sky high rates, and booze pedlers would lose a bunch of their business.  Booze is still the number one killer.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:13:58 PM
Except that a real study done showed smoking marajuana had little or no increased effect than other legal prescription drugs.  It's time to legalize marajuana, legalize the use of hemp for oil and clothing and actually let those in prison for these minimal charges be let out.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:18:14 PM
seriously?!?!?!?!   scuba i agree, this has to be funded by the liquor industry. i for one have been driving for 15+ years with 0 accidents and 0 parking or traffic violations, and use "pot" on a daily basis. here is another story of the diferences different drugs have on different people. your insurance rates are not based off how many stoners live in your neighborhood, 3 things play into your premiums. cost to repair, cost to replace, your driving record. now the cost of repair and replace is obviously going to differ depending where you are located. so lets stop comparing apples to oranges and back to the subject on hand. legalize it, and treat it the same as alcohol. or just make alcohol illegal. Crying
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:23:46 PM
I agree!  they are by far the safest drivers of the three choices.  Data can be manipulated into any form the researcher wants.  I, too, doubt there are more stoners than drunks in the wee hours of the mornings.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:43:55 PM
Another skeptical reader-I also believe that marijuana is NOT an issue and would trust my life to a "stoner" driving over ANY other distraction, alcohol, or drug. For those of you that have drank the kool-aid, I suggest a little research. You will find that marijuana does not contribute to increased accidents. As well, how many "road rage" incidents do you think occur where marijuana is involved?
Wednesday, July 15, 2009 5:47:20 PM
This is a junk study. It's not fair to say that someone is driving under the influence just because they smoked pot within the last 30 days. If they step out of the car and start calling people dude.. and ask for snacks.. that's different... but I'm a little tired of the crack downs... how about counting the number of people that drive while taking "prescription" pills... is that some how better? Pot is a better alternative than alcohol for many people...
1 - 10 of 363
To add a comment, pleasesign in