this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2026
597 points (99.2% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
40706 readers
4731 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The only issue I have with weed, and most other drugs, is that you can't easily test for them in a person's system, meaning that you can't know if someone's driving under the influence. This wouldn't be as much of a problem if not for the fact that we have have such a car centric society. I don't like people endangering other people just for a buzz.
Imagine being so car brained that you base personal freedom around it
I don't think this is "car brained". They're not saying anything around public transit, just that we need to have a test for DWI and weed. People shouldn't be jailed for 30 years regardless of the presence of the test or not, but we do still need some other test. Otherwise I guarantee that "don't drive while baked" will be the next infomercial you see in a few years.
Missing the point a bit, we shouldn't base legalization around if people are going to drive their cars on a substance.
100% agreed. Like I said I think it should be legal regardless, the punishments are way too severe for what it is. But on a completely different note, we do still need the tests. I love drinking and I love smoking, but there are rules of the road, and one of those is "don't drive the death machine with impaired judgement".
But yes you're right, the legality shouldn't be based on if "but what if they drive". I'm more saying "if you do some life-disregarding level ignorant" shit you're still getting in trouble.
I honestly ......... for calling me "car brained". That insult hurt me more than any other I've received. I want to protect pedestrians and cyclists from people driving cars under the influence. I want to limit driving people's freedom to make life better for everyone.
That's honestly a very odd reaction, for what it's worth I meant it lightheartedly.
Of course I think pedestrians and cyclists also deserve safety.
I would like to point out however that a majority of incidents are drunk drivers who do not already have a device like that in their car, so it's a tad bit absurd to indicate your hard line for legalization is that when it would only apply after the fact anyway.
Sorry, that was too rude, I just got really upset... It's odd, I've never really gotten angry at internet comments until now.
I just wanted to point out my single issue with weed, which is more an issue with car centric infrastructure.
Sorry for making you angry!
Yeah, it's hard, it's not like you're wrong that driving while baked is more dangerous then sober, but to your point I think the way our infrastructure is built where pedestrians are an afterthought if thought about at all, definitely contributes to make it even more dangerous.
I wish we had more walkable/bike-friendly locations, it's just not super likely given how large the US is
Nothing you said was rude. In fact everything you said was correct on all counts. I think the other person was just joking
I edited my comment. I said that I despised them and said "fuck you". Not that bad, but I changed it to be a little less abrasive.
thank you for explaining, I was a little confused about the exchange until I read this. I think the edit was valid and a positive but I just wish there was an edit history for better context sometimes.
The best way to eliminate this risk is public transit.
Yes. I want to ban cars too.
You can easily test if they're in someone's system with a saliva test, so your argument doesn't make any sense.
Blood test is better for weed. It's only detectable for 12h vs 24h with saliva.
But levels of THC aren't really correlated with impairment.
12 to 24h seems good (maybe even too long imho) in the context of driving a car.
Not when the levels have no bearing on intoxication.
I hear you. The saliva test isn't perfect, but it's something.
Where I live only a doctor is allowed to draw and test your blood, which is tough to do at the side of the road during a traffic stop. They need a lab for that. So a saliva test is much more viable in that context.
No, it's not something. The tests are not a measure of impairment.
The same applies to alcohol to some degree. We as a society need to set some limits
No, it doesn't. BAC is directly related to impairment, even with chronic drinkers.
The problem is that THC tests check for the metabolite that THC is broken down into, not actual THC. Alcohol tests check for actual alcohol.
I would even say some drivers might be better drivers with hints of calming THC&CBD in their system...
Can you hook a saliva test to a car's ignition system to only allow sober people to start the car?
Now lick the knob
No, but not every car has a breathalyzer. Only repeat offenders get one of those. So the point still stands imo. Maybe someday the saliva test can be hooked up to the ignition.
They have mouth swabs they use now that can tell for smoking.
Those can't be used on the road and can't be integrated into a car's startup system.
They can be used when pulled over just like a breathylyzer (although this is the law in my state and I'm in USA all places may not have the same rules) but I do see what you are saying about hooking it up to the car like the breath machines.
Man, someone could potentially make a lot of money to be the first ones to roll that out.
All that means is the person consumed THC within the last 24h. Even blood is 12 hours, and there's really no correlation between THC levels and impairment, especially with regular users.
I am 100% on bike I see no argument on there. Just don't smoke 3 day before you have to drive.
Eh, you can still do a blood test in conjunction with a field sobriety test. Its not as cut and dry as something like alcohol, but to be honest it really shouldn't be anyways considering how much more dangerous driving while drunk is.
Blood THC levels aren't indicative of impairment. Even high levels are only weakly associated with impairment in occasional users, and there's no correlation in regular users.
You sound either like someone who has never smoked, or smokes way too much π
I'm someone who looked up studies on the topic.
A THC test isn't directly testing for THC; it tests for what your body breaks it down into. This is different from alcohol tests that directly tests for alcohol.
Oh they don't really let it stop them over here, they just use whatever shitty system they have available and let you deal with the false positives and the fact it detects it for much longer than you are intoxicated.
If you can't tell what problems is it causing? What about the elderly, just because they're not actively impairing themselves further it makes it alright that they are more impaired than a normal driver?
Elderly people shouldn't be allowed to drive.