American Reacts to Random Breath Testing! (pt. 3)

Thank you so much for watching!
🔴Other Channel: ItsJps - / itsjps
Where should we go next? 🌏❓

[@brianlewis6774]

Absolutely fair. Field sobriety tests as used in the states are extremely unreliable, most countries have ruled out the use of them in favour of chemical tests.

[@rickau]

Plus, the FSTs is pass/fail and the result is entirely subjective on the part of the administering officer. It is literally in your best interest to refuse a FST. The results will never help you, ever. Especially because if a cop wants to book you for a DUI and you do a FST they can fail you for any reason they want.

[@gregorturner9421]

@@rickau also police training in the state is pretty much non existent. in aus for example and most other countries to be a police officer is a minimum 6 month training at an academy. plus we have only two levels state and federal. america has something like 18 thousand police forces. you can see the difference just in this video the way they are conducting the tests. always relaxed, keeping the situation under control, having a chat and a laugh but still remining the person of the potential effects of what could happen if they fail. our cops, like european cops are trained to de esculate a situation. a friend of mine was arrested and hauled off for swearing at a police lady, but she gave him like 4 warnings before arresting him giving him a chance.

[@bobpthaloblueross2849]

i can understand why theyre unreliable, i dont know about other people but personally i have a "focus mode" even when im drunk drunk, where i "focus" if i want to walk straight or move like im still sober, usually when im trying not to make a fool of myself in front of certain people

[@johnkinsela77]

When the one cop said to the other, "He had some MDMA on the weekend", I laughed so hard when the cop responded, "it is the weekend" 🤣😂

[@pricey4566]

Yea i picked that one up too 🤣🤣

[@Awesome-Jade]

Drug laws in Australia are tight and therefore any trace is considered a DUI. Its all part of making sure even if there is supply (which there is) that people are discouraged from drug use anyway. Even if they don't feel the effects, the laws are in part there to prevent drug use.

[@BenjiiBee]

Its really dumb hey. All of these drugs except for meth are now legally prescribed medication yet trace amounts in your system will get you done. They are recreationally legal in so many other 1st would countries except for ours and we pay the consequences of filling the courts with complete waste of time cases. It will all be fully recreational within the next few years no doubt.

[@goaway9977]

Perfect example of the Australian Nanny State. Driving while imparied is a morally bankrupt act that needlessly endangers others. Taking someones license because they had some ice or some cones two nights earlier is also a morally bankrupt act by the state that can lead to job losses and all the flow on effects from that. Inability to pay bills, stress and depression, and all to often mkre substance abuse. The punishment should fit the crime.

[@bloozee]

Not really. Drugs are being legalised In ACT ....BUT. the cops here are more likely to watch outside a dealers place to catch drivers.

[@zalired8925]

@@goaway9977 That's why two magistrates have resigned here because they were continuously taking licences away from good people because they had a few cones the other night.

[@BabyMakR]

@@goaway9977 BS. Read up on drug flashback

[@micko11154]

The law is about discouraging everyone from drinking and drug use when driving. The limits are to make administration of the legal side manageable. Our traffic statistics justify it. Cheers from Australia!

[@PBMS123]

Except for drugs, they don't have a limit for drug testing, or any observation of actual impairment. Which doesn't seem to fit a proper administration for the law. It doesn't matter if you have picograms/L and someone else has levels which would lead to impairment in any normal person, they're considered the same. I know of two people who have actually be done for pot, even though they hadn't smoked for years. They made the mistake, years ago, getting high regularly, and gaining weight. They start to diet and lose weight, and THC that has been soluble in the adipose tissue, is now freely circulating. Plenty of people have fought it successfully in court.

[@neuralwarp]

If people aren't discouraged by the risk of death, the risk of fines or losing their licence isn't going to deter them. Random testing is illegal under international law, as Australia will discover one day. The vast majority of drivers don't get breathalysed until they've had an accident, so what's the point.

[@triarb5790]

​​@@neuralwarp What specific international law are you talking about, where is it administered from and how does it apply here? ' under international law' is meaningless without context.

[@Deafening_Silence_333]

@@PBMS123 i want whatever youre on mate because that was nonsensical...

[@Deafening_Silence_333]

@@triarb5790 really?? no context?.. not saying i agree but the context is very clear.. presence of a certain lvl of a controlled substance.. same as you can be booked for opioids present.. as i said, i dont agree, i just understand the backwards law.. like, i have medicinal oil & can use it in front of a cop but he can book me as soon as i drive or ride... its retarded

[@johnschroeder6351]

In Australia we do not have a field sobriety test like the USA. I have known alcoholics that can walk and talk like a sober person till late in the day but are well over the blood alcohol limit. I have also known people that are stone cold sober that would not pass the field sobriety test due to either stroke or aquired brain injuries.

[@myopinion69420]

agreed, 2 people in particular come to mind for me, my step father and mother in law are both full blown alcoholics, both would be well over the limit by 10am, but don't start to appear drunk until anywhere between 6-10pm. luckily the mother in law does not drive, but my step father drives all the time and is scary behind the wheel, any time I know when and where he is driving I call the cops in hopes they will pick him up but unfortunately they have only ever got him once, only lost his license for 3 months because it was still early in the day (9am) if it had been in the afternoon I don't think he would have kept his license.

[@seanthiar]

I'm one of the persons who never pass a field sobriety test. I have a permanent tremor in my hands and an imbalance problem because I have damaged nerves in my spine caused by three herniated disks.

[@robertmurray8763]

American sobriety test has its flaws. Older people have trouble with balancing. I've had a mini stoke (T.I.A.) 7 years ago have trouble with balancing.

[@sunisbest1234]

I think we got rid of them years ago, when technology made it easier and gave more accurate testing.

[@NForrest87]

Our laws in Australia seem strict to Americans because they believe they’re “free” Americans are very individualistic whereas Australian laws were made around safety of everyone. Some of our “rights” may be strict however we can feel safe on our roads and in our streets.

[@oscillatewildly6553]

Yes and we'd all probably prefer our hospitals don't get choked up with patients who were involved in car accidents because they were impaired or because someone who was drove into them. As you said, it's about keeping the roads safe and reducing death tolls, and just to remind us, we have horrific and very realistic ads on TV to scare the shit out of us.

[@AmandaMitting]

haha... yes, Americans love screaming "I know my rights, I know my rights! I've done nothing wrong!" when ever they interact with officers there, they have no respect for the law in general, its all about them! Its same with their healthcare and not wanting a universal healthcare system like many other successful countries with the system as they only care for themselves, not their fellow citizens.

[@SGOI_AUS]

He’s not impaired the shelf life of mdma is approximately 3 days doesn’t mean he impaired what are people going to say when the doctors finally approve it for depression and mental health because it’s only around the corner that this medication hits all pharmacy prescribed very very soon trials already underway for last couple years

[@stihlsavvy666]

we are over policed, we are a nanny state.

[@liamjames6876]

@@stihlsavvy666 then leave if you think that. Plenty of us a fine with how we live.

[@ottotitslinger3430]

Drugs and alcohol in your system impairs your driving, despite what the "expert" users maintain. To get pulled over is so rare and so random to get caught you HAVE TO BE a regular offender. I was a fireman for decades and attended numerous fatal accidents where drugs, alcohol or both were a factor................ I have absolutely no sympathy for those caught, I've seen first hand the tragedies that results from it.

[@sandgroperwookiee65]

Talking out of your freckle! There is no impairment after up to 4hrs from smoking cannabis. Truth! Stop spreading the continuous lies.👎 Uneducated!

[@isaac827]

I wholeheartedly agree and dont doubt your experience in regards to people who are impaired, the problem with current drug testing laws in Australia is, they dont test for impairment they test for exposure to which are very different things and in regards to medicinal cannabis, exposure can be completely legal.

[@mrdilgames6546]

@@isaac827 There's unfortunately no changing the boomer generations mindset, Reefer madness was a big thing for a start, they still mostly think medical cannabis = getting high

[@goaway9977]

Drugs in your system absolutely does not nessisarily mean you are still impaired. Next they will be enforcing 8 hours sleep before you get behind the wheel cause god forbid you had 6 hours and are slightly impaired. Aus is a joke

[@bucinsk]

What do you think about someone having a drink on Saturday driving on a Monday?

[@Aabergm]

The road laws in Australia are an at fault system, which means you are issued a violation notice and must prove you are not guilty, pretty sure the US is the same (see speeding tickets). Zero tolerance came about because people got sick of the stupidity on the roads. Plus you know drugs are illegal so any usage is technically a crime. Edit: field sobriety tests are actually unreliable, the US uses them because some states have laws that prevent better methods like RBT. A person can present as sober but still be three sheets to the wind and there are some historical examples of this.

[@goaway9977]

In every US state probable cause is required to administer any test, and in states where field sobriety tests are required, this does not exclude the use of breathe or blood test if the offender chooses to take one to prove that they are not in fact intoxicated. Frankly it is a much fairer system that emphasises the actual crime (negligent driving) rather than using the essential ability of independent travel as a means of enforcing wider and often unrelated social behaviour. Smoking ice or cones 48+ hours before you drive is not the same physically or morally as smoking right before you get behind the wheel. And yet they are treated the same in Aus. Western law is built on the premise that the punishment should be proportional to the crime, a principle that is thrown out the window in the nanny state that is Australia

[@rumpelstiltskin6150]

@@goaway9977 Cool, don't live here. Our kids come home from school and our roads are statistically safer, if the US was a kid, It would need a nanny or three.

[@Aabergm]

@@rumpelstiltskin6150 Hey don't attack the Americans, Lead pipes cause neurological deficits they can't help it. But yes you can either live in a nation that values fairness or one that values aquisition of wealth. I will always choose fairness because that is the Australian way.

[@BabyMakR]

@@Aabergm That's their fault. They chose to elect the politicians who poison them. Look at the train derailment thanks to Trump's deregulation of the rail companies and loosening of safety laws. I wonder how much his kids were paid to make that happen?

[@rickau]

I don't see the issue with police being able to randomly check if you are meeting the legal requirements you agreed to for being able to drive regardless of whether you've committed a violation of road rules prior. Not driving under the influence is a condition of being able to hold a license, cops should be able to police that without needing some other probable cause first. But the damn 4th amendment gives people a golden shield to violate that part of traffic law with impunity provided they can convince cops they're sober. It's fucked and is by no means fair. I get why the 4th exists but it shouldn't be able to prevent police verifying the legal conditions you agreed to for operating a motor vehicle.

[@JakeMartin94]

As this show is based in 3 states (Victoria, New South Wales & South Australia) you will see road rules are different from state to state. But all states have pretty much a zero tolerance for drugs while driving

[@craigmorrow5145]

The onsite sobriety test, ie walk the line etc hasn't been used in Australia since the 1980's , Note this series is based on 3 different states, and the Laws Vary wildly between them, SA, Vic & NSW are the states, Vic Laws are the harshest for Drink driving and Drug use

[@PBMS123]

Police in some states can still perform sobriety tests, like straight line walking, usually to determine and support a charge of driving under the influence of some other drug, that cannot be tested roadside. This usually then allows them to get someone to draw blood. There was an episode of Motorbike Cops where they performed a sobriety test in NSW only a couple of years ago.

[@triarb5790]

If it keeps me and all my adult children safe on the roads, my grandchildren are protected too, then that is absolutely ok by me.

[@bloozee]

@@PBMS123 that's why the cops did prefer cocaine... they were not testing for it.

[@shereebrolaski1791]

I’m watching a season of it in south Australia and that state is hardcore about drunk driving if you blow high you just don’t lose your license but also you lose your car as it gets impounded by the cops. Even low range you can’t be near your car. Great show

[@PBMS123]

@@bloozee Its also a class issue. The rich boys are doing coke, and wont be tested for it, while the poor end up addicted to meth

[@PokhrajRoy.]

The cliffhangers of this show is why I’m here. The editing team deserves a huge shoutout 👏🏽

[@philiprowney]

Lol, I've only just watched pt. 2, I feel lucky ;-) 0.100?

[@benkirtley9066]

Ironically, the cliffhangers are what my family hates about the show

[@paulkazzer]

MDMA is huge in the US. Go to space nightclub in Miami at 10am or any of the big EDM festivals to see. 😮 The only reason drug laws apply days after use is because there is no way to assess a % of the drug in a person’s system. Pot can be tested many days after.

[@grahamjeffries1058]

There needs to be zero tolerance to drinks and drugs. Just because someone feels fine to drive, they will still be impaired in some way. Police have to deal with some very irresponsible road users and penalties need to be high to teach lessons and for them to learn better habits. As you said, buy an alcohol testing unit. If there’s any chance of drugs in the system, there’s always Uber to get home then get someone to get their car later. What’s a $20 to $40 fare compared to a $600 to $1000 fine and loss of license.

[@listey]

100% this. I'm sure after 4 pints I'd feel absolutely capable of driving. Have I ever tried...? Obviously not.

[@schr4nz]

I'm not sure this is true, drugs can be detected in your system days later and they don't impair your driving at all, they need to study actual thresholds of impairment and how drug levels affect impairment of driving, there's never been such studies as far as I'm aware. We are punishing responsible people who may have waited a day or two before driving, unnecessarily. Like, here's a reverse scenario, LSD is powerful and taken in very small doses(micrograms) this is so tiny that it is unlikely to be detected in any field drug tests, it's even hard to confirm in lab tests because the leftover and side products are indistinguishable from normal body wastes in blood/urine, you would never drive on LSD unless you're insane... but if you did, you would absolutely be impaired, but never be prosecuted for anything. I would rather test the drivers ability to drive, as well as have the ability to test on a threshold of drug impairment, this is more than reasonable and would continue to save lives.

[@grahamjeffries1058]

@@schr4nz The point you miss apart from the obvious is taking non prescribed drugs is illegal in itself! Combine any amount with alcohol and it can be potent and dangerous deadly mix. Police have to deal with some terrible accidents in many cases where there’s body parts everywhere. This is about education of young road users in particular. Different road users have different tolerances but the fact remains that any drug remains in a system can be a cause for concern. This is about behavioural change that recreational drug use and driving don’t go together.

[@manavein8870]

Except with other substances - you're not under the influence of drugs if you took them multiple days/a week ago, it only detects traces of metabolites in the saliva (basically chemicals that are evidence you took a drug at some point) - not substances that are actually effecting you or psychoactive.

[@grahamjeffries1058]

@@manavein8870 The fact remains someone shouldn't be taking them anyway! Let alone taking the risk of driving. Drugs are illegal whether someone likes/agrees with that or not...

[@user-ed8bk6rz9s]

Zero tolerance in Oz mate. We like our friends and family alive!!

[@pats3071]

Lmao typical Aussie, the most ardent rule followers in the world live in this country while claiming to be “laid back”, doesn’t matter how stupid the rules are. If someone takes a cap on Thursday they shouldn’t lose their license for driving on Saturday completely sober, give me a break

[@FlipzPlayz]

@@pats3071 deadset aye mate, they're dogs abt it, it's the same with choof if ya had a few billys with the boys Saturday night you can still get done monday morning

[@stevesalkas9128]

And no police and goverment corruption to

[@debbiejefford5187]

@@pats3071 dude....3 tests? how much more reliable do you want it? 2 on site and one sent to a lab. If you drink and drive there are consequences...if you do drugs and drive...even days later...there are consequences. Here's a tip...DONT!

[@pats3071]

@@debbiejefford5187 He was driving while completely sober, you’ve only proven the point I was making lmao

[@cottawalla]

The last driver that tested borderline negative was targeted for his driving behaviour. Out of the car he looks sober. That's why we don't rely on subjective tests any more. The legal limits are set to take most exceptional situations into account already, or they'd all be zero to start with (as they are for provisionally licensed drivers).

[@just_passing_through]

The point is that if the drugs are still in your system you are affected. You may not feel it, but it’s still affecting you and your reaction times. We take a no nonsense approach to drink/drug driving. We are all prepared to pay the price if it means keeping our kids and parents safe.

[@TheZaru]

yeah but you can drive with a hangover? Same side effects apply mate no one should get done for smoking some weed the night before if they are perfectly capable to drive

[@godkilla4329]

​@HuntedFlames I strongly agree the weed tests here are fucking bananas weed can stay in your system for 3 months but your not high for the entire 3 months it's complete bs...weed should be decriminalized so they can focus on the bigger problems like opiates, acid and ice

[@emcar777]

All drugs (including scripts and over counter) have a “come down” or withdrawal period. Realistically, feeling doesn’t equal fact. Let’s say you’ve taken MDMA 3 days ago, you feel physically fine but you’re finding that your a bit more anxious than usual, which is making it harder to sleep, in turn your more irritable and are having feelings of depression (which is only the tip of the many comedown effects of MDMA). All these little things that are seemingly innocent actually have significantly detrimental effects on cognition, behaviour and function. Even if you’re only experiencing one of the above, without proper awareness/ intervention you could cause a horrific accident. I know this sounds super dramatic, and harsh but it’s the reality. Being “under the influence” involves more than just the obvious changes in behaviour and function initially. We have strict rules for our safety and the safety of those around us, this even extends outside of the realm of illicit substances and/or alcohol. As someone (from NSW) with certain prescription medications not only do I have to carry authorised documentation as I’d fail the initial drug test, but I have regular monitoring of behaviour, cognition and physical symptoms/ side effects so my doctors can complete the annual fitness to drive test, otherwise my licence is suspended. Depending on what medications or conditions someone has or even someone’s age determines if they have different set of parameters needing to be filled just to have a license.

[@xXSinForLifeXx]

That's bullshit if that's the case drunks should be arrested for being hungover. But instead aslong as you are not currently drunk you are fine. It's got nothing to do with what you said and more to do with the fact that the drug kits are not accurate enough compared to breathalysers.

[@emcar777]

@@xXSinForLifeXx Mater, If you're pulled over the day after a big sesh, usually you'll still have a reading under the legal limit, if you are hungover you are still metabolising the alcohol. Hangovers occur as your body metabolises the alcohol, and as the your BAC goes back to 0. If you're pulled over after just using mouth wash you will have a BAC reading as the initial breathalyser is pretty basic (it can't distinguish between breath and air within the car or around the driver), same if you've just sprayed perfume in your car. That's why the second test is done minimum 15 minutes later and with a different (more accurate but more expensive to run as initial device) machines. Also alcohol is a legal substance with the education and research to support having a BAC/ safe limit whereas drugs in this context (actually any context outside of safe prescription use) are illegal, as a result there's not enough/ if not any research and education into what is and isn't a safe limit for driving. Why would the government (using tax payers money) or pharmaceutical companies fund testing and research on something that in the eyes of the law is illegal. For drivers who are on these medications due to safe scripting for actual medical conditions, the meds bring them to the same "safeness" as every other driver, that's why there's so much extra work/ and hoops these drivers (like myself) have to do to be allowed on the road. Also the drugs they're testing for (ie; meth, MDMA, etc) all have medicinal purposes for the right people. Even if it's not the exact same compound usually there's a lot of overlap at a chemical level. The basic testing first used by cops can not distinguish every individual compound as it would be extremely expensive and requires pretty large amounts of time. That's why there's a register of people who are prescribed S8 or S4D medications. "Schedule 8 (S8) substances are labelled 'Controlled drug'. They are medicines that can only be supplied by a pharmacist on prescription and are subject to tight restrictions because of their potential to produce addiction. They are often referred to as 'drugs of addiction'. Morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl are examples of S8 drugs.... S4D drugs are called 'prescribed restricted substances' and include drugs that may be abused and/or are liable to cause dependence. Anabolic androgenic steroids, barbiturates and benzodiazepines are examples of S4Ds... The supply of Schedule 8 (S8) and Schedule 4 Appendix D (S4D) drugs are subject to special requirements." - NSW Health.

[@xXSinForLifeXx]

@Emma Carthew So you are agreeing with me basically. My point was the people making the tests don't put any effort into making them accurate for drug users. Someone who is drink driving can go home being 0.01 under the limit but someone who is completely sober but used drugs days ago can be charged. Your original point was that even when you are sober after using drugs you are effected. This is bullshit and it's why the tests should be more accurate. You say being hungover is still metabolising alcohol whenever but that doesn't mean you are over the limit. You can still be hungover 12 hours after you wake up and people will drive and not blow over. What I'm hearing from you is people should be charged for simple being hungover or tired from drinking the night before? Even if they are not actually over the limit. Since this is what you are saying about drug users?

[@manavein8870]

1. Alcohol also has a comedown but their test detect the AMOUNT not positive/negative - so it doesn't make sense to say drug users are all impaired here. 2. The "come down" doesn't last multiple days/weeks. We're talking hours here (generally) or maybe the rest of the day/next morning just like a hangover.

[@yorky1111]

No sobriety tests in the UK only the breathaliser. Every driver involved in an accident has mandatory breathaliser testing. You pass or you fail. A failure will lead to a ban of usually at least 12 months plus a fine.

[@jsegal8385]

Over a 4 year time frame a mate of mine got done for three high range drink driving offenses and two driving while license suspended charges...The kicker is not the loss of wages (no car, no job) so much as the costs associated with getting his license back. He has to pay for an alcohol interlock device to be installed on all vehicles in his name. He then has to have it recalibrated once a month. This goes on for four years. He estimated the cost is $20,000 over the four years on one vehicle.

[@triarb5790]

Better than jail for killing a family. Wouldn't you say?

[@emcar777]

Addiction although a disease and is not the “fault” of the person suffering cannot be used to justify driving under the influence. Even a “high functioning” addict poses a significant risk and as a country with such a blurred line between addiction and social norm/ expectation (in regards to substance use), we need sweeping and hard hitting legislation to truely break the desensitisation Aussies have to substance Abuse.

[@jsegal8385]

@@triarb5790 I'm not defending him. He did wrong. He knows he did wrong.

[@peachiedb]

​@@triarb5790I think he's trying to point out another reason not to drink/drug drive. Not only do you risk killing someone but it can ruin your life long term. I lost my job, lost my car and now 7 years later I'm still paying for that one stupid decision. I know I messed up I have absolutely no one to blame but myself. I now try to help others not make that same stupid decision. I would give anything to go back and have just taken an uber or taxi

[@jordanferrazza8700]

15:02 L - Learner driver, P1 - Red or first year probationary/provisional driver, P2 - Green probationary/provisional driver They tend to have strict conditions like zero alcohol, no muscle cars, absolutely no phone use, and in some cases passenger limits 17:30 Sometimes people pass secondary drug tests but get summonsed for failing lab drug tests

[@petert24turner71]

Yes there is a standard blood alcohol limit across Australia. The limit has been determined scientifcally and by observations from accidents over many years. Yes it saves lives, howmany, undetermined. Maybe the States should look into our process as it would eliminate uncertainty. Drug testing is similar as well.

[@BabyMakR]

I can hear the yanks now. "theyr takin aur rites!!!!"

[@aussiebreadandotherstuff]

The impairment caused by various drugs is similar to alcohol Field sobriety tests are complete rubbish Just because a person can walk a straight line and speak normally doesn't mean they are capable of making appropriate decisions or managing risk sufficiently. The fact that they know what the consequences would be but get behind the wheel anyway proves the point.

[@just_passing_through]

I hope you noticed how our police interact and speak to our citizens. US police could learn a thing it two here. I’m so glad our police behave this way when they can.

[@Angrymans]

Policing in both countries are very different. Not only the climate between civilians and police but also the risk of approaching someone is very different. Also, there are good and bad police here in Australia too. I’ve seen police talk really bad to people but also really well. America only has a small amount of bad apples.

[@just_passing_through]

@@Angrymans agreed. There are good and bad cops everywhere. But exceptions don’t make the rule. Overall, I would rather interact with an Australian law enforcement officer than a US one, any day of the week. Anyone who says anything else has no idea what they are taking about.

[@AmandaMitting]

When you look at law enforcement around the world, we would have the BEST cops for sure!! Our cops are majority very laid back and easy to get along with and happy to have a good laugh with you. Its basically ingrained from us at a young age that Police are the good guys and if they're after you, you're in the wrong! I've seen many real Police shows in the US and I find its not just the "Police" attitude that's in the wrong, a lot of it falls back onto the civilians. If a cop over there approached you for something or pulled you over, they scream blue murder that they've done nothing wrong and love this "I know my rights!, I know my rights!!" and basically they tell the Police what to do. I think its blame on both sides but especially the civilian side as they take Policing and laws in general over there as a joke. Yeah, all countries have bad eggs, us included (very few thankfully) but can you blame US Police when they're constantly have the threat of not knowing if the next person has a gun and is going to kill them? There a lot of factors in it but I do feel the US Police do have a hell of a hard job, not knowing if they're going home to their families everyday and the higher risks they face just with guns alone. Then having to deal with people with no respect for laws in general or Police Officers, you can understand why some Officers do do things perhaps the wrong way as they're fed up with it too but can come off as the bad guy, I'm not saying all do the right thing but it would be hard to have to deal with daily. Then they get going with "I know my rights!! You can't do that!!". Then its all about getting the phone out and recording everything as the Police are always in the wrong and they're going to have their badges. I see it all too much in the US Police shows and do feel for most of the Officers there. Sometimes a lot of the "bad" footage is only one side of the story, not matter who it is and its usually the bad footage that spreads like wildfire. I'm just glad we have such awesome cops!

[@dianaperry1929]

The Aust Gov is fazing in 2,500 Overseas Police Officers in the next 5 yrs…..WHY?

[@geekexmachina]

You have to bare in mind that after the larger effects of a drug may wear off, while the drug is in the system it may still have smaller effects such as reducing reaction time, altering concentration levels, it only takes a small change in these sort of things to be life changing. Some effects even last after whatever has left your system however at that point its not detectable and you cant be done for it.

[@TheZaru]

yeah you say that but its legal to drive with a hangover? same effects on reduced reaction time etc

[@manavein8870]

Except those smaller effects are barely existent more than 2-3 days and sometimes even sooner. You are more impaired getting a bad nights sleep, drug tests only detect metabolites - they don't determine whether you are under the influence.

[@Vexatious011]

A compilation of funny Australian ads!!! "Don't chop the dinosaur daddy!" "Yeah.. to keep the rabbits out.." And our drink driving ads aren't a joke either

[@infin8ee]

"Stop it or cop it"😂

[@Taz81660]

Vexatious, nasi goreng, 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣👍👍🤪😜😝

[@ericktreetops741]

I remember seeing one of those safety videos years ago. The had a number of people whose driving responses they measured and the got them drubk and redid the test. They had to drive around a course and at some point a pedestrian dummy would pop up and they would measured how long it took them to bring the car to a stop. All took longer to stop then when they had been sober. In some cases the difference was between stopping in time and hitting the pedestrain. None looked drunk. I still remember one guy bragged that he actually drove better when drunk.There were quite a few people who held that positoins. During the drunk test when it came time to stop he complete missed stopping and just kept drivng. Feeling sober is not tthe same as being sober.

[@andrewhall9175]

You touched on what I believe is the core of the drink driving problem in Australia here 4:21 People who have lost their license because of driving over the limit portray themselves as the victim and are treated with way too much empathy by their friends. All too often the potential danger they have unleashed on other road users is completely overlooked as friends console the mate about the consequences their own actions have caused. This even flows through to the judicial system eg I have a mate who was done for DUI and the magistrate (for some reason) empathised with him and organised that his period of suspension from driving overlapped with his upcoming overseas holiday. Go figure.

[@abatage]

I think the point (as others have also said) about the drugs in your system is that if you have it in your system, then you're impaired - maybe to varying degrees, but you could argue the same with alcohol having different effects on different people - ultimately though, the line has to be drawn somewhere and if it's well known (which it is in AUS), then it's easy to avoid by simply not driving if you have anything in your system.... agree or not, it's super easy to avoid it =)

[@seanthiar]

No it's not easy to avoid. For example cannabis can show positive even after weeks. Depends on the test used. They don't test you for medication but on how many medications you use you have a warning not to drive when using them and the people still do it. Driving when you took some medicine against a common cold that day makes you a bigger risk than someone who smoked some weed 3 days ago.

[@shanerittman4581]

Hi Ryan I think these laws are fair, I take strong prescribed pain killers every day and have for over 20yrs. The only time I don't drive is when I have taken morphine or Ketamine. But the difference is I am under a few specialists and they said it was possible to drive except on those drugs. The drugs they are after are basically recreational drugs marijuana, Ice and MDMA.

[@matthewsmith6330]

from experience I think its pretty fair, I only lost my licence for 3 months and the cops were cool as

[@rodneymatthews1891]

I had a friend in high school that was run over by a drunk driver on her way walking to school in the 90's. she never got to grow up. she would be in her 40's like me now if someone didn't make that decision to get behind the wheel drunk.

[@NovemberMe5213]

I think its because you might not be able to tell if they took the drug that night or three days ago so they're treated the same.

[@TheLyds01]

You may not feel the effects, but it may still effect your judgement and functioning, especially when driving

[@nineteen96]

You'd think that'd be common sense

[@dawntreader1247]

11:24 these breath and saliva tests are objective and therefore free from police discretion. Also if your mobility is poor in the first place you may fail a walking test while sober

[@riversong_]

They call SA the Nanny state but I live here and I don't mind. We still have a small town mentality and they read the road death toll on the news and compare to this time last year. We really hate it when people are off their faces and cause accidents. I guess with drugs, you never really know how much someone is affected and they have to make it fair across the board, so zero tolerance.

[@helenlecornu1651]

Huh, I didn't realise we're called the Nanny state, I don't feel that way at all, although I don't participate in anti social behaviour, so maybe that's the reason I don't feel controlled 'ie Nanny state'. You learn something new everyday :D

[@v.b6028]

Joel watching you watch this is hilarious 😂 I always complain when this comes on TV but then I find myself glued to it and trying to guess what the readings will be…🤦🏻‍♀️

[@unoriginalsyn]

The physical sobriety tests are troublesome, they may be thousands of legitimate reasons someone might be unsteady. And then there's weirdos like me who are pretty clumsy, literally trip over my own feet all the time but when I drink I get steadier so 🤷‍♀️ breath/hair/blood testing is just more accurate and wastes less time and money figuring it out

[@oscillatewildly6553]

Reducing road accident deaths is the whole reason also because we have free healthcare here in Australia, less accidents means less patients in hospitals taking up beds, and to reduce the cost. Also, how inefficient is it for cops to spend all that time by the roadside with a driver putting them through all of those commands for a field sobriety test? (That's obviously a rhetorical question!). Thanks for your reaction!

[@Skidman2000]

the officers where called because he was driving weirdly so something was affecting his driving and if dope was in his system it adds up . Just because you think your ok doesn't mean you are.

[@fionamcwilliam8703]

What people don't realise is that taking some drugs can trigger mental illness so it matters if it's in your system. The main one is that cannabis can trigger schizophrenia which happens in your late teens. When I worked in a mental health ward it was so sad to see people in their late teens / early twenties come in with their first episode of schizophrenia. I'd hate to think what would happen if someone was driving and the episode started!

[@schr4nz]

I don't disagree with some of what you've said here, there's absolutely evidence that correlates psychosis with cannabis (THC) if your brain hasn't fully developed (should ideally wait till about 21/22 before smoking). It should also be noted that a lot of these people are smoking regularly (3 or more times per week) However, you are then conflating drugs in your system with impairment of driving, I don't understand the leniency people grant with alcohol and having a limit like 0.05, drugs of varying kinds should be studied under safe driving conditions or simulators to determine the same thing, then tests should be developed to determine if these thresholds are crossed in the field

[@fionamcwilliam8703]

@@schr4nz hi. I was saying (but not very well) what if someone who started a mental health episode who'd taken drugs which triggered it was driving at the time of the episode. That's not very safe. It's also clear from watching the RBT show over time that some of the folk tested are affected by drugs when they've been pulled over. In those cases they should not be driving. In Australia we have a low tolerance of people driving while affected by any sort of substance. This is because it's very much a cultural thing to drink too much and then drive. This is why we have such strong deterrents in the law. The strong deterrents are also because of the number of people killed on our roads.

[@justtobecool3699]

If something is in your system, it can still be affecting you some way. Weather it being effecting your phycological, or physical state. example is people with high tolerances of alcohol, they may not feel the effects but they are still over the legal limit and even though they feel fine and like it hasn't affected them, all it is, is they have gotten use to being that way. It doesn't mean it isn't still effected them someway. at this point in time there is no way to detect how much of the drug is in your system in a on the side of the road format, therefore they can only tell if it is in the system or not in the system. it has been like that for a long time in Australia and people still choose to ignore the road rules. People need to take more responsibility for there actions and not think they can get away with anything they want. If you wish to drink or do drugs, fine but please don't put others in danger because you believe your fine.

[@Blisters952]

G’Day J, yes the show is on telly every week but of course, sometimes repeats. It is interesting but very frustrating because some people never learn and the innocent pay. Stay safe🇦🇺

[@erinmccabe1984]

People can look sober and feel sober however many studies and we know that it still effects reaction times, decision making and concentration and that's what causes accident

[@jocelynmarks5111]

Australia got sick of people dying on the roads. Zero tolerance. Drugs are illegal and anything in your system means you are under the influence. You aren’t supposed to do drugs anyway so you definitely don’t get the right to drive. We pin our drink drivers for morning after as well. If it’s in your system then it’s in your system

[@harleyquinn3589]

Not all drugs are illegal though...

[@jocelynmarks5111]

@@harleyquinn3589 the ones we test for roadside all are

[@harleyquinn3589]

@@jocelynmarks5111 cannabis is legal here, but stays in your system for up to 90 days.

[@listey]

​@harleyquinn3589 cannabis is illegal. You may want to fact check your comments.

[@Sallysanga]

​@@harleyquinn3589 it depends what kind of test. They use a saliva test on the roads and that shows up for like max 48 hours for weed

[@nixon.herban]

These days in Australia the “field sober test”, are not effective anymore if there are better ways to test the substance in your system.

[@jusosa]

I'm so very very glad we have these rules in Australia. You don't have to be visibly incoherent for you to be a high risk on the road, people forget that drugs like weed slow down all your receptors meaning that the speed and reaction to a hazardous situation is sooo much more delayed than a sober response.

[@TheZaru]

yeah mate but not the day after maybe a few hours yes but it does not impair you any longer than 10 hours

[@manavein8870]

@@TheZaru Exactly, smoking a joint 3 days or a week ago makes no difference to impairment. Currently testing is a bit of a joke. Imagine if they just gave people a test for alcohol that showed 'Positive' when you drank anything the past week, people would riot.

[@TheZaru]

@@manavein8870 yeah it is fucked up and is 100% due to laziness in not wanting to create a better testing system but also allows them to get tons of money from fining people from it

[@Neyka_Ishikawa]

We have Zero Tolerance for illicit drugs in Australia, and the vast majority of us support it. Having a driver's license is not a right, it's a privilege that comes with rules and responsibilities.

[@rinibrugel3573]

If someone is over the limit with either drugs or alcohol they are likely to have done this more than once. They know the result if caught and the drugs are illegal, even if you don't drive.

[@PBMS123]

There is no limit for drugs though, which is why its such a terrible system

[@gundamsigma]

We have a zero tolerance toward drug/drink driving.

[@ariadnepyanfar1048]

Australia's road death toll is one of the lowest in the world per capita, and is lower than it was in the 1970's despite tripling our population since then. Seatbelts and policing them so they're universally used by everyone in a car halved the death toll in the 1970s. Speed cameras and then random breath tests halved the road toll in the 1980s again, and then halved the road toll in the 1990s. Now the government focusses on warnings against driving while sleepy, and on drug tests, to try shave more deaths . The speed limit is the speed limit in Australia, no one drives over it for fear of fines and licence loss. It sounds harsh, but most Australians know just how safe our roads are and can't argue with the results. You thought a couple of people weren't impaired... but the police chased them because they noticed them speeding or driving erratically in the first place. Just because the drugs don't show on their face or voice doesn't mean their concentration is all there. There's also legal prescription medicines that people cannot drive on, so the fact that the movement is to legalised cannibis (which I agree with doing) doesn't mean that legal cannibis or other drugs are alright to drive on.

[@rattusrattus9456]

You should check out our Australia day(our 4th July) lamb advertisements, they're treated culturally kinda like super bowl ads.

[@toprock9500]

totally agree they are the best ads, every year

[@helenlecornu1651]

I reckon there should be a million likes for this comment, they are a total crackup :D

[@liamwagner6597]

I'm strict in case of the use of drugs and alcohol, but only on a personal basis. I'm not on a mission trying to persuade others to forgo all of this. In my opinion that would go too far. However, part of becoming that strict on myself in my stance on drug and alcohol use was expierincing what alcohol and drugs do to people. And it wasn't exactly extreme excesses of peers that I witnessed. In general, my personal rejection in the case of alcohol consumption is simply that I saw how friends and acquaintances simply lost control over themselves and therefore very often got into very embarrassing situations. Sometimes they were funny, voluntarily but mostly involuntarily, and now and then they even got very aggressive and fought over trifles. The more I witnessed that, the more I was convinced that I will never do that to myself. And it stayed that way.

[@fionah_6581]

JP you are actively on a drug if it is in your system. While you may feel no effects it is likely to be affecting reaction times and judgement in ways you are not aware of.

[@amandashort7039]

I'm pretty sure over here in Australia, in some states you can't drive with certain prescription medications in your system neither.

[@seanthiar]

That is the case in Germany, too. They can even remove or restrict your license depending on your illness. They don't test you for it, but if you have an accident.... I have a friend who got diabetes 1 and she isn't allowed to start a car without checking her blood sugar, because her blood sugar levels are very unstable. In some cases your doctor is required to warn you to drive. For example I got an eye test and my doctor forbid me to drive after the test for the following 6 hours. Because it was an emergency I was stuck for a few hours in another town until I could drive home. Some medications have warnings about driving or working with dangerous machines when using those medications like some for the common cold. That way you never can say - I didn't knew - when something happens.

[@kmichaels7653]

I’m on opiates, benzos and prescription cannabis and I can drive with all of them in my system as long as I’m not obviously smashed. I’ve been on them long enough to know when I can and can’t drive. The endone barely affects me anymore. If the pills made me drowsy I wouldn’t risk it but they don’t. I can drive well with 10mg of endone in my system for example but most people could not. I’m in TAS.

[@patriciadarcy3479]

The issue of MDMA in his system, the police are just taking his word for weekend use, he may well have had it that morning, they don't know. Surprisingly, people will lie when faced with losing their licence, go figure !!! Here's the deal, everybody with a licence knows the rules. But hey, love your videos, you seem like a open-minded guy....

[@PBMS123]

The issue is that there is no lower limit like there is for alcohol. That means if he tells the truth, and isn't affected in anyway by the drugs, but he has even a picogram/L that he gets done, just the same as someone who has just smoked a pipe of meth. Thats the issue, and its been fought in court and won several times. Hell one woman who was actually high on meth, got an expert witness to attest that she had better reaction times on meth than not on them, and so although she was affected by the drug, it only led to a positive affect. From what I recall she struck a child in a school zone. She wasn't speeding, and braked, but still hit the child who ran out onto the road without warning. After the mandatory tests, it came back she had meth in her system. The level was such that it increased her awareness, and likely the only reason the kid was alive. The judge, or jury accepted the expert witness' testimony and acquitted her

[@manavein8870]

The problem is their testing procedure is inherently unfair since it only detect if you had taken drugs at some point, NOT if you're under the influence like with the alcohol test. If I were a drug user I'd ask for a blood test since it would test for recent usage rather than the fact you took a substance last week.

[@PBMS123]

@@manavein8870 Sorry what? You have a misunderstanding of the testing mate. Oral fluid tests for recent use. A blood test is more likely to show the drug in your system than an oral fluid test. If its not in your blood it will not be in your oral fluid. Not sure why you think it will show week after use.... Not sure why you think its "unfair". I think the system has the issue that there is no lower limit But do concede this system works to show recent usage. This is not like urinalysis, it is NOT testing for metabolites that may be in your body.

[@manavein8870]

​@@PBMS123 I think my little essay got caught in the spam filter so I'll have to re-write off the top of my head; but detection windows are definitely smaller in blood than it is in saliva - you are thinking of urine or hair. It generally goes (from shortest to longest): Blood > Saliva >> Urine >>> Hair And saliva tests do detect metabolites, which is why they can detect marijuana so long after use (generally not a week but within 24 hours and sometimes 72 depending on the state's test and the user and their habits) e.g. detecting COOH metabolised from THC but again depends on the state you are in. Look up SAMHSA Drug Advisory Board who had a chart on their report, I tried linking it in my previous comment but it wouldn't let me post.

[@farqsideways5679]

"This guy's way to chilled" you'd be to after breaky bongs.

[@solreaver83]

i think its fair. just ask drunk people if they are feeling the effects of it. guaranteed most say they are fine or are unaffected. I kinow for a fact most deaths and accidents involving drunk or drug drivers think they were unaffected at the time.

[@rebeccaaustin3247]

Drink and drug driving is a serious offence and I know way too many people who have died as a result of it, Australia doesn't do the field sobriety tests which I personally an glad for. There is a limit for a reason and no matter how much it effects you there should be no difference in your treatment. Australia has 3 different levels of drink driving penalties. We should also mention that penalties including demerit points, suspensions ect vary from state to state. Edit: Watch the "Just waiting for a mate" RB video, it is hilarious 😂

[@AussieElricFangirl]

It only takes 1 time, 1 slip to kill someone. Which is worth more, the licence of someone who decides to drive under the influence of a drug (regardless of how often they use) or the life of the innocent people they could possibly kill or maim. When I was in high school a good friend of mine was killed walking along the footpath on the way home. She was 2 blocks from the school and was not crossing the road or doing anything risky. She was struck by a man who felt no effects of any drugs but who tested positive for weed by paramedics. He didn't feel it but his reaction time was likely slowed by the drug according to the medical advice. The result regardless was that he was unable to stop before rear ending the car in front, so he swerved to avoid it. He ran up onto the footpath and hit her hard enough to knock her sneakers off. She died 4 hours later from her injuries, she was 16. I miss her and even forgive the man who killed her. I can tell you right now that everyone who knew her wish that instead of her death and the man getting locked up for killing her they would have preferred him losing his licence before this happened. I bet he wishes that he'd been pulled over by an RBT bus and had his licence revoked too rather than prison time and living with knowing he killed an innocent 16 year old girl.

[@elcardil]

I have to say you have an amazing take on everything. You are very open minded and take on board all sorts of things, regardless of what you've seen/done in other videos. Definitely going to try to put my friends on to your channel. Thank you.

[@relentlessimagetattooshop5438]

Bro u need to make these episodes longer to get a whole half in atleast 😅🤙🇦🇺 funny seeing Americans react to the Aussy way 😂

[@llb7148]

You take the drugs or booze, you take the consequences.

[@davidmurphy6256]

Everything you say is true, for a young bloke you've got a good head on your shoulders. Regarding your question about charging people with drug use point blank instead of doing a sobriety test the problem is when you give police the option of selecting who to charge and who to let go you invite corruption.

[@Scooterboi60]

People lie, so while that guy said he’d done the drugs over the weekend, that might not have been absolutely true. Remember he was pulled over so he was unimpaired really was he.

[@roseofsharon2156]

Absolutely right. A car is a weapon. Responsibility should rest on the individual that is in control of that vehicle.

[@bramba1953]

The sate of Victoria 1970 had 1034 road deaths and a holistic approach was taken to reduce this. We were the first state in the world to have compulsory seat belt wearing which started a a series of laws and education to bring it down such as random breath test, probationary licences, speed limits, road upgrades and car being made safer and many more. We had 240 deaths last year while our population has doubled and far more cars now so the proof is in the pudding even though we don't like it as a society we have a lot less grieving families than then.

[@alpharia]

What you are missing is that a license is not a positive right but a licence to drive as long as you obey the rules that apply. If you don't want to get caught(no matter how rare it is to get caught) do not drink & drive (that includes being affected in ANY way by illicit substances). The psycho-active effects can still impair your response time and can absolutely influence the risks you would normally not take. Whilst I agree somewhat with your response to the length of time the legislation very much so draws a line in the sand. This doesn't mean that you will automatically lose your licence though since there are mitigations that can be brought up if you go to court and plead properly. Though this requires obtaining qualified legal counsel and advice (that can be expensive unless you can obtain legal aid) on what is the best method to mitigate dependent on the individual facts matricx - each case is different. Also the Drug & alcohol based road rules are also different depending upon what State you reside in. Though in the basic legislative response they are becoming very uniform nowadays thankfully.

[@Streetw1s3r]

Cannabis can affect your abilities to react behind the wheel since it makes you sluggish and slow to react, that's why it's not allowed to drive when under the influence of it. Like, a child could be crossing the road but you're slow to react because you're high as a kite.

[@mrslbw]

Having lived through the changes to drink driving, I remember there was a time when everyone who drank, sometimes to the point of being very drunk, would then drive. There were three requirements needed to achieve a change in that practice. One, recognition of the cost to society of people being killed, families split apart, long and short term disability due to injuries, damage to property, the cost of taking healthy, productive people out of our society. Two, changing social norms. Education was key and not necessarily the type done in schools. Things like putting drivers through road courses sober and under the influence and demonstrating the loss of driving skill with mathematical measurements. Breath testing machines in pubs to show how individuals are effected. These were removed by the way because Aussies began to have competitions to see how high a reading they could achieve, this also being before the days of responsible service of alcohol laws. Even developing an understanding of what a standard drink is. We still have advertisements designed to maintain a culture of don’t drink and drive, like the 'Yeah, nah.' ad set in a pub where the whole pub goes quiet and even the dog on the floor gives a concerned look to the guy who says he is going to drive after drinking. Three is enforcement. Here you need a line set and for coppers it has to be zero tolerance enforcing the level of alcohol you can have in your system and still function safely. Without that you get all sorts of human bias and possible corruption setting in. It is the magistrates who get to take into account the individual circumstances. Again, not a perfect system but at least a level of empathy and compassion is considered and allowed for. Although illegal drug use is a whole other area, alcohol is still the drug with the highest consumption rate and is the drug causing the most problems percentage wise. Is this changing? A side comment: in my local area, a small isolated country town, the drug and alcohol bus arrived and spent the weekend testing everyone driving! One in three drivers had alcohol or illegal drugs on board. A very high percentage. This happens because it’s a small town with not much else to do and with no traffic police to enforce the road rules, it slides. As a consequence we now get lots of visits from Highway police. I have driven 1200km to come back home and not seen one police car to get within 100km of home and see 3 in short succession. Stressful, because you have to be super vigilant watching your speed all the time and it’s super stressful if they fall in behind you for 100k's of driving. I don’t speed or drink drive but long scrutiny by an authority is unnerving. But, the main thing is our roads are definitely safer.

[@cassiefinnerty8426]

We have a legal limit for alcohol but a zero tolerance for drugs. I even have my mental health medications come up on a road side drug test as a benzo and have to provide a prescription. But I totally agree I could have had my medication at midnight and it still shows in the morning but I have no effects of it. The same with MDMA. The test doesn't show how much you have in your system road side, but I think the one sent away does which is why some people only get a fine for drugs in their system in comparison to losing their license.

[@BenjiiBee]

Its ridiculous hey. We need more common sense laws here in Aus. A dedicated test that shows how impaired you are and not just testing for trace amounts is needed. Cannabis and MDMA are now prescription medicine in Australia and yet you can still get done days after use.

[@listey]

​@@BenjiiBeeyou should devise the test if you're so passionate about it

[@sandgroperwookiee65]

@@listey maybe you should as you seem as passionate

[@oscillatewildly6553]

Very well explained!

[@BabyMakR]

@@BenjiiBee So go ahead and invent it if you're so smart. All the doctors in all the world can't come up with such a test, but I'm sure you, in your infinite wisdom will be able to crack in in a couple of hours, right?

[@al6491]

Australia's tough road rules has some benefits. The USA has 12.4 road deaths per 100k people each year, compared to Australia's 5.3!!

[@bichiahamatadoum1395]

UK Canal Boat/Narrowboat Trip! FIRST TIME REACTION! WE ARE IN LOVE

[@petethundabox5067]

Fuck. In Victoria, I lost my licence for 6 months for weed 16hours after the smoke. I had smoked a small joint to get to sleep the night before, then eaten breakfast and lunch, and done physical work. I wasn't high at all. I was fined $500 And had to do a 4week course $350, and lost my driving job. I have osteoarthritis and I used it for pain relief. The thing with Meth and MDMA is you don't sleep, and can be still effected and distracted.

[@listey]

This is great to know. It's absolutely excellent that the system works. Hopefully you learn your lesson.

[@OilBaron100]

The USA doesn’t have government-funded universal healthcare, so there is less financial incentive for governments in the USA to reduce road trauma and death (the government doesn’t pay anything for medical bills of injured motorists). Field sobriety tests are not done in Australia. The drink-driving laws in every jurisdiction give police the right to randomly pull over any vehicle to demand a breath test.

[@jenniferharrison8915]

Thank you, so excited! 😁 That is typically British behaviour, the pub after work with mates - sad, but Australians have empathy! 🥸 No sympathy for the next guy! 😳😠 Drugs and Sharks 😯 not fun! I agree that "strong" warnings are necessary, it's safer to be sure they are sober, we care more about the innocent victims! 🤗👍 Note, they are reluctant to give them prison time! 😊 (We have Border Security, Territory Cops, Highway Patrol, Bondi Rescue, Beach Cops to watch?)

[@Marzipan_Rocks]

We get Boarder Security and Bondi Rescue here in New Zealand 🇳🇿 sometimes I watch them.

[@stanleywiggins5047]

I turned 18 in 1976, every day I was off work I was plastered until about 1982, was never pulled over (lucky) after 82 I still drank but never got behind the wheel. Between 2000 & today have been pulled over for RBT a dozen times with 0:000 & done RDT twice & both times negative. Although if the technology for the RBT & RDT had been around in the late 70s early 80s I probably would have been up shitters ditch... 😉

[@justinpayne305]

Well mate,.. that's Her Majesties service for ya,...on that note I'm goin for a few bongs lololol

[@terencestella]

You're take is spot on about being sober but it being in the system

[@gusdrivinginaustralia6168]

With drugs there isn't a system to differentiate between low effects or high unlike with alcohol where it can be seen in a reading. A sobriety test doesn't prove much because it doesn't start with a baseline of how you'd test normally. Like a balance or straight walk isn't good if you aren't normally great at that for a disability or something.

[@btchplz5352]

There is soooo much more rbt to watch, it’s been a series for at least 10 years, no doubt more

[@PhillipGWilkie]

I think it is fair because you may not realise that you are still affected. You can feel fine but your reflexes could be a little slower than normal.

[@Wandafulofit]

You should do a comparison video of how the cops treat people here in Aussie compared to the USA It's way more casual here No cuffs for instance And no go DIRECTLY to jail like you do in the USA

[@helenlecornu1651]

It's hard to do a comparison between both, because our system are set up differently and even the recruitment, control and government of law enforcement is worlds apart. USA is an adversarial system compared to us as well.

[@janedoe4471]

The drugs thing is based of what they can scientifically prove, they can’t prove how much drugs are in your system or how effected you are, but they can prove if it’s in your system, it comes down to what they can prove on paper in court. Also if you want to get into Aussie ads do- Carlton draught’s “it’s a big ad”

[@milyan360]

We have medical cannabis in Australia but even if you drive with THC in your system it's still treated the same way even with a prescription or not. Kinda wish they had a test that could tell you if you're under the influence like the concentration of THC in your system similar to the breathalyzer

[@BenjiiBee]

Exactly my point. Its beyond dumb. We need common sense laws across the country.

[@samanthapeters8314]

You can't get high on cannibis oil. Because the THC isn't in it. If someone wants to drive and have medical cannabis they can use cannabis oil.

[@BabyMakR]

@@BenjiiBee So invent it. These tests can't detect the concentration in your system. The can only detect the by products. So you should totally go ahead and invent something that can be used on the side of the road to test for concentrations.

[@janedwards6726]

If medicinal cannabis contains THC you are equally dangerous on the road. You have still ingested a psychoactive drug. There are lots of prescription drugs that you can't drive on.

[@mrgrumpy6408]

Yes I think its a fair traffic law, I also think the penalties should be harsher especially for repeat offenders.

[@lward53]

With your comment at 15:51, He's not being charged for USING the drug, he's being charged with driving with it in his system, Our drug laws are super strict. (He also wasn't randomly pulled over, people had called about him, so clearly something was wrong.) And he still passed.

[@Vexatious011]

Please please watch "Waiting for a mate" 🤣🤣🤣

[@kennethdodemaide8678]

He's already broken the law by buying illicit drugs. If he respected the law he wouldn't have any problem. Methamphetamine is a dangerous and highly addictive drug.

[@roslynjonsson2383]

Sorry m8, but we don't look at having a driver's license as a persons right, it's a privilege that comes with responsibilities - we are a small population who provides 100% disability care, which is very expensive. The very last thing the tax payers of this country need, is to foot the bill for a family of 4 hit by another person who 'says' they feel sober, but aren't 100% with it still, and another 4 people are in need of millions of dollars worth of 'free health care', and possibly for the rest of their lives. In Australia, it's our civil duty of care to each other, to be in 100% control when behind the wheel of any vehicle, no excuses, same expectations of everyone here, its a VERY fair system, especially when you're the family member of someone killed by an offender. Its about prevention is much better than paying to clean up the mess here in Aus, the way we like it

[@manavein8870]

Interesting to hear you haven't seen/heard people take ecstacy before, in Australia half the people I knew back in school had taken it but there is a big party/nightlife & drug culture in Australia (or at least Melbourne). The atmosphere is pretty good and different to the nightlife I've seen in US states, but I don't really know how to explain it. Most people grow out of it, but we still have addicts although thankfully we have treatment options for them for detox, drug maintenance and psychotherapy although services are stretched pretty thin in many places and they need to take it up themselves. Unfortunately the tests only indicate that leftover traces are found in your system (any amount), so you don't have do be under the influence to test positive, it could test positive even if you took something a few days/a week ago.

[@amyfield9711]

100% agree with you on the sobriety test. If it’s not affecting you while you’re behind the wheel, you shouldn’t be fined. For context, I am an Australian who doesn’t drink or do drugs.

[@----.__]

Cops in Australia are pretty good, got pulled over heaps in my younger years and rarely got a bad cop. Last time I was pulled over I was running from the cops on an old ZXR750, on the wrong side of the road, doing over 200km/hr with no license or registration. I was serving at the time and thankfully the sergeant on scene used to work at Holsworthy which is the Aussie military prison. He knew I'd be locked up if he charged me for all I was doing, so just charged me with no motorbike license (had a car license). Despite running from the cops I was pretty respectful when they cornered me. I had no hope of getting away that night, there were about 6 cop cars on the highway I was on because a drunk driver was turning his headlights off and playing chicken with trucks so they'd set up to try and find him. As I was running from the two cops behind me there were blue lights approaching me from the front!! Talk about bad timing!! I deserved a lot more but I'm glad they went easy on me, just goes to show if you're not a d!ckhead to cops and just act like a normal human then they treat you with human decency.

[@PokhrajRoy.]

15:37 As law enforcement, you want to be thorough. Although cannabis enthusiasts rarely head towards alcohol.

[@buckbumbleboomstein4375]

Australia has some truly great ads you gotta check some out!

[@rrw_au9584]

The other issue is they can say it was this morning but could of been a hour ago. you watch and so many of those over say they "just had a couple" when they have had more. just because someone seems fine and "chill" doesn't mean they aren't impaired. if something happens and they have to react to a emergency, kid running out or anything and they react any slower......... but they don't feel affected. I've been blind drunk before and would of sworn that i wasn't affected. does that make it okay? that is why Australia and most other countries don't bother with the field sobriety test. theres a great clip of a old guy passed all the field sobriety stuff easily, the cop said he was a good dancer and his response was only when he was drunk, then admitted to how much he had to drink.

[@Diorella_scent]

Wowza you’ve almost reached 20K subs! Well done matey 🎉. Now as to your questions about the RBT etc (I love this show too) I firmly believe that every single person in this country with a licence to drive a motor vehicle, knows and understands the laws that go with this privilege. And, yes it is a privilege and not a right to hold a driver’s licence. If you can’t comply with the very simple concept of do not drink or use drugs when you get behind the wheel of a vehicle, then you deserve everything that gets thrown your way. The laws surrounding these criminal offences are far too lenient in my humble opinion. I know this now sounds a tad hypocritical, but Why don’t you get a VPN and then you can watch all the Australian tv shows your cute heart desires 😊

[@carokat1111]

I’m totally comfortable with the strictness of our road laws where alcohol and drugs are concerned. Our road toll is excessive so anything which mitigates deaths is fine by me.

[@godamid4889]

Probably the main reason the US doesn't have a huge MDMA culture is the ready access to cocaine and ice. In Australia, cocaine is more expensive than pretty much anywhere else in the world. Ice is not so hard to get, but it doesn't fit with Aussie culture - no one likes a crackhead at a party. MDMA is much more chill, and the vibes you get from them are far less problematic.

[@beresfordthompson1370]

There are a few police tv shows over here. Highway patrol is another good one which covers speeding, w reckless driving, hoon driving and rbt.

[@carolinehaf21]

Re the guy at 12:10 - he's saying he took it a couple of days ago - that may or may not be true for one thing. If he tests positive, his body is still under the influence as in - his reflexes can still be impaired (over or under responsive) and his judgement impaired as well. Impulsiveness is particularly heightened with stimulants. People with stimulants are more likely to run red lights, overtake unsafely etc and take more risks than when they're not under the influence. Whether they "feel" impaired or not - they still are (especially if mixed with lack of sleep alcohol or other tablets). We also don't know how he feels. He might be tired from not sleeping due to being wired for the past couple of days on MDMA and he can then fall asleep at the wheel. These are the many reasons for the other people on the road he shouldn't be driving under the drug influence whether he "appears" to be impaired or not. He is just as a function of having that amount of that type of drug in his system. We have a heavy ad campaign for years to warn that those drugs can stay that long in your system so don't drive.