4 ms·

Thanks for you comment, and we certainly respect your opinion. Being conscious of the impact of our device on groups that have been historically target by polic

Thanks for you comment, and we certainly respect your opinion. Being conscious of the impact of our device on groups that have been historically target by police is something that is on our mind a lot. I think it is important to recognize that the way drug impaired driving is tackled today is very subjective. Police administer an field sobriety test that involves walking in a straight line, standing on one foot, and touching their nose. They are then able to arrest the individual solely based on their opinion regarding impairment, which is susceptible to their personal biases. Our device can take out a lot of the guesswork and help eliminate biases from the equation. Also, our device it not assisting police it arresting people for owning or even selling cannabis, just using it before driving. Not only that, but by detecting only recent use, it will reduce the instances of frequent users being improperly charged due to blood tests with large windows of detection.

computerex 7y ago
Have you guys actually established a relationship between presence of THC and actual driving impairment? I doubt it. Seems to me that you guys are just out to make a quick buck and the way you are framing the rhetoric is just a nice story. At what levels of THC concentrations is driving empirically impaired and is this measurement consistent across everyone? What evidence do you have to support that THC impairs driving?
- aianus 7y ago
  > At what levels of THC concentrations is driving empirically impaired and is this measurement consistent across everyone? What evidence do you have to support that THC impairs driving? The Government of Canada has already legislated [0] that THC impairs driving and that the per-se limit is 2ng of THC per ml of blood. I'm certain this YC company had nothing to do with lobbying for that legislation and that it would have been passed with or without them. Surely if there is someone to blame for setting nonsensical limits, you should blame the government and the hysterical voters who elect them. [0] https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/qa2-qr2.html https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/qa2-qr2.html
  - computerex 7y ago
    I'm not sure why you mention Canadian legislation when this product is for America. Secondly, Canadian government setting these constraints doesn't mean that THC impairs driving. What is their evidence? Laws aren't always supported by science and data.
strict9 7y ago
Your response here directly conflicts with what you say in the opening paragraph. Response to my comment: >"our device it not assisting police it arresting people for owning or even selling cannabis, just using it before driving." Product desription from original post: >"... we're imagining a world where there are one of our devices in every police car in North America." And it sounds like a dystopian nightmare. This isn't about improving anything but getting a slice of the pie that serves the law enforcement industrial complex. The same one that disproportionately targets minorities and those without the means to defend themselves in court. And that's just the intended use case, much less other use cases that it's applied to. Truly awful product idea that will make society much worse off.

computerex 7y ago

Have you guys actually established a relationship between presence of THC and actual driving impairment? I doubt it. Seems to me that you guys are just out to make a quick buck and the way you are framing the rhetoric is just a nice story. At what levels of THC concentrations is driving empirically impaired and is this measurement consistent across everyone? What evidence do you have to support that THC impairs driving?

aianus 7y ago
> At what levels of THC concentrations is driving empirically impaired and is this measurement consistent across everyone? What evidence do you have to support that THC impairs driving? The Government of Canada has already legislated [0] that THC impairs driving and that the per-se limit is 2ng of THC per ml of blood. I'm certain this YC company had nothing to do with lobbying for that legislation and that it would have been passed with or without them. Surely if there is someone to blame for setting nonsensical limits, you should blame the government and the hysterical voters who elect them. [0] https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/qa2-qr2.html https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/sidl-rlcfa/qa2-qr2.html
- computerex 7y ago
  I'm not sure why you mention Canadian legislation when this product is for America. Secondly, Canadian government setting these constraints doesn't mean that THC impairs driving. What is their evidence? Laws aren't always supported by science and data.

strict9 7y ago

Your response here directly conflicts with what you say in the opening paragraph. Response to my comment: >"our device it not assisting police it arresting people for owning or even selling cannabis, just using it before driving." Product desription from original post: >"... we're imagining a world where there are one of our devices in every police car in North America." And it sounds like a dystopian nightmare. This isn't about improving anything but getting a slice of the pie that serves the law enforcement industrial complex. The same one that disproportionately targets minorities and those without the means to defend themselves in court. And that's just the intended use case, much less other use cases that it's applied to. Truly awful product idea that will make society much worse off.