[ds968]

This is not fake news ! A California driver is facing a DUI charge for " excessive " caffeine in his system. Only caffeine ! He was stopped by CHP for changing lanes too frequently , given a sobriety test which he passed, then given a toxicology test which revealed no " controlled substances " , other than a high level of caffeine . The CHP and the local D.A. , in spite of the fact that the vehicle code does not specifically list caffeine as a controlled substance, decided to still pursue DUI charges against him.b We've all heard about DUI charges for cold / flu medications, for various prescription drugs, etc . but this has to be a first ! His attorney vowed to file a multi-million dollar suit against the state the moment he wins his client's DUI case.. If you're the judge in that case what do you do ? Do you throw the charge out and deem it to be ridiculous , or do you set a state-wide precedent introducing a new ( and arguably the most common ) " controlled substance " into the vehicle code violations mix ?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[MCL968]

If he is impaired, I don't care what the substance is.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

It would probably have been easier to bring charges against his erratic driving than to punish the cause...either way, I'm glad he got pulled over.

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

http://alerts.nationalsafetycommission.c...ng-car.php

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

California's DUI law bans driving a vehicle under the influence of any drug. Caffeine is a drug. If a person is under the effect of caffeine to the extent that it impairs a person's ability to safely operate a vehicle, they are DUI. I'll bet dollars to donuts if this guy brings a lawsuit based on a DUI for caffeine, it will go nowhere.


Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

I would hope that the legal authorities in CA. use this as an opportunity to raise significant amounts of $ by pulling people over for driving under the influence of caffeine. It makes sense to use this opening as a revenue raiser. Kudos to CA. for showing other states an easy way to raise revenue. Forget hanging around bars. Hang by Starbucks and pull people over as they leave. The enormity of this is austounding.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

So I suppose this means everything and anything, every single element in nature which could potentially impair someone is subject to DUI ?   Spicy foods ?   MSG  ?  Drinking too much water ?  Where does one draw the line ?    I have no problems with a traffic violation for changing lanes as recklessly as alleged,  but a DUI which will cost him $ 5 K to defend because of ...caffeine ?    I call B.S on this one !        

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[MCL968]

California's DUI law bans driving a vehicle under the influence of any drug. Caffeine is a drug. If a person is under the effect of caffeine to the extent that it impairs a person's ability to safely operate a vehicle, they are DUI. I'll bet dollars to donuts if this guy brings a lawsuit based on a DUI for caffeine, it will go nowhere.


Bill

Agreed, a suit will go nowhere, and DUI is distinctive in that the substance is not the issue. Further, pulling people over does not generate funds, only tickets that actually generate fines, which not all will do.

 

A few years back I was next to a big muscled knothead that was having a meltdown because he missed the light. Clearly a case of roid rage, and he should have been pulled over, tazed a few times, and then ticketed. The signal changed and he lit the tires up and burned through the intersection. He was certainly not drunk, but he was clearly impaired and a danger to society.The spirit of the law deals with impairment, not intoxication, and that has included (historically) fatigue, prescription meds, and driving without your glasses if they are required.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

If I understand you guys correctly, you don't care how unsafely a person is driving, so long as you agree with their impairing substance of choice. If someone is so hyped on on speed, (and yes, caffeine is a form of speed), that they are driving so errectically that they put thmselves and others on the road at risk, you would still give them a pass because you like your Starbucks caramel macchiato?


Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

I wasn't suggesting that , I fully support penalizing the driver for the moving violations , but to my knowledge there is no medical or other empirical evidence of any kind that links caffeine to impairment of one's driving ability ( as opposed to alcohol, pot, otc flu medications, or various other medications whose side effects are well documented ) so adding a DUI charge in this case is , IMO , entirely arbitrary and lackis any valid proof of a connection between the violation and the caffeine in his system. The are some people for which caffeine has the exact opposite reaction vs. the typical effect ; it calms and relaxes them ( I'm one of those BTW ) . So pursuing a DUI against this driver under the assumption of caffeine causing him to act jittery and doing what he was doing becuase of that particular substance is pretty damn speculative .

Secondly, my other point was that it opens the door to an unlimited number of elements which the authorities can argue cause you to be DUI , without any evidence that it does so.


Incidentally , energy drinks contain so many other chemicals beyond just caffeine it's scary ..it's the combination of all those which cause the caffeine to react and turn into an exponentially more potent brew than just a multiple dose of pure coffee .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[biosurfer1]

You guys should really read the actual story. It wasn't the CHP who pulled him over, it was an ABC agent, in an unmarked car who felt the drive cut her off an changed lanes unsafely:

 

"Schwab was driving home from work when he was pulled over by an agent from the <a class="" href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/california">California</a> department of alcoholic beverage control, who was driving an unmarked vehicle. The agent said Schwab had cut her off and was driving erratically.

The 36-year-old union glazier was given a breathalyzer test which showed a 0.00% blood alcohol level, his attorney said. He was booked into county jail and had his blood drawn, but the resulting toxicology report came back negative for benzodiazepines, cocaine, opiates, THC, carisoprodol (a muscle relaxant), methamphetamine/MDMA, oxycodone, and zolpidem.

The sample was screened a second time by a laboratory in Pennsylvania, according to documents provided to the Guardian, where the sole positive result was for caffeine – a substance likely coursing through the veins of many drivers on the road at any given time."

 

The charges were also not filed until 10 MONTHS after the arrest.

 

Sounds to me like an over zealous ABC agent who is trying to flex her muscle. They will lose this case, they will settle the ensuing lawsuit. This is a complete joke and whoever is wasting the taxpayers money by pushing forward to take this to court should be fired.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016...ano-county

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Look at some of the symtoms of caffeine overspdose listed below. I don't think someone should drive who is experiencing hallucinations, confusion, uncontrolled muscle movement, and convulsions, even if it's from coffee. The issue isn't the substance, it's the impairment caused by the substance, regarless of the nature of the substance involved.


Bill



What Are the Symptoms of Caffeine Overdose?

Symptoms

Several types of symptoms occur with this condition. Some symptoms may not immediately alert you that you have had too much caffeine because they may not seem serious. For example, you may experience:


dizziness

diarrhea

increased thirst

insomnia

headache

fever

irritability

Other symptoms are more severe and call for immediate medical treatment. These more serious symptoms of caffeine overdose include:


trouble breathing

vomiting

hallucinations

confusion

chest pain

irregular or fast heartbeat

uncontrollable muscle movements

convulsions

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Bio, thanks for posting the full story , the TV snippet I watched covered none of those details, reporting just a highly simplified and evidently a much condensed version of the event . Still, it does not change the ultimate issue though. which is the alleged driving impairment caused by caffeine justifying a DUI charge and the precedent that could set nationwide with a potential for, as RAP mentioned, the enormity of this being astounding .

I also can't imagine a caffeine DUI conviction prevailing in this case, but I'm concerned if the judge simply does not tods the charge out AND ridicules or at least cautions both the officer/agent and the DA in the process, the possibly of cities, counties, states looking for an additional source of income from traffic violations will get a pass to overreach their authority and look for ways to start a new toxicology category for an element which can be found ( to various degrees and with various effects ) in the system of 85 % of drivers on the road at any given time. ( except Utah :-) :-) ). But then again I couldn't have imagined a lot of things which yet somehow still happened ...


Bill, half of those listed symptoms can also manifest themselves when falling in love ;-) , and the other half after eating spicy food or drinking water while on vacation in Mexico . Heavens forbid a couple should go to Mexico on their honeymoon and drive anywhere ! :-).

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

obviously you guys have not had enough coffee.  i have definitely had enough caffeine to be impaired to the point that driving was out of the question.  ironically i was taking the caffeine so as to be able to keep driving.  i was on a long haul across country, very tired, and took a no-doz.  a few hundred miles, and i took another.  the problem was that the body was STILL TIRED!!!  it's really no different than giving a drunk coffee.  it doesn't make you any less drunk.  you just have a wide awake drunk.  the caffeine kept me awake, but the fatigue was still there.  i was awake AND still slow to react.  at the same time, my heart was racing, i had the jitters, and was incredibly distracted.  just because you are awake does not mean that you are not impaired by the fatigue.  being fatigued to the point of impairment and driving anyway is also against the law.  the other resultant symptoms were also just as dangerous.  i was so focused on my condition, that i was not paying attention to anything else.

 

the problem with caffeine is that it affects the mind much like alcohol in that it impairs judgement.  just like the guy who thinks that one drink does not affect his ability to drive, he thinks that a good cup of coffee will wake him up enough to get home.  the problem with that line of thinking is that he does not have any clue as to his real abilities.  he will make the determination based on how many times he was lucky in the past, rather than actually using test results.  i am just as guilty as the next guy of this.

 

i drink a LOT of coffee, and have no plans to stop.  still, i also realize the results and dangers, and try to take care not to let them mask symptoms that would otherwise impair my ability to drive.

 

as bill points out, it is not the chemical itself that is the issue here, but rather the impairment.  something else to consider is that the chemical would merely be masking and/or exacerbating the impairment, and deliberately taking it could be argued to be committing fraud.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

If we follow that line of thinking, and as I said before , 85 % percent of drivers COULD be driving while impaired, much of the time...morning commute in particular. One person may be affected by a single cup of coffee to the same degree as another one may be after having a dozen cups. So what do you do, start giving fitness to drive toxicology tests to everyone pulled over for a moving violation ? That's just absurd.


I think it's far more dangerous to drive with flip flops ( which seems to be the footwear of choice for waaay too many people ) in the last few years , why don't we haul those people to jail instead of targeting the coffee-infused ?


Sheesh, we should probably ban all trucking in this country if we follow that line of thought.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Dan, you still seem to be focusing on the substance instead of the impairment. Either you don't beleive that an overdose of caffeine can actually have a negative impact on driving ability, or you beleive that caffeine addled drivers should have a free pass, regardless of how much danger they present to themselves and others. I guess I can understand your position IF you don't beleive any amount of caffeine can possibly diminish driving ability. Of course such a belief is clearly inaccurate from a scientific standpoint. Your apparent fear that everyone will now be DUI because they had a cup of coffee is not well grounded. No one is suggesting a per se caffeine law, such as we have for alcohol. No one is calling for "drink a cappuccino, go to jail". To get a conviction, the prosecution would still have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was actually impaired to the extent that they could not operate a motor vehicle in a reasonably safe manner. Such proof includes the officer's empirical observations of the erratic driving. Do you really beleive that it is virtually impossible for an overdose of caffeine to render a person in such a condition? Or do you beleive that a person driving in a dangerous manner due to impairment should be allowed to drive if the impairment was the result of a caffeine overdose? Or is it that you just don't beleive it is possible to OD on caffeine?


Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Neither of the above actually, of course a specific individual COULD overdose on caffeine to the point of arguably impairing their driving ability, but nearly ANYTHING else can have the same effect , and it's probably a million to one chance anyone can OD on caffeine to the point of impairment . So what I'm saying is that introducing the most common stimulant ( if you want to call it that ) considering that 86 % of adult Americans have at least one cup of coffee daily , as a potential cause for a DUI charge is beyond absurd given the time , effort and expenses associated with precisely what you described would be required to be proven in order to link the cause and effect , which again I believe would be so rare it's crazy to waste everyone's time with the nonsense . We're really talking about nearly everyone on the road ! Besides, I'm becoming more and more weary about governmental agencies inching toward a nanny state and draconian rules, and I think this new twist on things would just give the. yet one more excuse to target the largest segment of population in history.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Dan, you obviously don't get it. You would give a free pass to someone driving while convulsing, hallucinating, and experiencing uncontrolled muscle movement. Most of the rest of us wouldn't. And don't kid yourself that caffeine isn't a stimulant. At least if you're the guy who gets creamed by the impeded driver, you can always sit in your wheelchair and say "it's o.k., it was only caffeine".

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

No, I think you're completely missing the point here : first and foremost the severe symptoms you list associated with caffeine are so rare, it does not even get on the exterior perimeter of a statistics radar ; it may literally be a one in one million people who might experience convulsions or hallucinations or for that matter anything more than a slightly elevated state of being "wired ". So theoretically if some driver gets pulled over and happens to have a common cold ( no meds of any kind taken for it ) which causes him to be a less than ideal driver, and the toxicology test reveals a viral infection present in his system , would you advocate not only him being charged with a DUI, but also a sweeping movement to test everyone stopped for a traffic infraction and have them medically tested for any potential virus or bacteria in their system ? Sounds like you're drumming up for some business Bill, you'd win every single case hands down on your client being charged with a caffeine violation. There is really no medical evidence supporting caffeine as having a a sufficiently material impact on physiology - the "possible" side effects you posted are the typical warnings you hear and see associated with any medications sold ; highly improbable, extremely uncommon, but yes once in a million cases it could conceivablly happen. In the late 90s we had a truck driver file a worker's compensation claim in which he alleged excessive coffe drinking that day was a factor to his accelerating and side swiping a warehouse ..suffering minor injuries in the incident . His attorney and our attorney had evaluations performed by two different , highly reputable credible physicians both of whom agreed the link between his coffee consumption and so-called impairment was baseless . Of course, that was many many moons ago, and this was just one individual , but it's the first thing I thought of when I heard this CA driver's story . Maybe my opinion is tainted by that old claim but I'm still trying to underscore the danger of having law enforcement start targeting a substance that no one until this particular case happened had ever considered to be capable of impairing judgment and / or driving ability. Dehydration may cause similar symptoms to the ones noted above, so should we test every driver pulled over for a violation if there is suspicion they may be impaired , and subsequently charge them with not drinking enough fluids if the test results reveal they're dehydrated ? Actually coffee dehydrates you , so maybe not a good example, lol, but what I'm driving at ( no pun ) is that without proof that coffee is anymore influential than a fruit juice, where do you draw the line for charging people with DUIs ? That's the reason I am focusing on tje substance instead of the impairment ; there are countless other things which can cause inpariment , coffee hadn't been proven to be one of those . But maybe new science will reveal it does cause much bigger problems than any previous tests have shown . So I suppose it deserves the benefit of the doubt, until that absolute conclusion is reached, as is the case with alcohol and " real " drugs .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Dan, you still are missing the point. I agree that a person being so under the influence of caffeine that it impedes their ability to drive is a very rare occurance. But it's not impossible, it can happen. If it does happen, should the person be subject to a DUI because they were under the unfluence of any drug, as the law provides, or should the person get a pass beause the drug involved is caffeine? Your hypothetical about a person being ill is not relevant, as the statute in question does not address such a situation. Rather it addresses impairment caused by drugs, any drug. It is not uncommon for people to be impaired by medication. I, for one, shouldn't be driving if I take Actifed for allergies. If I were to drive in such a state, wove all over the road, and crashed into a telephone pole, I could easily be prosecuted for DUI. That doesn't mean that everyone driving on Actifed will be subject to conviction for DUI. It really is quite simple: if your driving is impaired to the extent that you cannot safely operate a motor vehicle due to ingestion of any drug, you are DUI. If you are driving safely, regardless of any drug in your system, you are not DUI. The only exception in California is alcohol where, if you have a certain amount in your system, you are per se DUI. No one is calling for DUI's for everyone who had a cup of coffee with breakfast.


It comes down to this:


1. Do you beleive it is possible, regardless of how rare, for a person to overdose on caffeine to the extent that it results in unsafe driving?


If your answer is "yes", then


2. Should that person who is driving in an unsafe manner get a pass because the drug involved is caffeine?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.