Hear we go again: ‘Mobile drug testing, there is no escaping it’. But there’s a very large defect in this statement by the NSW Police Force.
When someone wants to buy a product that involves chemicals it is required by law that the product for sale lists what the chemicals are and the safety measures to be taken.
If someone happens to be stopped for a roadside drug test, there is a very sound reason to ask the police officer what are the chemicals that are present on the stick they want you to lick.
When this happened to me I was told it was nothing and to proceed with the testing. This is the defect that exists with the drug testing.
Being chemical sensitive the only option I have is to refuse the test and put my case before the court.
I have this information from the ombudsman as I inquired about the chemicals involved in the drug test and as it stands by law I am breaking The Law if I refuse the drug test.
From my own research, the chemicals impregnated on the drug test stick are not suitable for human consumption and there are no indications from the police or the testing device what the chemicals are, that they want me to ingest.
If I am stopped again for the drug test I will be facing court to put my case. It is very reasonable to expect a full disclosure from the police of the chemicals involved in the test, that they want me to ingest.
They are classifying me as a law breaker if I say no to the test.
Something is wrong with the drug testing laws. Say no to the test and ask the court for a full disclosure of the chemicals involved in the drug test.
Then time is needed to research the implications of the effect of the chemicals on a human being.
Robert Podhajsky, Ocean Shores
Spot on, Robert. I have been wondering how to handle being tested if it ever comes up (I’m less likely to be stopped randomly as I am old and drive a new car). I have had tongue cancer in the past and the thought of licking some filthy chemical in order to prove I don’t take drugs is a worry. I hope I will have the courage to refuse!
As a cyclist and motorist who needs to share the road with people who might have taken drugs that impair driving, can I suggest that if you do not wish the take the test than do not drive a car.
There are no “chemicals” on the swab – the brew in the test tube however is ‘commercial-in-confidence’ and we all know what a wonderful catch-all get out that is for bureaucracy.
yeah yes its wrong that the australian laws on drug driving issues n also drink driving hve you to pull up..while not driving incorrectly n interupting your travel to .put your health at risk while .yes licking ..injesting a chemical supstance into your body thru tounge..what chemicals n rights do govermnt hve ..to put health off road uses at risk n ..harm of chemicals ..we are ..intoduced to.its a good question .what are we actually given..drugs to invest in more randome rd side ..revenue…be good question even for .sme drug users ..are we ..actually over the limits bfre road side testings .or they atributing to it..make revenue…tell me that n answer that ..question..as do we really trust govermnt .when put at risk off .chemical ..lick stickng ..as it be nice to be warned or told what we are ..intoduced to chemically when fronted with road side testing while driving..what chemicals are used..please let me [email protected] cheers