1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.

Police Unable to Blood Test "Legal Party Pill Driver" as he had NOT Consumed Alcohol

Discussion in 'Article Archive' started by ~lostgurl~, Jun 4, 2006.

  1. ~lostgurl~

    ~lostgurl~ Platinum Member & Advisor Donating Member

    Reputation Points:
    Dec 23, 2004
    from Australia

    Driver on party pills frustrates police

    05 June 2006

    The officer who caught a 17-year-old man driving after he had taken 40 party pills said police were often powerless to respond to people driving under the influence of the legal pills.

    The 17-year-old was pulled over on Friday night when he was seen to be driving erratically. He told police he had taken 40 party pills. Constable Sean Drader believed it was not the first case but police had no way of knowing for sure because they did not have the power to extract blood from those they thought were under the influence of drugs. A medical examination was ordered but a blood test could not be done because the man had not consumed alcohol, Mr Drader said.

    The man is due to appear in court tomorrow on four charges: careless driving, driving under the influence, possession of a cannabis pipe and driving while disqualified.

    The party-pill culture was huge but it was the public's responsibility to lobby government, he said. "It's not up to the police to influence government. The public has to go to their local member and do something about it."

    Young people took party pills and then drove because they thought it was legal. "But if you're driving so poorly that you are all over the road, then it is illegal.

    "No one has done any tests to say what the legal limit should be." The young man could have taken other drugs such as methamphetamine, cocaine or cannabis. "It's completely impossible to measure it," Mr Drader said.

    The man told him the pills contained benzylpiperazine (BZP). "It's made out of cattle worming pills and one of the side-effects is an anti-depressant. "We know that some shops have been selling double-strength pills and they are now selling at 100 percent."

    The man told him he couldn't feel anything if he took fewer than four party pills. "At $10 each, that's a lot of money for a 17-year-old to be spending. "He also said he could get the stuff in powder form. That's pretty concerning."

    A Lakes District Hospital spokesman said the hospital treated about two to three cases a week involving party pills. Side-effects included altered consciousness, anxiety or increased alertness, dehydration and difficulty in breathing. Most cases also involved alcohol, making it difficult to determine the side-effects of the pills. How much information patients were willing to divulge also had an impact, the spokesman said.

    Herbal Heaven manager Brent Adamson said he doubted the man took 40 pills.
    "I don't know how big he is but he must be a monster to be able to take 40 pills. Two is enough."

    Police were deliberately trying to push the issue of party pills in order to get more funding from the Government.

    "I hope that the police will do their due diligence and work out if it was party pills or something else," Mr Adamson said.

    Anyone who sold pills to a person under 18 years from their shop faced instant dismissal, he said.


    {Not a bad idea to claim "Party Pills" caused careless driving. Much better to have on your criminal record "Driving under the influence of Legal Party Pills" than "Driving under the influence of heroin/methamphetamine/GHB" .....Laura}

    {The blood test law definately works in favour of drug users, but against consumers of alcohol - what kind of example is that setting - that if we want to drive home we shouldn't drink but can consume copious amounts of drugs and drive home (not carelessly obviously) and will not get in trouble with the law. And if the driving is sub standard just blame it on the legal party pills. I think anyone viewing your criminal record would laugh at that as a conviction, not hold it against you...... Laura76}
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2017
  2. KorSare

    KorSare Titanium Member

    Reputation Points:
    Dec 29, 2005
    30 y/o from Canada
    Reports like these kind of make me shake my head in frustration.....

    It is the reckless, irresponsible actions of these pill poppers that invoke restrictive action towards legal recreational substances.

    Then again, you could be right, Laura. Perhaps the 17 year old driver was under the influence of an illegal substance, and "wisely" chose to cover his own ass and blame the legal party pills.

    So let me rephrase. It is the reckless, irresponsible actions of these types of individuals that invoke further restrictive action towards recreational substances in general. Not to mention giving them a bad rep. Next thing you know, some kid under the influence of salvia will kill a family of 4 in a head-on collision. Can you say "goodbye legality"?

    Like the article states, it is the public's duty to lobby government. I just hope that blood tests for people suspected of driving under the influence of anything, do not become mandatory.

    Then again, those smart enough to know when their motor skills (no pun intended) are significantly impaired, are hopefully smart enough not to be providing a few tonnes of steel any velocity. But there's always one in the crowd.....

    On another note, did anyone else find it odd that the driver gave the officer so much information?

    "Yes officer, I've been taking party pills. about 40 of them. yes, they're legal. I took about 40 of them. They contain BZP. I pay about 10 bucks for them. Oh, did I mention I can get the drug in powdered form? My mother's friend's brother also takes BZP...... we go fishing together sometimes. He's buying a new car on Wednesday......."

    People these days......:confused:
  3. matti_2003

    matti_2003 Gold Member

    Reputation Points:
    Dec 27, 2004
    from U.K.
    40 pills, sounds like an expensive night
  4. ~lostgurl~

    ~lostgurl~ Platinum Member & Advisor Donating Member

    Reputation Points:
    Dec 23, 2004
    from Australia
    Update - Youth 'joking' about swallowing 40 party pills

    Youth 'joking' about swallowing 40 party pills

    03 July 2006
    A Central Otago youth who boasted to police that he had taken 40 party pills before driving has been jailed for six months for a variety of offences.

    Daniel James Stronach, 17, a painter, pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of a drug when he appeared in Queenstown District Court last month. Stronach also admitted possessing a pipe for using cannabis, operating a vehicle carelessly and driving while suspended.
    He was remanded on bail for sentence, but a day later assaulted two men in Balclutha and was arrested and remanded in custody to appear in Dunedin District Court.

    Stronach pleaded guilty in court last week to assault and was sentenced to six months' jail on that charge and terms ranging from one to four months on 10 other charges, including driving under the influence of drugs, unlawfully interfering with a motor vehicle and breaching community work.

    Stronach's lawyer, John Westgate, told the court Stronach had been joking when he told police he had taken 40 party pills. He had wanted to see if police could prove a charge of driving under the influence of drugs.
    Mr Westgate asked Judge Stephen O'Driscoll to give Stronach another chance. He knew his offending arose from drug use and he had decided "no more for me".

    Judge O'Driscoll told Stronach he could not behave as he had during the past six or seven months. He granted Stronach leave to apply for home detention.

    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 10, 2017