Should a blood drug test be introduced under compulsory legislation for all drivers to submit when stopped by police whether they were in the act of committing a traffic offence or not? Would this Draconian measure prove realistic, fair and above all beneficial to society at large? What are the alternatives or better still are there realistic alternatives to a blood drug test that will either effectively deter or prevent people driving under the influence? Has current legislation proved inadequate, too complex or simply ineffective as a deterrent? The responsibility for the introduction of an effective deterrent ultimately rests with the government although any measures initiated should reflect the action wanted by the population who elected them.

Prevention is better than cure as the saying goes and this is demonstrated most ably by the effective measures that need to be put in place to deter an individual climbing in behind the wheel of a vehicle intoxicated by drugs or alcohol.

High financial penalties and imprisonment are two impositions designed to deter. However by that stage the offence has been committed and someone may well be dead. The real deterrent for this type of crime should exist even before an individual reaches a courtroom to stand trial. In order to achieve such a deterrent legislation needs to be in place that suggests a high risk of capture to anyone taking drugs or alcohol. Introducing a national policing policy in which it is mandatory for every driver stopped by police whether for a road traffic offence or not, to automatically take a blood drug test may appear seriously Draconian but appears to be a measure required to be put ion place to counter the upsurge of drug abuse related driving offences. Anyone who does not pass a blood drug test should be arrested and charged with driving under the influence of drugs. In the case of an individual receiving medication for illness if the drug found in their body is proven to have a detrimental effect on their ability to drive they should be charged and taken before a court for their circumstances to be heard. When a Draconian measure is required it is necessary for it to be mandatory for all.

Today an increase in the numbers dealing in drug abuse has risen to such a degree that current legislation appears to be less than adequate to deal with it. Increasing the risk of arrest is arguably the best deterrent because not only does it force individuals to recognize that their freedom will be at high risk, it also removes the potential danger of someone driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. A blood drug test will in the eyes of the public be considered as a true deterrent should the police have to be provided a blood drug test whenever encountering a motorist at the scene of an accident or simply as a check/stop. The possibility of simply being pulled over and asked to provide a blood drug test even when not driving erratically will prove for many too much of a risk to take.

Failure to pass a blood drug test should also include refusal to take one which should automatically allow an individual to be arrested. Anyone stopped by police who subsequently is able to pass a blood drug test can proceed on their journey safe in the knowledge that the police monitoring their locale. In addition such police action will eventually have an impact on potential offenders by heightening the possibility of arrest through police surveillance checks.

Perhaps the time has arrived for people to ensure their capability to drive through the ownership of home diagnostic tests. For those on drug medication home diagnostic tests would be a method by which they can prevent themselves from committing an offence related to driving with blood alcohol/drug content higher than permitted by legislation.