[ACoochy]

$$ is power fellas ante up

1 of the main reasons ur country finds itself where it is as power has shown to corrupt and in the case of the USA absolute power has absolutely corrupted what was once a mighty country

[ACoochy]

I don't think racing a NASCAR stoned on weed should be taken lightly at all or that posters should be taking that lightly at that point he is taking the lives of everyone racing and at the venue into his own hands. This is a completely different story now, from victim to criminal. He didn't deserve to die but he should not be honored the way he has been and his family should not receive one penny from anyone.

Patron saint right here boyz...

[opie1988]

Racing a car 100+ MPH stoned on weed should not be taken lightly at all nor should posters be should be taking that lightly at that point he is taking the lives of everyone racing and at the venue into his own hands. This is a completely different story now, from victim to criminal. He didn't deserve to die but he should not be honored the way he has been and his family should not receive one penny or skittle from anyone.

Exactly right, Steven.

[INVEGA MAN]

he was on drugs and left his car. case closed. you can also throw the lawsuit out the window. it was like a drunk behind the wheel and gets out of his cars and walks down the middle of the freeway

[Mac4Lyfe]

The only way to explain what he did was that he was high. Who stands almost in the middle of a race track with cars speeding around? That is insane. Racing a car stoned is more of a danger than Stewart could ever be. The worst part is that his family is still trying to fight the decision??? Your son was stoned folks.

[Chi_archie]

do we know from a drug test like that how recent that drug use was?

I thought Marijuana could still be detected like weeks later

its not like he was in the car blazing up in the pitt right before the race, right?

[MoneyLineDawg]

Huge question here that no one in the mainstream has answered:

Is there a test that proves he smoked before the race and was therefore high? Or is this one of those tests where they could tell he had weed in his system from up to 45 days before the accident?

They are all reporting it as he was impaired at the time of the crash but not one has specified details

If all they did was find THC in his system (and couldn't tell if it was because he was 100% high that night), it's pretty much worthless and pretty disingenuous of the media iMO

[MoneyLineDawg]

he was on drugs and left his car. case closed. you can also throw the lawsuit out the window. it was like a drunk behind the wheel and gets out of his cars and walks down the middle of the freeway

So if alcohol was detectable in your system for a month+ and you drank 3 weeks ago, would you consider yourself drunk while driving if you crashed your car tonight? Unless they can tell he smoked within hours before he drove, it's the same thing

[Mac4Lyfe]

I worked with the company that created the hair test for drug use. Using urine, blood and hair can give you an accurate account of use. Look at the chart below. By using a combination of tests you can tell if it was a recent single use, chronic habit or something months ago. Most employers are looking for habitual use, which is why the hair test combined with blood or urine works great. If a person test positive for cocaine for example in both urine and hair, most likely they are an addict. If someone coked up a day or 2, it won't show up in the hair yet but it will the blood and urine.

Kevin Ward had to take Marijuana at least in the last 7 days for it to show up in his blood. Depending on the concentration it would be pretty easy to tell if it was a day ago or 7 days ago.

	Urine	Blood	Hair	Saliva
Marijuana - Single Use	1-7+ days	12-24 hrs	Doubtful	Not validated (0 -24 hours?)
Marijuana - Regular Use	7-100 days	2-7 days	Months
Amphetamines	1-3 days	24 hours
Cocaine	1-3 days	1-3 days
Heroin, Opiates	1-4 days	1-3 days
PCP	3-7 days	1-3 days

None of the above matters when it comes to driving while taking drugs.

NY law is that any detected amount of THC can be used as evidence that the driver was under the influence.

Analyses of blood samples obtained more than two hours after the alleged driving may be used as evidence that within two hours of the alleged driving, a person had a THC concentration of 5.00 or more in violation of subsection (1)(b) of this section, and in any case in which the analysis shows a THC concentration above 0.00 may be used as evidence that a person was under the influence of or affected by marijuana in violation of subsection (1)(c) or (d) of this section.

do we know from a drug test like that how recent that drug use was?

I thought Marijuana could still be detected like weeks later

its not like he was in the car blazing up in the pitt right before the race, right?

[Mac4Lyfe]

In that chart above the hair test can detect marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines, heroin, pcp for months.

Also, they strip the hair before testing it so no such excuse as "second hand smoke". If you're sitting in a "clambake" and getting a large dose of second hand smoke, it will show up but it is very easy to extract that one incident. It would take you getting second hand smoke on several occasions to reach most thresholds. Nice excuse Josh Gordon but that shit won't fly.

[ItsMeMrMattE]

have any of yall ever smoked weed? its like a fukin remake of reefer madness in here. the amount you have to have in your system to be considered impaired is negotiable. for some people a couple tokes makes them feel impaired for a few hours for others they could smoke all day and not feel any where near what would be consider impaired. besides lets say he was smoking a joint in his car during the warm up lap. even then the adrenaline released during a race would negate any of the affects from marijuana. tony stewart did not have to take a drug test from what it sounds like. he was observed by a professional and the professional determined he was not under the influence. so for all we know stewart could of been high on meth. but thats not the point here. what matters is that a young guy was killed because of the actions of both parties involved. if ward would have stayed in his car would he have been killed? no. could stewart have driven by in a manner where there was no way ward would have been killed? yes. why a lie detector test isn't issued in situations like these i don't know, but if stewart genuinely felt that it was an accident he would have no problem taking one willingly, just for the sake of wards family if nothing else.

[manny24]

fukkin Smoke tryin' to impress the chicks

what a dikk

[Mac4Lyfe]

What the hell? Tony Stewart was driving his car around a race track like every other racer. Kevin Ward, however, was walking along said race track. How is that both parties fault? Who the hell should have been tested??? Ward acted impaired and was found to be impaired. What excuse can you give for him to test positive for Marijuana? He is a race car driver. That job IMO means no to drugs. He took a huge chance smoking marijuana and then getting in a car. Who really knows if Stewart was impaired. I agree he should have been tested too BUT apparently he wasn't. He didn't do anything but race his car. Ward however acted unusual and irrational by getting out of his car. He definitely should have been tested. Plus since he died, he couldn't refuse a test. Stewart could have refused and they couldn't test him unfortunately.

Here's the problem with the Ward case. He broke protocol by getting out of his car. He actively tried to confront Stewart in his car, ran out in front of several speeding cars and had marijuana in his blood. Maybe if he wasn't high, he could have avoided being hit. His reaction time seemed impaired and his judgement seemed impaired. How can you legitimately take up for a guy that was walking on a race track? That is like walking on the freeway times 10. That is nuts.

have any of yall ever smoked weed? its like a fukin remake of reefer madness in here. the amount you have to have in your system to be considered impaired is negotiable. for some people a couple tokes makes them feel impaired for a few hours for others they could smoke all day and not feel any where near what would be consider impaired. besides lets say he was smoking a joint in his car during the warm up lap. even then the adrenaline released during a race would negate any of the affects from marijuana. tony stewart did not have to take a drug test from what it sounds like. he was observed by a professional and the professional determined he was not under the influence. so for all we know stewart could of been high on meth. but thats not the point here. what matters is that a young guy was killed because of the actions of both parties involved. if ward would have stayed in his car would he have been killed? no. could stewart have driven by in a manner where there was no way ward would have been killed? yes. why a lie detector test isn't issued in situations like these i don't know, but if stewart genuinely felt that it was an accident he would have no problem taking one willingly, just for the sake of wards family if nothing else.

[Mac4Lyfe]

You said yourself that if Ward would have stayed in his car, he would not have been killed. You have proven the defenses case. Ward basically killed himself.

Does it matter if Stewart sped up, slowed down, swerved, etc.? Maybe Stewart thought Ward had a gun so he tried to speed up. Maybe he had a bat? He definitely had a helmet. That could be a weapon if thrown at a moving vehicle. We don't need a lie detector test because we don't need to know the mindset of Stewart. He could have felt threatened by Ward on the track. Wouldn't you? Ward did something totally unexpected. He created a dangerous situation not just for him but others. What if Stewart would have swerved, jumped off the track and killed someone else?

[ItsMeMrMattE]

2 questions for you maclyfe. have you ever smoked weed? and do you think at any point tony stewart saw ward get out of his car after the initial crash?

[MoneyLineDawg]

I know about laws and all that but if someone smoked a day before the race or an hour before the race, that is the difference between being impaired or not

How can they tell he was high during the race like they are reporting?

[Mac4Lyfe]

You can tell how long ago the person smoked based on the concentration of THC in the blood. High concentration means very recent use. Low level means longer time between smokes.

But the law in NY does not care the level. If any marijuana is detected in the blood, you are considered under the influence. Any amount.

I know about laws and all that but if someone smoked a day before the race or an hour before the race, that is the difference between being impaired or not

How can they tell he was high during the race like they are reporting?

I've never smoked weed before... only inhaled.

I'm not sure Stewart saw him on the track. It was very dark, he was wearing black and he was very close to the car in front of Stewart. I've seen the video at least 30 times and it looked like Ward initially was going after the car in front of Stewart. It took him a bit to realize where Stewart's car was and he started walking towards it. Stewart is coming around the corner and really had milliseconds to react. I really don't think he wanted to hit him. He might have had a flash thought to hit him but that doesn't mean he intentionally ran him over. The guy is in the middle of the road for God's sake.

2 questions for you maclyfe. have you ever smoked weed? and do you think at any point tony stewart saw ward get out of his car after the initial crash?

[MoMoneyMoVaughn]

Upon further review, the ruling on the field is overturned.

[MoneyLineDawg]

You can tell how long ago the person smoked based on the concentration of THC in the blood. High concentration means very recent use. Low level means longer time between smokes.

But the law in NY does not care the level. If any marijuana is detected in the blood, you are considered under the influence. Any amount.




I've never smoked weed before... only inhaled.

I'm not sure Stewart saw him on the track. It was very dark, he was wearing black and he was very close to the car in front of Stewart. I've seen the video at least 30 times and it looked like Ward initially was going after the car in front of Stewart. It took him a bit to realize where Stewart's car was and he started walking towards it. Stewart is coming around the corner and really had milliseconds to react. I really don't think he wanted to hit him. He might have had a flash thought to hit him but that doesn't mean he intentionally ran him over. The guy is in the middle of the road for God's sake.

I know you are "considered" under the influence if you smoked 2 weeks ago or whatever under some bogus law but that doesn't tell the real truth and that's my problem with this whole thing......

Can you tell if he smoked a shit ton the night before the race vs right before the race based on the THC blood level?

Basically it's being reported everywhere that he was "high on marijuana" during the race.....I have a real problem with this if they are not positive about this.....With a blood alcohol level it's pretty cut and dry, but I'm not sure about thc levels

High or not, it was a real dumb move that cost him his life

[ItsMeMrMattE]

as someone who has smoked plenty of weed before, the only thing that it had to do with this accident is that it gave stewart a loop hole. i wouldn't doubt that his lawyer popped a bottle of champagne when the toxicology reports came in. mac4lyfe your statements on stewart possibly feeling threatened are ridiculous and we will just agree to disagree on whether or not he saw ward.

[Mac4Lyfe]

Yes, you can tell if someone smoked a bunch a few hours versus the day before based on concentration.

I have no idea how or what they tested. I think they just tested the blood and found small amounts of marijuana but are reporting it that he was under the influence under NY law. If they knew he was over 5.0 they would have said it, meaning that he was smoking a few hours before the race. Good spin for Stewart but bad for Ward's estate because they really can't say yes or no that he wasn't affected by using.

It is very stupid to smoke any amounts of marijuana for certain jobs in most states, even when legal. If you get in an accident or screw up on the job and you are found with trace amounts, you are pretty much fvukked.

I know you are "considered" under the influence if you smoked 2 weeks ago or whatever under some bogus law but that doesn't tell the real truth and that's my problem with this whole thing......

Can you tell if he smoked a shit ton the night before the race vs right before the race based on the THC blood level?

Basically it's being reported everywhere that he was "high on marijuana" during the race.....I have a real problem with this if they are not positive about this.....With a blood alcohol level it's pretty cut and dry, but I'm not sure about thc levels

High or not, it was a real dumb move that cost him his life

[MoneyLineDawg]

as someone who has smoked plenty of weed before, the only thing that it had to do with this accident is that it gave stewart a loop hole. i wouldn't doubt that his lawyer popped a bottle of champagne when the toxicology reports came in. mac4lyfe your statements on stewart possibly feeling threatened are ridiculous and we will just agree to disagree on whether or not he saw ward.

Exactly...a loophole. Maybe he was high/impaired during the race but logic/my gut tells me that he probably smoked on his off days and it's being reported disingenuously that he "was high".... I just want the real truth. I mean imagine alcohol stayed in your system for a month and police could charge you with a DUI if you got drunk 2 weeks before an accident or something? Crazy....

Yes, you can tell if someone smoked a bunch a few hours versus the day before based on concentration.

I have no idea how or what they tested. I think they just tested the blood and found small amounts of marijuana but are reporting it that he was under the influence under NY law. If they knew he was over 5.0 they would have said it, meaning that he was smoking a few hours before the race. Good spin for Stewart but bad for Ward's estate because they really can't say yes or no that he wasn't affected by using.

It is very stupid to smoke any amounts of marijuana for certain jobs in most states, even when legal. If you get in an accident or screw up on the job and you are found with trace amounts, you are pretty much fvukked.

That's interesting, wish they would tell us the full details on if they could tell that he was in fact smoking hours before his race

It makes a world of difference

I think during a lawsuit, Wards family will definitely hire a bunch of experts on the matter to prove that he wasn't high at the time....But again, he might have been....We simply don't know at this point

[Mac4Lyfe]

It's a huge loop hole, I agree...

But isn't it conceivable that he didn't see Ward until it was too late? It was dark and he was wearing black? Isn't it also conceivable that he hit the accelerator out of surprise or even to speed past him? Have you ever seen a deer or armadillo at the last minute and freeze because you're not sure what to do? Did Stewart ever swerve? Didn't look like it. He ran the same line as the car in front of him. If he wanted to hit him, wouldn't he had hit him with the hood?

We will never find out Stewart's state of mind. It does not matter. Ward is walking on a race track. How do you not see the deadly error in that?

as someone who has smoked plenty of weed before, the only thing that it had to do with this accident is that it gave stewart a loop hole. i wouldn't doubt that his lawyer popped a bottle of champagne when the toxicology reports came in. mac4lyfe your statements on stewart possibly feeling threatened are ridiculous and we will just agree to disagree on whether or not he saw ward.

[PaperTrail07]

Weed was a non-factor we all know that $$ is power we all saw what happened NO CHARGES lol...

[PaperTrail07]

The jails are not filled with rich individuals -pretty simple

[manny24]

drugs are bad mmkay?

and marijuana is a drug mmkay?

so marijuana is bad mmkay?

[ChalkyDog]

drugs are bad mmkay?

and marijuana is a drug mmkay?

so marijuana is bad mmkay?

Valid argument. Not sure on its soundness.

[Mac4Lyfe]

I'm thinking the defense was overjoyed that he failed toxicology. It really doesn't matter to them if he was smoking during the race or a week ago because the LAW says he was driving while impaired. We all know that's bullshit but it's the law. No way would Stewart be culpable once they found that out.

Now the civil trial could be different but the defense has a great case with the results because they will always point out that Ward broke the law. They will then eat their lunch by showing that Ward was an irresponsible kid, not only by breaking the law but by getting out of his car and running on a track with cars racing like a toked up reefer madman. They won't need the toxicology by that point because the main sticking point that we ALL know is that if Ward would have stayed in his car, he would be alive today. The drugs really don't matter.

Exactly...a loophole. Maybe he was high/impaired during the race but logic/my gut tells me that he probably smoked on his off days and it's being reported disingenuously that he "was high".... I just want the real truth. I mean imagine alcohol stayed in your system for a month and police could charge you with a DUI if you got drunk 2 weeks before an accident or something? Crazy....

That's interesting, wish they would tell us the full details on if they could tell that he was in fact smoking hours before his race

It makes a world of difference

I think during a lawsuit, Wards family will definitely hire a bunch of experts on the matter to prove that he wasn't high at the time....But again, he might have been....We simply don't know at this point

[ItsMeMrMattE]

his state of mind does matter if he was trying to buzz him. but we will never know because no one can make him take a lie detector test (ju$tice) and there is no way he will take one voluntarily.

[Ghenghis Kahn]

if you do hair test, even if you smoke for one day, it can show up on a drug test for at least 3 months.

this is some bullshit. media trying to crucify this kid and making him out to be some stoner that went nuts.

[Mac4Lyfe]

It is very difficult to determine a defendants state of mind. Polygraphs are inadmissible in the state of NY even if both parties agree.

his state of mind does matter if he was trying to buzz him. but we will never know because no one can make him take a lie detector test (ju$tice) and there is no way he will take one voluntarily.

[Mac4Lyfe]

They took Ward's blood. That test means that he definitely smoked marijuana within the last 7 days. The concentration of THC in the blood will show if he was smoking close to the race or

Hair is not a real good test for long term marijuana use. Most companies use hair test for other drugs.

It takes multiple uses to test positive in hair under normal drug use. A one time use will not be above the cutoff level

if you do hair test, even if you smoke for one day, it can show up on a drug test for at least 3 months.

this is some bullshit. media trying to crucify this kid and making him out to be some stoner that went nuts.

[Kermit]

I don't care what toxicology tests were performed, Stewart flat out throttled and buzzed the kid during a caution to scare and intimidate him and he ended up killing him. You don't hit the fukking throttle during a caution like that. Are we supposed to believe that it was a coincidence? Bull-fukking-shit.

[Ghenghis Kahn]

lol mac4lyfe the child abuser chiming in on weed. do you really think ward was high when he was racing? c'mon pal. do you really believe the bullshit the media is feeding you? honestly, doesn't surprise me one bit you eat that shit up.

[Fidel_CashFlow]

Ward had traces of marijuana in his system .

Thank god Tony Stewart took his life away before Ward murdered thousands of innocent people