Originally Posted by jim goerge:
That's a dam shame. Maybe that track needs to have police field test drivers before they race 
That is one way to deal with it.
Not to debate your idea, Jim, for it has merit, but this goes back to the Tony Stewart-Kevin Ward incident and the debates about drivers, and crews, having illegal substances in their systems.
Sobriety tests for drivers are good - blow in the tube. But now who is going to pay for it? I guess you could charge each driver a certain fee to blow in the tube. If he or she does not they are excluded. You also have to have the local authorities, or testing people, on site to administer the tests. The authorities might "volunteer" their time but professional testing companies are not going to.
And then you get into things other than alcohol, like pot. Now you have blood or urinalysis testing. This takes more time and you do not get results immediately like the breathalyzer.
And we are only talking about drivers here. What about crews? If a crewman toked up the day before the race night and still can pee positive for a test, is he guilty of anything at the present time?
On one hand, addressing the issue and taking action is a HUGE undertaking. On the other hand, if events like this continue where one bad apple can spoil it for all, the track itself is going to have a bigger issue with possible legal action eventually being taken.
But a good point you make, Jim. Don't get me wrong. The subsequent undertaking, however, is mind-boggling. Maybe it can start with the random pill draw for heats. You draw a certain pill, you blow in the tube or pee in the bottle?
