Marijuana: Facts, Myths, and plain old Stupidity.

[CONAN]

That is a change from your original stance so nice job seeing the light.

Now if you want to argue where that limit is than fine. Your study says the limit is 5 ng/ml in blood. And that same study says that can be reached with one puff easily.

There's also obviously a time limit on how messed up you are and many factors go into how long that lasts. But it does exist and driving during that period is not good. And there are no ninja secret driving techniques that mitigate the effects.

I'm gonna hang with this.

 

[SaltyDawg]

If you fail a roadside sobriety test, there ought to be some penalty, just like if you get caught driving while texting/putting on your makeup/jerking off.

Unfortunately, you can't test for THC the same way you can for alcohol...if you could, I'd be all for a similar system as is in place for drunk driving (minus the mandatory religious brainwashing at AA).

Actually, driving while texting/putting on your makeup/etc isn't illegal everywhere.

Like you said, there is no way to test it like alcohol. So this will remain as the last sticking point with all the people who are fighting to keep marijuana illegal.

You can't really have it be a judgement call. That would be a judicial nightmare. People that are actually high would be getting off, while people that only smoked once 2 weeks ago would be going to jail for driving while high. There either needs to be a standard, which can be tested and proven, or it needs to be legal.

 

[Scat]

So do you think people who legally smoke weed should have to forfeit their license to drive? Or what do you propose happens when someone gets pulled over, given a test, and marijuana is detected from 2 weeks ago? There is no way to prove if it was from 2 weeks ago or not, you're either clean or dirty.

If you have a root canal on Tuesday and take a single lortab for pain and then hit someone on Thursday, when the cops do a blood draw you are going to be busted for driving while "intoxicated" even if the lortab effects wore of 48 hours ago. The burden of proof that you weren't high at the time of the accident would be on you. Put simply, there are consequences for using drugs, legal or not.

 

[SaltyDawg]

If you have a root canal on Tuesday and take a single lortab for pain and then hit someone on Thursday, when the cops do a blood draw you are going to be busted for driving while "intoxicated" even if the lortab effects wore of 48 hours ago. The burden of proof that you weren't high at the time of the accident would be on you. Put simply, there are consequences for using drugs.

I honestly don't know about that. I have no idea how long a lortab stays in your system, or if there is even a test to detect it. I have not researched any of that.

It doesn't matter though, because we're not talking about lortabs here, we're talking about a (theoretically) legal marijuana. You can't really legalize marijuana if it in fact is a huge danger on the roads and there is no way to test for people being under the influence when driving.

I'm guessing when you get a prescription for lortabs they tell you not to drive for 48 hours or whatever (if it will in fact get you sent to jail). But if marijuana was legal, it would still show up in your system several weeks or even months after using it- long after the affects have worn off.

Now if it is legal, and you are not under the influence when driving, then why should you go to jail for testing positive? And at the same time, if it's super dangerous to drive after using it, how can you legalize it with no way to tell who is driving after using it?

The people saying it's bad to drive but it should be legal need to ask themselves, how bad is it to drive and is it worth keeping marijuana illegal to make sure driving after using it is illegal, or is it worth legalizing driving after using it in order to legalize marijuana? Because you have to link driving with normal usage until there is a way to test for influence and not just detect it in your system.

 

[CONAN]

You can't really legalize marijuana if it in fact is a huge danger on the roads and there is no way to test for people being under the influence when driving.

I don't get that. Are you saying that having a legit test for marijuana available to cops would be grounds for legalizing it (like alcohol)? And there are ways to test just not feasible to cops on the road (blood and plasma tests).

 

[SaltyDawg]

I don't get that. Are you saying that having a legit test for marijuana available to cops would be grounds for legalizing it (like alcohol)? And there are ways to test just not feasible to cops on the road (blood and plasma tests).

I am saying that you can't test whether someone is high or not. You can only test whether they have marijuana in their system or not. As we all know, marijuana stays in your system for weeks or months, long after the affect of the drug has worn off. So if marijuana was legal, it would either be illegal for anyone to drive who has used marijuana (even if they aren't high anymore and haven't used it for weeks) or you would have to legalize driving under the influence of it.

 

[Agoxlea]

I found this relevant https://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/Record-High-Americans-Favor-Legalizing-Marijuana.aspx

 

[Nate505]

I was wondering when the new Gallup poll would be out. That is great news. Just a mere 6 years ago it was at 36%. That is a very significant increase. And since the smallest number in favor are the elderly, that number should go nowhere but up.

I expect to see a state to vote it legal in the next 5 years, possibly even next year in Colorado or California or a state like Washington. I am rather excited about this news, especially since I would like to open up a legal shop and run the place with a few of my cousins (I'm working on getting a Master's degree in Accounting, so running the books would be a dream come true). Of course, the assclowns that are the Federal Government will have something to say about it, but their job is to ruin things.

 

[squareinthecircle]

California could be the first. California Medical Association is pushing for it to be legalized, and the American Medical Association wants it decriminalized. Here's a nice article.

https://www.sandiegoreader.com/webl...rnia-medical-association-pushes-pot-legaliza/

 

[GVC]

I expect to see a state to vote it legal in the next 5 years, possibly even next year in Colorado or California or a state like Washington.

The organization in Washington is a bit of a mess. They decided to go big in 2011, hired some big shot defense attorney and journalist to run the campaign, and brought in "experts" to help with marketing and the like. The attorney ended up alienating a lot of the people who'd been working on legalization in Washington for years, and the journalist was a ****ing mess. They got fewer signatures this year than they had in 2010, despite a much bigger budget.

Or at least that's the story I get from someone involved in the process the last few years. You'd think it would be easy to at least get on the ballot in Washington...

 

[CONAN]

I am saying that you can't test whether someone is high or not. You can only test whether they have marijuana in their system or not. As we all know, marijuana stays in your system for weeks or months, long after the affect of the drug has worn off. So if marijuana was legal, it would either be illegal for anyone to drive who has used marijuana (even if they aren't high anymore and haven't used it for weeks) or you would have to legalize driving under the influence of it.

You can test it's just not feasible and not to mention the legalities of roadside blood testing. It's not whether marijuana is in your system it's a matter of how much. No question this is a legit factor in legalization given that driving while high is very dangerous.

 

[Qman]

You can test it's just not feasible and not to mention the legalities of roadside blood testing. It's not whether marijuana is in your system it's a matter of how much. No question this is a legit factor in legalization given that driving while high is very dangerous.

I agree driving impaired whatever the source of impairment should be against the law. Maybe they need to come up with new punishments too. How about a beating with a salt water soaked bamboo stick followed by a forced detox program.