HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » With Pot Legal, Police Wo...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:25 AM

With Pot Legal, Police Worry About Road Safety

It's settled. Pot, at least certain amounts of it, will soon be legal under state laws in Washington and Colorado. Now, officials in both states are trying to figure out how to keep stoned drivers off the road.

Colorado's measure doesn't make any changes to the state's driving-under-the-influence laws, leaving lawmakers and police to worry about its effect on road safety.

"We're going to have more impaired drivers," warned John Jackson, police chief in the Denver suburb of Greenwood Village.

Washington's law does change DUI provisions by setting a new blood-test limit for marijuana a limit police are training to enforce, and which some lawyers are already gearing up to challenge.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pot-legal-police-worry-road-safety-17723983#.UKSz845rQ0s



Don't see how this can work. So if they catch you driving under the speed limit they are going to draw your blood for a lab test?

64 replies, 3919 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 64 replies Author Time Post
Reply With Pot Legal, Police Worry About Road Safety (Original post)
Seedersandleechers Nov 2012 OP
Major Nikon Nov 2012 #1
Aerows Nov 2012 #18
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #64
Solomon Nov 2012 #2
liberal_at_heart Nov 2012 #3
eShirl Nov 2012 #5
Solomon Nov 2012 #6
SammyWinstonJack Nov 2012 #8
eShirl Nov 2012 #11
eShirl Nov 2012 #9
boston bean Nov 2012 #13
eShirl Nov 2012 #17
azurnoir Nov 2012 #22
AlexSatan Nov 2012 #46
jmowreader Nov 2012 #58
randome Nov 2012 #4
gollygee Nov 2012 #14
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #53
Le Taz Hot Nov 2012 #7
hlthe2b Nov 2012 #10
Daemonaquila Nov 2012 #12
Robb Nov 2012 #16
eridani Nov 2012 #15
sendero Nov 2012 #19
demwing Nov 2012 #39
marmar Nov 2012 #20
vanhalendlrband Nov 2012 #21
azurnoir Nov 2012 #24
immoderate Nov 2012 #32
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #41
cherokeeprogressive Nov 2012 #59
whistler162 Nov 2012 #61
datasuspect Nov 2012 #23
slackmaster Nov 2012 #25
2on2u Nov 2012 #26
BlueJazz Nov 2012 #54
graham4anything Nov 2012 #27
unblock Nov 2012 #28
kydo Nov 2012 #29
PD Turk Nov 2012 #30
WilliamPitt Nov 2012 #31
WCGreen Nov 2012 #33
jberryhill Nov 2012 #36
dem4ward Nov 2012 #34
Eyes of the World Nov 2012 #35
Dr Fate Nov 2012 #37
devilgrrl Nov 2012 #38
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #40
lalalu Nov 2012 #51
adigal Nov 2012 #42
lexx21 Nov 2012 #43
Blue_In_AK Nov 2012 #44
pnwest Nov 2012 #45
snooper2 Nov 2012 #47
Pryderi Nov 2012 #48
Nevernose Nov 2012 #49
mick063 Nov 2012 #50
Blue_In_AK Nov 2012 #55
kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #52
Matariki Nov 2012 #56
BlueMan Votes Nov 2012 #57
kentauros Nov 2012 #60
Smilo Nov 2012 #62
RedCappedBandit Nov 2012 #63

Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:37 AM

1. I can see it now. Fast food drive through lanes will be staked out.

Anyone seen ordering more than 6 Dorito tacos, 4 corn dogs, or 1 order of gut grenades at White Castle will be immediately suspect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:42 AM

18. Anyone ordering

a Dorito taco is suspect. I loved EVERYTHING on the Taco Bell menu - I've probably eaten one of all of them, until that came along. That is yucky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #1)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:55 PM

64. LOL! Look for the ones going about 2 mph thru the fast food lanes, or parked at 7-11....

buying lots of Honeybuns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:44 AM

2. Knew this was going to be the problem. Pot stays

in your system long after the high wears off. They will have to go back to doing field sobriety tests on everyone in addition to breathalyzers. It's going to be a mess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solomon (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:47 AM

3. exactly

impairment is the issue, not what level is in your blood. I agree field sobriety tests may still be the best way to figure out if someone is impaired. If you cannot pass a field sobriety test you shouldn't be driving I don't care what you're on. but patients who happen to still have some in their blood but are not impaired should not be charged with DUID.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solomon (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:11 AM

5. I don't think that's an accurate description of it, actually

It's my understanding that it is a metabolite (or product of the body's metabolization of the pot) that is the substance tested for. It's this that can be detected long after the pot is gone; it's not that the pot itself stays in your system for that long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eShirl (Reply #5)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:14 AM

6. (rolls eyes). Okay. Let me say it this way then. You can

test positive for pot but not be high. That's the fricking point. (Sheesh)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solomon (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:20 AM

8. +1.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SammyWinstonJack (Reply #8)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:28 AM

11. -1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solomon (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:20 AM

9. right back at you



People have been fired for being high at work, days or weeks after smoking a joint, because the available drug test for pot showed positive.

So yeah, sheesh right back at you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Solomon (Reply #6)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:20 AM

13. There are ways to test the active THC to determine if you are high.

they can separate it out.

So, in other words, if you have the inactive THC in your system, they can tell you weren't high and vice versa.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #13)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:31 AM

17. oh good

now, if we can get them to use the more accurate test for current under-the-influence-ness, that will be great

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eShirl (Reply #17)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:15 PM

22. let me get this straight your claiming that if one smokes a joint and tests positive a month later

they're still 'under the influence' have I got that right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #22)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:13 PM

46. That's not what the poster said

 

He/she said that hopefully (if they use tests) they will use one that tests for ACTIVE THC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eShirl (Reply #5)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:22 PM

58. The Marijuana Metabolic Pathway

Let's start with the basics: there is no free THC in leaf marijuana. Pot contains THC-carboxylic acid (THC-COOH). Heating the weed decarboxylates it and releases THC freebase, which is psychoactive.

When you take THC your liver metaabolizes it quickly to 11-OH-THC, which is also psychoactive, acting mainly on the parts of your brain that regulate hunger. IOW this gives you the munchies. Your liver metabolizes 11-OH-THC back to THC-COOH...but body temp isn't high enough to decarboxylate it, which is why you don't stay high for two weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:57 AM

4. Right. Because everyone reacts to pot the exact same way.

No one is going to get tested for blood levels unless they have already exhibited signs of erratic driving. At that point, erratic driving plus marijuana blood level equals impairment and a DUI.

It's the same as when you're drinking. The police aren't going to stop you unless you have already exhibited signs of erratic driving.

There WILL be more accidents. Maybe not a lot but some.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:25 AM

14. My concern

Is that sometimes they automatically do a blood test when someone is in an accident. If you have it in your system but are not high, you might unfairly be blamed for the accident, and even negligent homicide or something, because they found THC in your system even though you were not impaired at that time and therefore the THC would be irrelevant. Also, your insurance could use it as an excuse to not cover you.

I think it should be legal, and I think the issues can be handled, but police, lawmakers, insurance companies, and whoever else might be involved need to be smart about it and well educated, and not respond based on a knee-jerk reaction to the word "marijana" or on their experiences with alcohol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #4)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:45 PM

53. The majority of vehicular accidents have nothing to do with being under the influence

 

of anything.
The statistics speak for themselves

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:18 AM

7. This is such bullshit.

There will be NO change -- including in fast food line. Yuck yuck har har

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:23 AM

10. They will stop to test all drivers pulled to the side of the road, chomping down cheetoes



Seriously, I'd really like to see some evidence that this is a problem. While it has been many years for me, I can honestly say I don't recall my college acquaintances and "tokers" ever getting up to drive anywhere...at least not for hours. Is this now a problem? And if, as I'd imagine, these are drivers who slow down, are they inherently unsafe and demonstrably impaired? Perhaps, but where is the evidence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:18 AM

12. Total non-issue.

Every state has DUI laws based on actual impairment regardless of blood level, which cover driving under the influence of everything from alcohol (if the test is unavailable or a person is impaired despite being under the legal limit) to cocaine to cold medicine. Blood level based charges are absolutely unnecessary. For alcohol, they came into vogue because of the ease of testing, the prevalence of alcohol-related incidents, and the ease of making charges stick with an absolute limit versus making a behavior-based case each time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daemonaquila (Reply #12)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:29 AM

16. Agreed.

But BAC numbers play an important role at sentencing. Public safety may not be affected, but the meting out of justice will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:28 AM

15. Point of information. WA State will require testing for THC ONLY

No metabolite testing at all. I expect the threshold of 5 ng is going to be challenged by medical marijuana users, though. For most people THC is pretty rapidly cleared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:53 AM

19. This is sily...

..... first of all pot may be legal but driving while stoned is not.

Approximately the same number of people who are driving stoned now will be driving stoned later.

And isn't it funny how rarely you read of an accident caused by a stoned, rather than drunk, driver?

This is just cops looking for more funding or back-door complaining about their most easy cash cow, busting dangerous pot smokers, is being taken away. Ignore it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sendero (Reply #19)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:50 PM

39. Speaking from observation only (not personal experience) stoned drivers

drive @ about 15 MPH under the limit, and are hypersensitive to the presence of the police. A cop could be behind every building, beneath every billboard, and around every corner. That granny in a Subaru? Definitely a cop...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 09:00 AM

20. Oh, like the hardcore stoners weren't out driving before the legalization vote.

Much ado about nothing.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 01:47 PM

21. Weed is not impairing at all

Being stoned and driving is not an impairment. I can do everything stoned. I took my full drivers test stoned and passed with flying colors. There is absolutely no reason why Weed should be treated the same alcohol where people drive when they can't walk straight THAT's AN IMPAIRMENT! Not weed! I can out drive anybody in this city stoned including all the police officers. I challenge anybody to prove me wrong.

A lot of times people smoke so much weed that they can't even get stoned. Unlike booze where if you keep drinking you'll either get drunk, black out, or have alcohol poisoning. Xanax, which I took for 2 years, is FAR MORE impairing than weed. And the law here now is even if I smoked last night, which was the last time I smoked at around 9 pm, if I go out right now I'm going to get charged with a DUI. What a joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanhalendlrband (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:22 PM

24. I must qualify that

it all depends on the weed that was smoked, if it was very average run of the mill stuff maybe not so impairing BUT if it was something like BC bud or Gravity for instance it can be very impairing and I certainly wouldn't suggest driving
the differences are similar to drinking 3.2 beer and drinking Everclear

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanhalendlrband (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:35 PM

32. I agree somewhat.

I drive fine when I'm stoned. Actually a bit safer, as I'm more cautious and less aggressive. My problem is I forget where I'm going.

I have friends who become totally paralyzed from pot. I envy them but wouldn't ride with them.

It's hard (impossible?) to determine who and how much people can smoke and drive safely.

--imm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanhalendlrband (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:58 PM

41. A lot depends on the person

I've known people like you with high tolerances that needed a LOT of weed to become impaired. At the other end of the spectrum are people like me, who have complete vision-blocking hallucinations after 3 or 4 hits. And there's a whole wide range in between.

Not everyone can smoke a joint and still drive, just sayin'. There does need to be some sort of standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanhalendlrband (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:30 PM

59. This 35 year toker thinks yer funny with all your bluster and bravado...

So you can "out drive" anybody in your city including police officers when you're stoned? Xbox360? I'll buy that for a dollar!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vanhalendlrband (Reply #21)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:34 PM

61. I know drunks that say the same thing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:19 PM

23. people are already driving while stoned

 

the weed is just legal now?

i give up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #23)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:24 PM

25. I had the same thought. I doubt that legalization is going to result in a significant increase...

 

...in people driving while buzzed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:25 PM

26. I don't see how everyone driving 20 mph could create any problems. n;t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2on2u (Reply #26)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:01 PM

54. LOL!...isn't that the truth. My friends drive so damn slow I have to "edge them on"

"Damn Bob...would you speed the fuck up...I can run faster than this"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:28 PM

27. I am more worried those that want to Secede in Texas driving 85 legally with a gun in the car

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:30 PM

28. i wouldn't say it's "legal", because it's not

as long as it remains illegal against federal law, it's "illegal".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:30 PM

29. what and alcohol is much safer

booze is the worst of all drugs.

its about money - they don't have fast tests for pot intoxican or legal limits. so they can't give out tickets, thats the gripe. besides I'm sure most pot smokers drive now, what all of a sudden when its legal will the amount of stoned drivers spike? Most stoners don't leave the house unless they have to, usually they lay on the sofa watch tv, mess around on their laptop or computer, maybe listen to tunes, play an instrument, draw, write, read and order delivery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:31 PM

30. as already pointed out in the thread

People have already been driving stoned for years. I'd suggest the first thing to do is study the statistics to find out how many accidents have marijuana influence as the sole cause of the accident to see if there is even a problem first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:31 PM

31. Derp

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:37 PM

33. I haven't smoked pot for probably 30 years now...

And every time I was behind the wheel, I was extra carefully and drove about 6 miles an hour...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Reply #33)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:44 PM

36. Yeah, I would drive for hours stoned...

Until figuring out that i had forgotten to turn on the engine and take it out of park.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:40 PM

34. People drink and drive

 

people take prescription meds and drive, people fall asleep while driving. I think those that smoke weed have already been driving if they desire and just because it's legal isn't going to put 1,000's of stoned drivers on the damn road! Give me a break!

If someone wants to smoke weed, chances are they already are legal or not. Making it legal isn't going to make people run out and start smoking weed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:43 PM

35. Because no one drove when it was illegal, right?

 

If it wasn't a problem before, how will it become one now?

Answer? Because its just more bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:45 PM

37. Saw it on the TV. Jemma almost killed those poor children!!

And we know this always happens in the real life too.

My guess is that most of these stoners will target school buses full of kids, or vans full of church goers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 04:51 PM

40. Easy, the same way you treat drunks or those under the influence of meds

DUI.

I don't see why tis s even an issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #40)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:28 PM

51. Thank You

 

That is how I feel. Just enforce the law the same way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:00 PM

42. Right? Pot smokers drive slllooowwwww! Granny and gramps will

Be pulled over by the millions! LOL!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:01 PM

43. I think most of the drivers that they will have to worry about

will be all of the extra Domino's delivery guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:03 PM

44. I doubt there will be many more impaired drivers than before.

People have been smoking it all along; the only thing that changes is that it's now legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:07 PM

45. there will not be one single additional impaired person on the road due to

the new law. everyone who's going to drive while high now that it's legal, have been doing the whole time it wasn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:15 PM

47. 1st, the same amount of "impaired" drivers, second..

Just have the person you pull over play a game of tetris..

That should tell you all you know


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:15 PM

48. I don't have the stamina to bother driving when I'm high. It's what delivery is for. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:17 PM

49. Bullshit. Everyone who wanted to drive high already was

This law isn't going to increase a damned thing; it's just going to decrease the amount of law enforcement money going to fight the Evil Hippy Stoners (and black people).

Anyone who wanted to smoke pot already was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:23 PM

50. As if there are not impaired drivers littering the highway now.

 

Driving with a hamburger in your hand can be considered impaired.

I work for a government contractor that doesn't think twice about people working overtime for 18 hours and then putting them on a two lane highway at 60 mph for a 45 minute drive home.

Why are people are not freaking out about the influence of prescription drugs with the same intensity as pot?

What are the statistics for people driving under the influence of pot now? It must happen all the time and it must have been happening for a long time. Where is the data? If it were easy to collect, then such data would be politically bombarding us as a counter to pot legalization right now.

Alcohol is legal and drinking establishments, complete with parking lots, are open by the thousands across our land. Where is the political movement to limit alcohol consumption to one's home?

I would like to add that I finished third in my high school state regional in the track and field event, triple jump, very stoned, and exceeded my previous best by more than a foot. I could argue that it was an enhancement. Not a claim that I can drive better under the influence of weed, but a claim that I could have never done that well under the influence of alcohol. In other words, alcohol is severely more impairing than weed. The two are apples and oranges with respect to impairment and I'm afraid folks will reference alcohol as an example of impairment when arguing against weed.

When I was a young man (25 years ago), I taught myself, from books, Basic Language (computer programming language), and wrote a 10,000 line program that included three dimensional visual affects. I was stoned every step of the way. Challenging to say the least, but fun, captivating, and mentally stimulating. Note: I was trying to create an emulation of the game "Tunnles of Doom" and came very close to completing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mick063 (Reply #50)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:10 PM

55. About alcohol?

Anchorage used to have drive-through liquor stores back in the '70s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 05:40 PM

52. Easy. Just enforce laws that already exist against reckless driving.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:14 PM

56. The reason why some people voted against the initiative in WA was because of the DUI provision

People who very much want pot to be legal but believe that the DUI test they propose using can detect THC in the blood from days before the test is administered.

I've heard conflicting 'facts' from both sides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:16 PM

57. driving stoned is for pikers...

 

try driving to the O'hare with a head full of acid.

for some reason- it's a very funny experience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 06:34 PM

60. If anything they should be grateful

as I would think it would cut down on the number of people attempting to text while they drive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:46 PM

62. SWAT team aisle 12 - they just brought some brownies

and cheetos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Seedersandleechers (Original post)

Thu Nov 15, 2012, 08:49 PM

63. Oh please

First of all, most people who are going to smoke pot are already smoking pot. Let's be realistic. I doubt this will have much of an impact on the long term.

Secondly, I see no reason why they can't do a normal sobriety test to determine impairment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread