Marijuana Sobriety Checkpoints: New California Legislation to Outlaw Driving While Stoned

[Newsjock]

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/03/marijuana_dui_norma_torres.php

... Under a bill introduced last month by a SoCal assemblywoman, driving while stoned would result in an automatic DUI offense.

The proposed bill would tag this "offense" onto the section of the Vehicle Code that addresses drunk driving. The new section states that any level of "cannabinoids or synthetic cannabinoid compound" found in a driver's blood or urine, up to three hours after a traffic stop, would equate to a DUI, according to AB 2552, which was introduced by Assemblywoman Norma Torres (D-Pomona).

However, cannabinoids remain in the body for days or weeks after consumption, according to California NORML. If passed, Torres' bill would essentially criminalize outright operation of a motor vehicle by any marijuana user. So hopefully tokers know enough beer-drinkers skilled enough to stay under 0.08 to designated-drive them to work.

... Word of the bill's existence broke over the weekend among the marijuana community: NORML issued a press release on Saturday, and union organizers pledged to fight the measure with "everything we have," according to Dan Rush, national director of the medical cannabis and hemp division of United Food and Commercial Workers. The union is also fighting a similar bill in Colorado, Rush said.

[anti-alec]

1. Not gonna work.

Colorado Legislature tried the same thing last year, and it failed.

Because of the same lingering problems - long-time stoners have cannabonoids on their systems for a long time.

[CrispyQ]

2. Pot, a perfect way to fill up the for-profit prisons.

I'm sure none of these legislators ever toke up.

[Initech]

19. Yup more free labor for the prison industrial complex.

Do they ever get it??

[think]

3. Please read the article. Torres is a shill for the alcohol industry amongst others /nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. Sobreity checkpoints are the only way to catch offenders.

Because there isn't a profile for stoned drivers except perhaps strict adherence to traffic controls.

[think]

5. Exactly. This bill is not based on factual need but rather prejudice and political contributions

This is just discrimination on behalf of the alcohol industry and law enforcement who don't want to see revenue losses.

[kysrsoze]

6. The cops can offer them some of their donuts and see if they bite.

[CrispyQ]

27. ...

[DoBotherMe]

8. Totally Dude!

I haven't smoked in 20 years. I had a few tokes at my 20 yr class reunion and was so paranoid I drove 15 miles at 20mph, praying to God that if I get home I'll never smoke dope again! It was hilarious! Dana ; )

[Whiskeytide]

30. Reminds me of my favorite "pot v booze"...

saying...

"When you're drunk, you run the red lights. When you're stoned, you stop at the green ones."

Been 30 years since I last lit one up, but I seem to recall that to have been spot on.

[saras]

13. That's what the stats say, but expect multiple drug abusers to argue that THEY get really fucked up.

[Uncle Joe]

16. "Strict adherence to traffic controls" I wonder why they never thought of that approach?

"Because there isn't a profile for stoned drivers except perhaps strict adherence to traffic controls."

Oh yeah, now I remember they want to criminalize the people.

[librechik]

7. so, are they searching for another source of profit from MJ to justify its legalization?

I certainly expect them to, since legalizing is looking inevitable.

[Bennyboy]

9. In CA, you can opt for blood, urine or breath....

when testing for sobriety. Take Breath every time.

[shanti]

12. can cannabinoids be

Last edited Mon Mar 12, 2012, 05:40 PM - Edit history (1)

detected by a breath test?

[Bennyboy]

26. Nope.....

They trick you into the blood test, but you do have the choice. With the blood test they can test for all drugs not pot.

[shanti]

10. good thing this isn't a ballot initiative

because it would probably win time to come down HARD on your reps, californians! this is bullshit, and can never be allowed to pass!

(btw, you should crosspost this to the california forum)

[Lawlbringer]

11. I don't want to jump into a pot should be illegal or legal debate

but driving while high, drunk, stoned, down, up, unconscious, or on the astral plane (I'm looking at you, Professor Xavier) should be illegal.

If you can finish the sentence, "Did I eat 50 white castle burgers? Holy crap, I was so _____" with any of those terms, you are putting other people at risk.

[woofless]

14. Where to start?

Look pal, I have been using cannabis for more than 40 years. In all that time I managed to never be fired from a job, never get a speeding or moving violation ticket. I have had exactly one 2 mph fender bender that incurred very little damage and no physical harm to people. I have never had a fist fight. I have never beat my spouse. I have never eaten 50 White Castle burgers. I am NOT uncommon or unusual. I know many, many people just like me who are regular cannabis users and so do you. Really, you do. Grow up.

[Lawlbringer]

18. lol huh?

Grow up? Honestly?

Anyway, I know people who say the same thing when they drink. I don't like to do that, so when I drink, I take the train. My personal opinion is that if it alters your perception in any way, you really shouldn't get behind the wheel. Your opinion is different, and I respect that and you may be a responsible user, so you should be commended. But don't tell me that I know people who smoke and expect me to be taken aback. Of course people I know use! Everyone I know uses or has used recently lol. The 50 slider thing was from a friend who got so messed up that he found out he ate 50 burgers because he didn't remember buying for all of us. He didn't remember eating them. He didn't remember getting home. He thought he smoked and stayed in. I have a friend who was playing volleyball while high and went up to spike the ball but forgot what he was doing!

There are limits. You can have a few drinks and never get into an accident. You can have one night where you are so messed up by it that you happen to luck out and ALMOST hit someone. It's a crapshoot. But you're really stacking the odds in the other direction when you use anything irresponsibly. "A few bad apples" and all. Just my opinion. Or should I grow up and attack people for how they feel?

[hobbit709]

20. Then someone with ANY amount of alcohol should also be charged

The problem is that the tests only detect presence of THC, whether or not the amount is at an IMPAIRMENT level.
So if you had a beer yesterday you should be charged with DWI today under that standard.

[Lawlbringer]

22. This is a valid argument.

I didn't think of the levels bit. So if it's ever legalized, how would they even be able to test it? Blood test? Peepee test? I could imagine the cop saying, "Piss into my glove."

[hobbit709]

29. True story

A friend and I were pulled over in his car one night by a state trooper. He wanted to bust my buddy for DWI and gave him all the tests. He blew a 0.08 when the limit was still 0.10. Then he made him do all the other crap and finished by telling him to take his left middle finger and touch his nose. My friend asked "Middle finger?" and the cop said "You heard what I said and don't get smart with me?"
So he smiled and touched his nose with his middle finger in the classic gesture. The trooper got all bent out of shape and it got worse when his partner started laughing and said "Well, you told him to."

[notadmblnd]

23. So you would advocate against being able to drivewhile intoxicated by pain killers?

How about anti-depressants or a nerve pill? They certainly alter the mind. What about driving after using viagra or cialis? Those drugs can mess with vision. We could go on and on in regards to the side affects of prescription drugs and their potential to cause harm while driving.

So many people are either drinking, smoking or taking drugs, that's it is really a wonder that anyone is driving sober.

So what should we do? Maybe have everyone that is pulled over for speeding or not using a turn signal piss in a cup and be detained until their urine has been evaluated for all possible drugs? I won't even bother to go into the food one could consume that could cause a false positive. Poppy seed muffins is just one food I'll name.

[Tveil]

28. I know people arrested for taking prescribed pain or anti anxiety pills while driving

DUI just means driving under the influence. It could just be only Benadryl, but if it effects your driving, You're fair game. At least in my State.

[notadmblnd]

31. So how is it determined and then proved?

or do they currently just get the people that admit it?

[Hippo_Tron]

32. People shouldn't drive when they're tired either

Nor should they be using any devices that distract their attention from the road. Fact of the matter is, though, that the NHTSA doesn't even keep statistics on deaths caused by stoned drivers, because there isn't enough data to do so. Yes in an ideal world we'd all be fully alert and conscious at the wheel. However, we don't punish every person who isn't with a DUI.

Stoned (or any impaired) type of driving is a bad idea. Drunk driving is a worse idea. Reckless driving (which alcohol can help contribute to) is an even worse idea and it's the kind of driving that usually gets people killed.

[Lawlbringer]

34. I think this is the basic gist of what I meant.

Well put.

[bemildred]

15. What does this mean:

The new section states that any level of "cannabinoids or synthetic cannabinoid compound" found in a driver's blood or urine, up to three hours after a traffic stop, would equate to a DUI, according to AB 2552, which was introduced by Assemblywoman Norma Torres (D-Pomona).

They are going to do a piss test three hours after the stop somehow? I don't think the author of the bill even knows what it means. I think it's just FUD, a bone for people that give campaign money.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. Norma Torres takes so much alcohol industry money that fumes rise off of her.

She's a shill, and she's shilling.

[Ikonoklast]

21. Won't pass, there is no way to scientifically measure if a person is impaired using that metric.

If it does pass, the courts would be clogged with people demanding a jury trial, with expert witnesses called.

[benld74]

24. Fer sur D-U-U-U-D-E!

[Rex]

25. I'm sorry...what was the question again?

[USArmyParatrooper]

33. IF there were a legitimate test for it on the spot...

that doesn't involve peeing in a cup, I don't have a problem with this proposal. Marijuana should be legal but also mandated that it's used responsibly. People shouldn't drive while high.