How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?

[TywinLannister]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wgtpWOGFkhY

[thequietkid10]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wgtpWOGFkhY

I'm not overly worried. Sure it's not libertarian, but like drinking and driving there are two ways you can be caught.

One is a checkpoint, which is awful, but I've only encountered it twice in my 26 years on this planet.

And two is erratic driving/motor vehicle collision, at which point you are a threat to those around you (or you'll already hurt someone)

[Peace Piper]

Washington Marijuana DUI Law To Take Effect on December 6, 2012

From a DUI perspective, I-502 creates a very specific legal standard for Marijuana DUI setting a per se limit of active THC of 5 nanograms per milliliter of blood...

Marijuana DUI prosecution in Washington State after I-502

Prior to the passage of I-502, there was no set legal limit for THC as it related to Washington DUI law. If the state believed an individual had been driving while impaired by the use of marijuana, it had to prove actual impairment irrespective of the actual level of THC in driver’s system. Under the new law, set to go into effect on December 6, 2012, the presence of 5 nanograms of THC in a state approved blood test within two hour of driving creates a per se DUI akin to a .08 level of alcohol....

Washington Marijuana DUI Consequences

While the new marijuana DUI statute changes how and when the state can pursue a marijuana DUI conviction, the general consequences of a marijuana DUI remain unchanged except for one major exception. Prior to the new law, there existed no administrative sanction for driving a motor vehicle with THC in the driver’s system, regardless of the level. Now, under this statute, as with drivers who either refuse a breath test or give a breast sample greater than or equal to .08, there are licensing consequences under the new marijuana DUI law as well...

Effects on Medical Marijuana users

It's one thing to tell a recreational drug user that there is no tolerance for driving after consumption of the drug. It's another thing entirely to take the keys out of the hands of one who relies on a prescription medication regardless of impairment or lack thereof. Unfortunately, that is exactly what I-502 appears to do. Because the established legal limit is so low, it is very likely that anyone who uses marijuana on a daily basis for medical and therapeutic purposes will find themselves over the new legal limit at virtually all times. Be sure to consult with your physician as well as a Washington DUI attorney to see how the new law may apply to you...more

http://www.washingtondui.com/blog/I502-washington-marijuana-dui-law-changes

see also:Norml re DUID: http://norml.org/library/item/you-are-going-directly-to-jail
DUID Legislation: What It Means, Who's Behind It, and Strategies to Prevent It

[pcosmar]

How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?

Marijuana is not Alcohol. It does not affect people like alcohol.
It is in no way similar. It does not impair motor function, or judgement.

If anything it would make driving safer. Cops would have one less reason to fuck with drivers. Drivers would be less distracted by police.

[kcchiefs6465]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RLkI5vdy1U
For what it's worth chronic marijuana users are generally pretty cautious drivers. It's never going to happen but I'd love to take a driving test high.. or drunk for that matter. Then when I pass I should be able to drive 'impaired.' (Moving violations etc. still could/would be enforced) Of course this would be the ideal libertarian society in my eyes. (No precrime statutes) I do understand that some irresponsible people might smoke or drink too much and cause an accident. Punishing me when I am a good driver, no matter if inebriated, is wrong. (Though I'd never get shit faced and consider driving) I feel there should be a compromise that when I prove I can drive their cone with a random 'rabbit' jumping out of the 'woods' course I should be able to drive at a higher level than BAC .08. ('Rabbit' simulating a playing child) Because let's be honest four beers in two and a half hours really isn't that much.

[dannno]

It is in no way similar. It does not impair motor function, or judgement.

If anything it would make driving safer. Cops would have one less reason to fuck with drivers. Drivers would be less distracted by police.


Low to moderate amounts of cannabis have been shown to make drivers safer, there are a ton of studies, even state funded ones that backfired. Obviously there is a point where you can inebriate yourself with THC to make driving a bit dangerous, but honestly most people will choose not to drive under these conditions anyway. Alcohol causes people to be a bit brazen whereas THC has the opposite effect. So people who are drunk will feel like they can drive when they can't, whereas people who are stoned will sometimes feel like they can't drive when in fact they would be perfectly safe behind the wheel if they chose to.

[parocks]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RLkI5vdy1U
For what it's worth chronic marijuana users are generally pretty cautious drivers. It's never going to happen but I'd love to take a driving test high.. or drunk for that matter. Then when I pass I should be able to drive 'impaired.' (Moving violations etc. still could/would be enforced) Of course this would be the ideal libertarian society in my eyes. (No precrime statutes) I do understand that some irresponsible people might smoke or drink too much and cause an accident. Punishing me when I am a good driver, no matter if inebriated, is wrong. (Though I'd never get shit faced and consider driving) I feel there should be a compromise that when I prove I can drive their cone with a random 'rabbit' jumping out of the 'woods' course I should be able to drive at a higher level than BAC .08. ('Rabbit' simulating a playing child) Because let's be honest four beers in two and a half hours really isn't that much.

How about you can be as drunk, as high as you want to be, and unless you hurt somebody, you're cool. The crime would be hurting someone, not being wasted while hurting someone.

[parocks]

Low to moderate amounts of cannabis have been shown to make drivers safer, there are a ton of studies, even state funded ones that backfired. Obviously there is a point where you can inebriate yourself with THC to make driving a bit dangerous, but honestly most people will choose not to drive under these conditions anyway. Alcohol causes people to be a bit brazen whereas THC has the opposite effect. So people who are drunk will feel like they can drive when they can't, whereas people who are stoned will sometimes feel like they can't drive when in fact they would be perfectly safe behind the wheel if they chose to.

Some have argued that if you do the both simultaneously, they balance each other out.

[bolil]

How about you can be as drunk, as high as you want to be, and unless you hurt somebody, you're cool. The crime would be hurting someone, not being wasted while hurting someone.

What of someone driving like a lunatic. Should they not be stopped before they hurt someone? For their good, and the general public?

[pcosmar]

What of someone driving like a lunatic. Should they not be stopped before they hurt someone? For their good, and the general public?

I have ridden with my Pastor.
I am glad God is watching out for him..

Please define "driving like a lunatic". I see them all the time,, and drive to avoid them.
Pretty sure most are sober. just friggin stupid.

How about a Friggin' Stupid Law.

[parocks]

What of someone driving like a lunatic. Should they not be stopped before they hurt someone? For their good, and the general public?

You mean like reckless driving?

Ok, well, the point I'm trying to make, and not really that well, is that we should step back from the causes, and look at the effects.

Because you make a good point. I suppose that my argument could excuse any amount of speeding, running stop lights, etc.

Look at the effects. Careless driving, reckless driving, etc etc., not drinking and driving, texting while driving, etc.

[kcchiefs6465]

You mean like reckless driving?

Ok, well, the point I'm trying to make, and not really that well, is that we should step back from the causes, and look at the effects.

Because you make a good point. I suppose that my argument could excuse any amount of speeding, running stop lights, etc.

Look at the effects. Careless driving, reckless driving, etc etc., not drinking and driving, texting while driving, etc.
That's the point I was trying to convey in my post as well. Driving reckless is still a law, whether drunk or sober. Charging me for being drunk when I am not reckless seems reckless with their charges/rationale. I feel bad for MADD but quite honestly, "it aint me, babe."

[parocks]

That's the point I was trying to convey in my post as well. Driving reckless is still a law, whether drunk or sober. Charging me for being drunk when I am not reckless seems reckless with their charges/rationale. I feel bad for MADD but quite honestly, "it aint me, babe."

I wouldn't mind seeing some changes back to the way things were. Drinking age used to vary until the 80s, when states couldn't get highway funds unless they changed the law to 21+. There's got to be some state out there who realizes they'll make a ton of money if they switched to 18+. States without a lot of federal highways and a lot of bars. Rhode Island? Delaware?

[Acala]

Government roads=tyranny.

But putting that aside, the first fallacy in the idea that legalized mj will result in more impaired driving is that mj prohibition worked at stopping people from using mj in the first place. And there is little evidence of that being the case. For the last forty years, virtually anyone who wanted to smoke mj could get some and smoke it. And drive under the influence.

Legalization isn't going to significantly increase use because prohibition never significantly curbed use. Legalization will merely reduce all the wasted law enforcement resources and ruination of harmless people's lives.

[FindLiberty]

DON'T TRY TO DRIVE - CALL 911 FOR "HELP" (before you die) !!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrZLc9lqQM0

[Jon311]

I find that I'm a much safer driver when I do light up occasionally.

I actually drive the speed limit and I'm very cautious.

[jkr]

so
this means more stop and chats
and the following arrest


thanks 4 nothing

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?


It's gonna make them drive 10mph under the speed limit, slow to turn right at red lights, and just generally behave like 90 year olds.

[pcosmar]

It's gonna make them drive 10mph under the speed limit, slow to turn right at red lights, and just generally behave like 90 year olds.

LOL,, not that bad, but I have noticed I am more cautious and less in an ass on fire hurry.

But then that might be just cause I'm old. or not, ( it did that when I was younger)

[thoughtomator]

I know a great many people who are a threat to life and limb on the road completely sober. One of the reasons for my minimal-driving lifestyle.

[phill4paul]

More roadblocks, forced blood testing, asset forfeiture, substance abuse courses, higher insurance, probable cause, etc. etc. etc.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

I know a great many people who are a threat to life and limb on the road completely sober. One of the reasons for my minimal-driving lifestyle.

You know it. I'm much more worried about stupid drivers than stoned drivers or even drunk drivers. Of course, the categories aren't exclusive, but it's usually the "stupid" causing the accidents, and it often takes 2 people not paying attention for an accident to happen.

[belian78]

LOL,, not that bad, but I have noticed I am more cautious and less in an ass on fire hurry.

But then that might be just cause I'm old. or not, ( it did that when I was younger)
If you ask my SO, she would probably prefer me drving after a small toke. When I'm not, I'm as you called it 'ass on fire' (going to use that, thanks :D) in a hurry, and screaming at the slow drivers. When we run errands on my day off after a little toke, I'm calm and just going with traffic. I'm no less aware of my surroundings, and even moreso actually, as I'm paying attention to traffic instead of trying to find out the quickest way through it.

[FindLiberty]

That I-502 law really sounds insane.

Stupid.

And now for something completely different:

Wouldn't it be better to just use video evidence of the actual unsafe driving (taken from police car camera) to justify every traffic stop/ticket?

Why not also automatically give the accused the optional of a jury trial to decide if that aggressing police officer and/or the accused driver should be fined, have license suspended or be punished?

Police making these kinds of accusations should always be required to submit their own prior 6 hours of driving via dashboard video taken from that same police car camera (and/or from their own personal vehicle to total their actual 6 hours of driving time) recorded immediately prior to each traffic stop!

The jury could watch those videos (in just a few minutes using FFWD Search) and then deliberate and "rule" if either the driver and/or accuser (police officer) was guilty of any unsafe driving or dangerous habits. The jury should then determine appropriate penalties, if any.

The courtroom judge should only preside over the initial random/impartial jury selection process and then just sit there wearing that long black dress, not saying a word while the jury runs the whole "show"!

[pcosmar]

If you ask my SO, she would probably prefer me drving after a small toke. When I'm not, I'm as you called it 'ass on fire' (going to use that, thanks :D) in a hurry, and screaming at the slow drivers. When we run errands on my day off after a little toke, I'm calm and just going with traffic. I'm no less aware of my surroundings, and even moreso actually, as I'm paying attention to traffic instead of trying to find out the quickest way through it.

My wife does not smoke or drink at all. She is the Queen of Road Rage.
I don't smoke much, and would prefer to make it a habit,, if I could. I have never had a problem with it in regards to driving.

I suspect those that are concerned about it have NO Clue, and are basing it on bullshit propaganda.

[JK/SEA]

as time goes by it won't be much of an issue. Texting while driving, prescription drugs while driving, drunk while driving, eating while driving, having sex while driving, talking on your cell phone while driving, driving in snow, driving in dust storms, changing a CD disk, sun in your eyes, forgot to fix the brakes, forgot to change out your may-pops, etc....lifes a bitch and then ya die...

carry on.

[presence]

“Roof Hits.” “When they were chooming in a car all the windows had to be rolled up so no smoke blew out and went to waste; when the pot was gone, they tilted their heads back and sucked in the last bit of smoke from the ceiling.”

Maraniss also says Obama was known for his “Interceptions”: “When a joint was making the rounds, he often elbowed his way in, out of turn, shouted ‘Intercepted!,’ and took an extra hit.”



http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-and-his-pot-smoking-choom-gang/

[kcchiefs6465]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/obama-and-his-pot-smoking-choom-gang/
Lmao, I've got to try that interception part.

[phill4paul]

as time goes by it won't be much of an issue. Texting while driving, prescription drugs while driving, drunk while driving, eating while driving, having sex while driving, talking on your cell phone while driving, driving in snow, driving in dust storms, changing a CD disk, sun in your eyes, forgot to fix the brakes, forgot to change out your may-pops, etc....lifes a bitch and then ya die...

carry on.

Done and done....


HURON, South Dakota - Huron is the latest city in South Dakota to ban texting while driving.

The ordinance approved by the City Commission on Monday night also encompasses distracted driving. Mayor Dave McGirr said that includes everything from eating pizza to reading a newspaper while driving. The ordinance also bars drivers with learners' permits from talking on a phone while driving.

The ordinance will go into effect sometime around the start of the new year, with police giving motorists a grace period while they become familiar with the new law. The fine for texting while driving will be $100, and the fine for distracted driving $15.

http://blog.al.com/wire/2012/12/south_dakota_town_bans_eating.html

[VIDEODROME]

Car crashes will happen at 5mph

[tod evans]

Is anybody else sickened and angered by these idiots who are still trying to put people in jail for smoking weed?

This time they're using the excuse of "safe driving"...

I'm here to say that a bitchy ol'lady or just a plain bad day makes for worse driving than burning a doob...

[FrancisMarion]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L8DcjFOD1k&feature=player_detailpage

couldn't pass it up.

[Brian4Liberty]

Unfortunately, that is exactly what I-502 appears to do. Because the established legal limit is so low, it is very likely that anyone who uses marijuana on a daily basis for medical and therapeutic purposes will find themselves over the new legal limit at virtually all times.

It applies to all drugs, illegal or legal. People probably have it in their system, as that is the point of the drugs. Whether it effects driving is a different matter. Many prescription medications effect driving. What is the blood limit for them? There is no blood limit. The test is whether they are driving erratically. Going down this path of criminalizing blood levels may create an incentive for alcohol, which clears the system faster than many other drugs. "Safer" (in the eyes of the law) to drink and drive an hour later than smoke and drive an hour later.

[Brian4Liberty]

couldn't pass it up.

Classic. First thing I thought of too.

Then there are the stoned drivers that stop for the red light...a block ahead of them.

"Why are you stopped?"
"The light is red."
"There's no light at this intersection, it's at the next intersection!"

[Tpoints]

How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?

Marijuana is not Alcohol. It does not affect people like alcohol.
It is in no way similar. It does not impair motor function, or judgement.

If anything it would make driving safer. Cops would have one less reason to fuck with drivers. Drivers would be less distracted by police.

where did you get the idea alcohol affects people or impairs motor function?

[bolil]

where did you get the idea alcohol affects people or impairs motor function?

Wha? Got drunk?

[kcchiefs6465]

How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?

Marijuana is not Alcohol. It does not affect people like alcohol.
It is in no way similar. It does not impair motor function, or judgement.

If anything it would make driving safer. Cops would have one less reason to fuck with drivers. Drivers would be less distracted by police.


where did you get the idea alcohol affects people or impairs motor function?


Wha? Got drunk?
Well then how'd he know cannabis wouldn't affect driving? ;)

[loveableteddybear]

According to Danno, Lippschitz et al. (2004) proved that three bong hits or more decreases car accidents by 18%.

[Tpoints]

Well then how'd he know cannabis wouldn't affect driving? ;)

he speaks from experience I'm sure.

[Tpoints]

According to Danno, Lippschitz et al. (2004) proved that three bong hits or more decreases car accidents by 18%.

oh yeah, but did you know that less than 18% of all accidents have anything to do with marijuana?

[parocks]

How Will Legalizing Marijuana Affect Drivers?

Marijuana is not Alcohol. It does not affect people like alcohol.
It is in no way similar. It does not impair motor function, or judgement.

If anything it would make driving safer. Cops would have one less reason to fuck with drivers. Drivers would be less distracted by police.

Actually, it does effect judgement. Not at all times, or with all people. It tends to make one more cautious. A little bit more risk adverse. So, you might find yourself at a stop sign a little longer. You might not try to get in front of that car, you might want to wait until the other car goes by, and get in behind it. What's interesting is that marijuana and alcohol tend to cancel each other out. The recklessness associated with alcohol is tempered by the cautiousness of marijuana. Legal marijuana is also likely to cause a drop in alcohol consumption, slightly. Instead of 2 parts alcohol, 0 parts marijuana, people might go with 1 part alcohol, 1 part marijuana. That 1/1 will lead to a better driver than an a 2/0 driver.

[kcchiefs6465]

oh yeah, but did you know that less than 18% of all accidents have anything to do with marijuana?
Lol. Source? Do you mean they were caused by marijuana? Or do you mean that per se DUI laws allowed the sampling of blood to 'determine' that said low levels of THC (as in, possibly haven't smoked in weeks) caused said accidents? I'd imagine you would want to look into the DUI laws of Michigan, for example. Per se that is.

[loveableteddybear]

Lol. Source? Do you mean they were caused by marijuana? Or do you mean that per se DUI laws allowed the sampling of blood to 'determine' that said low levels of THC (as in, possibly haven't smoked in weeks) caused said accidents? I'd imagine you would want to look into the DUI laws of Michigan, for example.
Anyone can make up statistics on the spot. 90% of everyone knows that.

[parocks]

Done and done....



http://blog.al.com/wire/2012/12/south_dakota_town_bans_eating.html


I lived in Huron for 2 months 20 years ago. Huron.

[Tpoints]

Lol. Source? Do you mean they were caused by marijuana? Or do you mean that per se DUI laws allowed the sampling of blood to 'determine' that said low levels of THC (as in, possibly haven't smoked in weeks) caused said accidents? I'd imagine you would want to look into the DUI laws of Michigan, for example. Per se that is.

18% was generous. I'd go ahead and say even if a person has low levels of THC (as opposed to none, or whatever level a non-smoker has), the accidents caused by sober, THC free drivers still make up well over 90% of all accidents.

[kcchiefs6465]

18% was generous. I'd go ahead and say even if a person has low levels of THC (as opposed to none, or whatever level a non-smoker has), the accidents caused by sober, THC free drivers still make up well over 90% of all accidents.
How generous? And I feel I must state, cannabis stays in your system for upwards of 30 days. I am sure you do not agree that a person who smokes marijuana one day be charged three weeks later over a per se D.U.I. stop thus fucking his advancement in society in any meaningful way?

[amonasro]

Obviously there is a point where you can inebriate yourself with THC to make driving a bit dangerous, but honestly most people will choose not to drive under these conditions anyway. Alcohol causes people to be a bit brazen whereas THC has the opposite effect.

Exactly. Getting someone who is really high to drive, much less leave the house, is a challenge. People inebriated with thc are generally at home stuck to the couch, not out driving.

[phill4paul]

Drivers with THC in the system are fucked. There will be a huge revenue generation over this.

[Tpoints]

How generous? And I feel I must state, cannabis stays in your system for upwards of 30 days. I am sure you do not agree that a person who smokes marijuana one day be charged three weeks later over a per se D.U.I. stop thus fucking his advancement in society in any meaningful way?

I don't believe a person should ever be charged for having cannabis or alcohol in their body.

[KrokHead]

Legalizing something almost everyone's already smoking isn't going to make the roads more dangerous.