Printable View
Again: If you want to know your blood THC level you should take a blood test. If you're asking me, instead, for a practical rule of thumb that will work for most people most of the time, like the "two drinks" rule I suggest the following: don't drive if you've gotten high that day.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaiBuddhaMan
It's bad science and the 5 nano-gram number just came from thin air as basically admitted by Levy in Nederland on Tuesday at the town board meeting where she discussed all the bills she has introduced except 1261, which she left out of her presentation until questioned by a physician and Kathleen (keeping em honest).
She admitted she had no science behind her bill and she did it to stimulate debate about the subject is what she said.
From what I am told the Physician pointed out what I believe. and that is she has just set up a system to ruin many lives from teenagers to the elderly but unjustly charging them for DUID. Costing our States citizens thousands to defend a bogus charge because of another bad law we do not need. The present laws work just fine and we dont need our State Representatives writing laws to stimulate debate, how fucked up is that? Where's the problem Claire? you forgot to call the local news crews 1st to stir things up with horror stories of the horrors of driving on Cannabis even days after using it. while many of your colleges pop their Diazepam before their rush hour drive.
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
you may want to check with an attorney that is skilled in DUID/DUI cases. but I am told of a case by an attorney in Boulder where he beat it, his client had smoked more then 3 hours before driving and beat the DUID. 3 hours seems to be the magic number.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
if only the "high" part lasted more than 15 minutes. was that case based on ng of THC-COOH or just argument about his impairment? I wonder about edibles? I bet its closer to 24 hours, which takes out many of your cancer/AIDs/pulmonary/sr citizen patients.Quote:
Originally Posted by GratefulMeds
most likely based on impairment but I'll ask Skip next time I see him.:jointsmile:
Even if that doesn't constitute impairment? That sounds like a great way to be safe, but why not just set the legal level to 0 nanograms?Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
Thanks for the tip GM.
Yeah. Even if. It's just a personal rule of thumb, not legal advice or the basis for law. I don't drive high or drunk - the degree of intoxication or impairment has nothing to do with my decision. It's a sensible rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
I saw last week in a washington state news paper a mention of a study that showed 18-20 nanograms was about the same as .08 alcohol.So where do they come up with 5?
We also already have laws on the books for driving while impaired.The only thing setting this kind of limit would do is give cops anouther way to screw you and your rights
ACT4CO is trying to organize some patients that medicate frequently to submit to a voluntary blood test to see if .5 ng is a fair limit. Call me at the shop if you're interested in participating.
Is this just in the Denver area?Eather way its a great idea but its a long way or meQuote:
Originally Posted by porone