No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaiBuddhaMan
WHAT!?!?! Did no one else read this! Hahaha! That's some funny sh!t there.
:D
oh yeah, that was popular in the...1930's! it makes the darkie think hes as good as the white man(if they could see sports today:D) and look twice at our white women. this was actual press then and the gullible public ate it up as a patriotic duty save our youth from this maniacal craze inducing narcotic. this in turn forged the dea whose only REAL job now is to keep mj illegal. yes that same gullible public taught this same discipline to their children and allowed racism and ignorance to thrive. they educated what they believed to be true and now we must educate to undo 75 years of idiocy.
i l:stoned:ove my job
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by copobo
this is excerpted from Rep Levy's newsletter sent 1/1/11. Be sure she hears from you!
Keep that hair short and the phish stickers off the bumpers kids!
State Representative
CLAIRE LEVY
200 E. Colfax Ave., Room 271
Denver, CO 80203
Capitol: 303-866-2578
[email protected]
"I will be sponsoring a bill that was developed by the Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, which created quite a flood of phone calls and e-mail when the Denver Post and Westword ran stories on it. That bill will create a maximum permissible level of THC (the psycho-active component in marijuana) in the blood that is allowed while driving. It would create an objective standard for determining whether a person is driving under the influence of marijuana. The level I will propose, which is supported by a lot of research, is 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood. There has been concern about whether that level will include people who have THC in their systems but whose driving is not impaired. Many people have expressed concern that this kind of law will simply allow law enforcement officials to target medical marijuana patients. The literature indicates that the 5 ng level is sufficiently high that anyone with that amount in their blood by the time testing occurs has ingested a significant amount of marijuana recently. (In contrast, urine testing detects various metabolites, which do stay in the system fairly long.) The officer must have probable cause for stopping the motorist based on their observable driving behavior and a reasonable suspicion that the impaired driving is from marijuana in order to request a blood test. As marijuana use becomes more prevalent and as criminal penalties decrease, I strongly believe the public needs confidence their safety on the roads is not being jeopardized."
well now, here we have some more 1930's propaganda i mean how dumb do they think Americans are? it is true about 50% will actually believe that this is true, they will probably be prone to vote in favor of such a bill. yet when we blindly follow a leader perhaps the leader should get a vision check. "i strongly believe the public needs the confidence...blah blah blah...not being jeapordized...blah blah blah!" yes my juvenile moments should ring loud and clear; F these pathetic excuses of payroll waste. that was me being polite... did you see that:jointsmile: "who thought i was attractive" king julian
then change the channel to the news "man kills teenage girl crossing street. this man has a history of dui's and to date hes never been under the limit. oooook steve, thats a dedicated drunk if you ask me, now off to you." "this just in dui man has just been released from one minute of jail time because he had no marijuana on him at the time...talk about your speedy trials back to you jack." i strongly believe we need a government worth fighting for. this whole bill is just another attempt at making money off of mj without approving mj. jeez grow some bolts
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by lampost
The fact of the matter is that you can be totally sober and still have >5ng/mL of THC metabolites in your blood...
And who is coming up with this arbitrary limit of 5ng/mL... scientists or politicians?
Has anyone mentioned this? Apparently it was recommendations from a study by CA NORML that produced the 5 ng/ml number being used.
The report is here: http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/DUICreport.2005.pdf
Its a helpful read. It sounds like they're also saying that for a typical medium to strong dose, 3-4 hours are needed to eliminate impairment before driving. But this really needs to be made more clear, as no one has home blood-THC testing kits.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Out of curiosity, would any of you support a legal limit for drivers under age 18?
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
I would support a legal limit the truly measured impairment, for everyone.
thing is, this method does not do that.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
Out of curiosity, would any of you support a legal limit for drivers under age 18?
No because there is no way to accurately measure impairment. Leave the kids alone.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
I was planning on moving to Boulder/Denver area to get away from leos. Virginia sucks when it comes to mj laws:mad:
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by probud
Virginia sucks when it comes to mj laws:mad:
CO actually has stricter DUID laws than Virginia, just so you know. The current law here says that any habitual user of a controlled substance who operates a motor vehicle is guilty of a DUI, even if the substance is lawfully-obtained medical marijuana. It's a de facto zero tolerance policy, that should (and apparently is) going to change in favor of a science-based limit. To my mind, that change would be a loosening, a liberalization of our DUI policy, but as you can see, everyone else disagrees.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by probud
I was planning on moving to Boulder/Denver area to get away from leos. Virginia sucks when it comes to mj laws:mad:
I grew up in Maryland, just on the other side of DC.
It's really not bad out here in Colorado. I much rather be able to kick back on my couch, medicate and not have to worry about the po-po banging down my door. For personal use - Colorado is still great! For those who are looking to sling - it's getting tougher. Prices are dropping. Quality varies but if growing your own and being about to grow your own without worry - who cares what the quality is out there. I've stopped trying to make money off of it. I'm strictly for personal use and also assist a couple of other patients who don't know how to grow.
If you're looking to keep a regular job and just enjoy your MMJ on the side - you'll love Colorado. If you're looking to come out here and make money off MMJ - it's getting tougher & tougher.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
The bigger issue I see other than the 5 nanograms is any cop any time can force a blood test based on 'reasonable suspicion'. What constitutes reasonable suspicion? Long hair? Candy wrappers on the floor of your car? Once again all a cop has to say is they smell it and the govt forces a needle in your arm. If that isnt unreasonable search and seizure I don't know what is. If a cop has it out for you he could pull you over every day and force this upon you, decline and its an automatic DUI. Its this kind of crap that makes me never want to leave the damn house.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by HighPopalorum
CO actually has stricter DUID laws than Virginia, just so you know. The
current law here says that any habitual user of a controlled substance who operates a motor vehicle is guilty of a DUI, even if the substance is lawfully-obtained medical marijuana. It's a
de facto zero tolerance policy, that should (and apparently is) going to change in favor of a science-based limit. To my mind, that change would be a loosening, a liberalization of our DUI policy, but as you can see, everyone else disagrees.
I'd be curious about how case-law defines "habitual" in order to avoid constitutional infirmity for vagueness.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by senorx12562
I'd be curious about how case-law defines "habitual" in order to avoid constitutional infirmity for vagueness.
I know, right? The current law is so vague as to be an open invitation for selective enforcement. There are no objective standards, so courts rely on the observations and evidence of LEO, which leads to some pretty convoluted logic. I got an especial chuckle out of this:
Halter v. Department of Revenue of State of Colo. "If an officer has probable cause to support arrest and breath alcohol test, officer also may request that driver submit to drug test. If driver passes the breath test, drug use is a reasonable explanation for driver's intoxication regardless of whether other evidence existed to support search for drugs."
Passing a breathalyzer is an indication of drug use. Pretty twisted, huh?
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Given that the respondent in Halter is the Dept. of Revenue, I imagine it's a license suspension/revocation/denial proceeding, so has no precedential value for a criminal proceeding as the standards of proof are very different and the constitutional limits on State action are also way different, but your point is well taken; in that context at least, much deference is given to the testimony of LEO.
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
"No refusal" DUI checkpoints could be coming to Tampa | Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Sarasota | WTSP.com 10 News
I would imagine that MMJ will be more heavily regulated than alcohol, and this story seems pretty troubling.
The federal government says Florida has among the highest rates of breathalyzer refusal.
"Now you've got attorneys telling their clients, don't blow, don't blow! Because we know from the results from these machines that they're not operating as the state or the government says they're supposed to operate," said Stephen Daniels, a DUI consultant and expert witness.
Supporters, though, say you could see the "no refusal" checkpoints in the Bay area by October.
"We don't want to violate people's civil rights. That's the last thing we want to do, but we're here to save lives," Unfried said.
edit: Here is a good post on the subject of impairment.
Abolish Drunk Driving Laws - Reason Magazine
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
And in Texas cops can forcefully stick a needle in a motorist on the roadside and take blood. Welcome to the police state of America.
Texas Police Will Take Blood By Force in DUI Cases
No more stoned driving -- Colorado is passing THC limits for DUI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedleppelin
The bigger issue I see other than the 5 nanograms is any cop any time can force a blood test based on 'reasonable suspicion'. What constitutes reasonable suspicion? Long hair? Candy wrappers on the floor of your car? Once again all a cop has to say is they smell it and the govt forces a needle in your arm. If that isnt unreasonable search and seizure I don't know what is. If a cop has it out for you he could pull you over every day and force this upon you, decline and its an automatic DUI. Its this kind of crap that makes me never want to leave the damn house.
Never submit to a test, shut up and exercise your 5th and 14th amendment rights and get a lawyer, beating a driving while stoned is one of the easier things for most attorneys it is a very hard case for DA's to convict hence the try for a new law, if you have trouble call Skip Wollrab in Boulder he beats this kind of crap all the time and I speak from experience.:stoned::thumbsup::thumbsup:
