Printable View
As it stands now there are 2 eliments to the crime.One being intoxicated.The other is driving in a manner that is a danger to others.I know I beet a duid without a lawyer and the judge said he beleived I was High as a kite but the state did not provide evidence that I was driving in any manner other than safe.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
Did they do a blood draw?Quote:
Originally Posted by porone
That isn't completey true. If I was hopped up on my third cup of coffee and tailgating and driving aggressively and a cop pulled me over, she would likely charge me with reckless driving, or careless driving, but she wouldn't look at my coffee cup and ask me to step out of the car so that she could determine if I had enough caffeine in my blood through a blood test to be considered impaired.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
She would just write the ticket.
In this case the coffee isn't illegal or the caffeine in my blood, it's the driving. So should it be for marijuana.
Yes They knew I was High but being pulled over for tail lights was not enough.It was alot more than Mj too.Glad that part of my life is overQuote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
I should have been more clear. There are DUID's written for prescription drugs. In your example, an officer would probably still give you a roadside, suspecting the presence of some drug.Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverRelief
Well, glad you didn't get found guilty. Getting pulled over for a tail light wouldn't be enough under the new law unless they determined you were impaired.Quote:
Originally Posted by porone
My point is this, the coffee can make someone a dangerous driver as can numerous other factors. Some of those are "illegal" because there is language explicitly stating such written in law. Even if the officer issued a roadside, though the coffee may have contributed to my bad driving, there is nothing the law can do about it, because it isn't illegal to drink coffee and drive.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
Becoming litigious about every single factor that could possible lead to bad driving to the point of drawing blood does not provide the benefit that is intended. The roads are no safer and wouldn't be if this THC DUI bill were to pass.
We should just punish bad drivers...
I don't know, I personally support things like bans on cell phone use while driving. There is overwhelming statistical and anecdotal evidence that driving under the influence of certain levels of D9 THC can be dangerous.Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverRelief
[QUOTE= There is overwhelming statistical and anecdotal evidence that driving under the influence of certain levels of D9 THC can be dangerous.[/QUOTE]
SO WHAT
I know why dont we right a law that says, At the age 18 you take a test.You should discribe a repulic, a dimocracy, monarcy and so on.Then ask what type of government is the united states is and if you get any of it wrong you get a oneway ticket to anywhere outside the US and never let your ass back in!
{spelling well not required } LOL
We have to many laws now.We have laws that are against the law.For example proabition is against the US constitusion.If you say its not then why did it take an amendment to alcohal illeagle and anouther to make it leagle again?
And it is up to the individual to make good choices when it comes to driving, and if they feel impaired they shouldn't drive. People should hang up the cell phone while they are driving, and stop texting, but they don't. That's a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReleafCenter
Making it illegal to be on a cell phone doesn't stop people from making phone calls. Making it illegal to be under the influence of THC over 5ng/ml will not stop people from smoking and driving.
We should exercise common-sense and see that we already have laws to deal with dangerous drivers and we do not need to put more people through the judicial system and subject them to DUI's.
Alcohol is proven to be a different animal when it comes to intoxication.