Quote Originally Posted by Douglas1
I don't really understand.. wouldn't a marijuana user always test positive? even a week or so after smoking?
Therein lies the problem with every per se proposal I've seen, people who smoke a lot could test positive because of previous use, but not be currently impaired at all. If there was a test that unequivocally determined that one was impaired at the time the driving occurred, that would be one thing, but to statutorily enshrine a presumption that for all intents and purposes is unrebuttable, based on uncertain science, in a criminal context seems to me to be unwise, unjust, and probably unconstitutional. The prosecution should have to prove impairment. I think most prescription drugs would be amenable to blood-testing for impairment, but cannabis is problematic under the current testing paradigms. This is a small detail for HighPop though.