http://blog.norml.org/2014/04/23/arizona-supreme-court-rejects-dui-per-se-standard-for-thc-metabolites/ the very precedence other courts need to say NO to the bullshit logic that has been used for decades.... soon it will bleed into the employment arena.
This is a pretty progressive step for a state that actually made it illegal to be a Mexican. Good job AZ!
AZ is damn near owned by the liquor powerhouses that are the McCains. We saw in CO and WA a 5ng limit for impairment, which basically puts you over the limit with one toke. The liquor industry wants in on pot. Starting from a place where the mere use of pot would make you susceptible to arrest is not in their favor. They need to be able to sell it to you for exorbitant prices and taxes AND bust you for impaired driving. They'll come out with a "sensible" solution like CO and WA yet. You watch.
And yet the amount of DUI's for pot hasn't skyrocketed like all you legalization prohibitionists predicted and were hoping for. Law enforcement is far more concerned, especially in WA where drunk driving laws are extremely tough, with drunks tearing up the roadways every night, then some pot smoking individual who may or may not be impaired by the time they pull blood.
No. I meant impaired, by legal standards. By the time the individuals blood is pulled, there's a pretty good chance they'll be under the legal limit and not considered impaired, therefore, no charge. Basically, unless your driving down the street, with smoke rolling out the windows, your not getting a DUI for pot.
Just sit back and look what you are arguing for and condoning. How long has it been "legal." Why would they so specifically put it in the laws to not use the 5ng limit? You're worse than a prohibitionist trying to "prove" something mere months after a law/policy was adopted. You have NO data to base any of your claims on. NONE.
Yeah I do believe I know what I'm talking about, so quite frankly, stfu. In DUIDs, in WA, a qualified physician must be present to draw blood in booking. Often there isn't one or it takes a couple of hours to get one. You fucking think a officer is going take the chance of wasting time and money on someone who's blood may or may not be dirty by the time they draw, especially for weed, hell no...
Yeah, I do too. And when test programs have already been implemented to take blood roadside in multiple states? Then what? When they have the "weed breathalyzer" to bust you roadside? Then what? You can't think in static terms. They can change the rules of the game as they go, and the technology will follow. You have picked up on that as a student of the drug war, right? So yeah, I'll keep expressing myself as I see fit, thank you.
I apologize for being an ass, but I believe that while yes their will be a focus by law enforcement on cannabis impairment, but the facts will remain the same that you still have to fail the field sobriety test to even get to a "weed breathalyzer" which IF accurate, then so be it. Don't drive high. Remember, its never been legal to drive with cannabis in your system, whether 5 ng or .001 ng
Breathalyzer will prove what? That I smoked? Well I didn't inhale, son. I say prove I'm impaired with a goddamn blood test. There's a big flaw in your logic, known as law.
That breathalyzer will give them the probable cause to take you down to the station for that blood test. If you are a daily smoker you would test over 5ng at not even be high. They got you for high driving now and your not even stoned. That is how they use the law.
Yeah if the breathalyzer is recognized by the courts which currently, as far as I know, isn't. So basically you have to fail a field sobriety test, get booked, draw blood (possibly hours after getting picked up) and then MAYBE get charged? Until field sobriety tests for cannabis can prove actual impairment law enforcement will not change their current stance on stoned driving, yes its illlegal and you will be arrested if caught, but you must be blatantly 'intoxicated'. Cops here in WA have pretty much stated as much.
I love the metabolite argument. lol It makes me chuckle. It's like saying you're on fire because you smell like smoke after sitting by a campfire. Sent from my garage-run gynecology office using Grasscity Forum.
Well, there are several in development that will test breath. They would not move forward with legalization schemes which include ridiculous 5ng limits (bankrolled by those in the insurance industry no less) without knowing full well it will be a money maker in the very near future. The breathalyzers used for YEARS for alcohol have often been proven to be either not accurate, or the source code withheld so that no one even knows if they are accurate. These pesky little details are right in front of your nose already showing you that accuracy and stated enforcement intent needn't get in the way. You're pretty confident when the available examples right under your nose at present paint a different picture. Shit, they are advertising ignition breathalyzer locks for sale on roadside billboards in this state. "Get your license back for only $10K." This is all a moneymaker, and if insurance leaches bankrolling these laws isn't a red flag for you, nothing ever will be.
Now that's something I'm happy to see Kind of surprising to see from AZ, especially with their strict driving laws. But strict doesn't have to include nonsensical, so good for Arizona! Hope other states soon follow suit.