|
 MrBump
Third prize is you're fired
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,263
Loc: Denver, Colorado
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
 D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws   1
#4420814 - 07/18/05 08:42 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
the herb is (finally!) legalized, what do we do to the traffic laws regarding its consumption and driving?
its a fair statement to say that a sober driver is the best driver. Alcohol can be consumed but if you have too much (.1 in almost every state), drive and get caught you could face some jail time and a big fine. But you can't really quantify THC concentration in the blood stream like you can for alcohol. IMO if pot were ever legalized, driving while high should not be legal. but what should the penalties be? should it be a jailable offense (stoners dont need detox tanks, they need Aqua Teen Hunger Force), a fine or slap on the wrist?
how could we quantify the drug's effects for the safety of the consumer and other drivers?
--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.
There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.
Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?
|
 rod
Ψ
Registered: 06/29/05
Posts: 3,727
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: MrBump] 1
#4420833 - 07/18/05 08:49 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
There could be a bad accident, if the joint falls between your legs driving.  And what about the passengers, is it ok for them, but not the driver?
|
MrBump
Third prize is you're fired
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,263
Loc: Denver, Colorado
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: rod] 1
#4420865 - 07/18/05 09:00 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
would you have to keep a pinched stash in your trunk, like you would an open container?
are roaches in your ashtray considered "empties?"
--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.
There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.
Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?
|
rod
Ψ
Registered: 06/29/05
Posts: 3,727
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: MrBump] 1
#4420882 - 07/18/05 09:05 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
well i,d have to say, no to the first question, yes to the second.
For me the worst thing I do while driving is a beer or two, no more
than that,the last thing I want is to lose my DL.
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: rod] 1
#4423335 - 07/19/05 11:44 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I think it should just be a warning or fine if your pulled over with pot smell in your car. Maybe increase the punishment on your 2nd or 3rd time getting caught.
However if you get in an accident and hurt someone while your high and it is YOUR FAULT, I could see a higher lvl of punishment there. The problem is that cops will abuse any law we place. So it's hard to exactly what is the right punishment. All I know is no one should be jailed for a victimless crime.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc: 
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: Sycronica] 1
#4423762 - 07/19/05 01:47 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Unless your driving poorly, I don't see any reason for a ticket, regardless of your level of "intoxication"....drunk or high.
|
LeftyBurnz
Mr. I Eat Butthole
Registered: 06/21/05
Posts: 24,570
Loc: FL
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl] 1
#4427850 - 07/20/05 11:04 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
i dont know about you guys but when im high i drive the EXACT speed limit, always use blinker and etc. not only do i feel that i drive MUCH better when im stoned but so does everyone i know, i drive like a bat out of hell when im sober, ive had 4 speeding tickets in 5 years and i was sober for each one. i guess that couldnt be said for everyone though.
--------------------
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: LeftyBurnz] 1
#4428025 - 07/20/05 11:38 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I'm the same way.
Weed lets me focus more on the task at hand. It is easier to get in the zone. I know many people who aren't like this tho, I also know many that are 
I think the breathalyzer tests are somewhat draconian.
A simple, on the spot, coordination test should be sufficient.
I know people who can tolerate a higher level of alcohol than me.
I could easily be "intoxicated" and not fail the breathalyzer test.
I have friends that could be over the legal limit and still have good coordination.
If you were driving erratically and failed the coordination test 
You get to have a ride in the police car.
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl] 1
#4428047 - 07/20/05 11:42 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I too can drive just fine high...but we have to pacify mothers against drunk driving.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
LeftyBurnz
Mr. I Eat Butthole
Registered: 06/21/05
Posts: 24,570
Loc: FL
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl] 1
#4428054 - 07/20/05 11:44 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
exactly, my business partner can drink so much its unbelieveble, id say that 5 beers will just get me to the point where i shouldnt be driving, my partner can walk a straight line and pass everything except the breathalyzer after drinking 14 beers! everyones different, and to subject everyone to the same tests is just idiotic.
--------------------
|
LeftyBurnz
Mr. I Eat Butthole
Registered: 06/21/05
Posts: 24,570
Loc: FL
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: LeftyBurnz] 1
#4428064 - 07/20/05 11:46 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
MADD was a good cause at first but now i feel theyre just a bunch of old bags with nothing better to do than tell other people how to live their lives.
--------------------
|
joeythecatch
Stranger
Registered: 08/26/04
Posts: 36
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl] 1
#4428073 - 07/20/05 11:49 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
The main problem I see with the coordination tests is that they leave the determination of whether you're intoxicated completely up to the police officer's discretion. In other words, the cop gets to decide whether you perform the stunts/tricks well enough, and if he's having a bad day/doesn't like the way you look/needs to write more tickets so his numbers look better/etc., you're fucked, no matter how well you do. That's true now of roadside tests for alcohol intoxication, and given that many cops will carry some residual bitterness over marijuana decriminalization once it actually happens, they'll probably be more than happy to find you "intoxicated" on marijuana just to vent their frustrations, even if your driving isn't the least bit erratic or dangerous.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: joeythecatch] 1
#4428204 - 07/20/05 12:16 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
joeythecatch said:
The main problem I see with the coordination tests is that they leave the determination of whether you're intoxicated completely up to the police officer's discretion. In other words, the cop gets to decide whether you perform the stunts/tricks well enough, and if he's having a bad day/doesn't like the way you look/needs to write more tickets so his numbers look better/etc., you're fucked, no matter how well you do.
That line of thinking was valid when they didn't have videocameras in the cop cars. They had to set some standard for the judge to go by.
Just because you get a ticket doesn't mean that your going to get convicted, a ticket is only the cops opinion. Now it would be virtually impossible to wrongfully convict someone of being intoxicated with the technology we have.
It is too easy, today, for proper evidence to be gathered at the scene for any unjust DUI/DWI convictions.
Laws....across the board need to be changed/amended.
|
joeythecatch
Stranger
Registered: 08/26/04
Posts: 36
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl] 1
#4428487 - 07/20/05 01:16 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry, I don't share your optimism. You're right that a ticket is not a conviction, but even once you get to court, the testimony of a police officer will generally be seen as more reliable than that of an average citizen. In cases where the officer has to make an on-the-spot judgment call about whether the results of a roadside "stupid human trick" sobriety test indicate that a driver is intoxicated (here I'm referring to incidents where one could validly interpret the evidence either way), many judges will side with the officer simply it's quicker and easier. Not all, but many. Yes, by the book, you're innocent until proven guilty, but in cases where the "proof" is open to interpretation, there are a lot of judges out there who simply don't have time to question whether the cop was in the right by judging you to be intoxicated. It's your word against his, and his word is backed by a badge, his history with the judge (if he's ever had to testify in front of him before on another case), his alleged experience in administering the tests and the sympathy he'll get for having a dangerous job and being just as overworked as the judge presiding over the case. The defendant, on the other hand, will have to overcome the judge's resentment that such a case is on his already overbooked docket in the first place, in addition to any suspicion that you're just trying to get out of a ticket even though you know you did it. If you're a young male and the ticket was issued late at night on a weekend, that could just seal the deal against you. Getting the ticket overturned, in those cases, isn't a slam dunk, though I agree with you: often it should be. Because police officers certainy do write DUI tickets for drivers when they're not incapacitated in any way. You're right that one can always challenge such a ticket, but even when the facts are on your side, it's not guaranteed that you'll get a judge to see it that way. Getting a judge to take your word over that of a cop is hard, and our jails are full of convicted "criminals" who, even with competent legal counsel, weren't up to the task.
What everybody should keep in mind is that you always can (and, for the most part, always should) refuse these tests. You're not legally required to perform stupid human tricks for a police officer just because he pulls you over. In most states, you'll lose your license if you refuse a breath test, but they can't take your license for refusing to do the stupid human tricks, and they can't compel you to do them. Cops, of course, don't want anyone to know that, just like they don't want anyone to know that you can refuse to allow a search of your car or allow them to enter your home without a warrant. If they ask--even if they do so forcefully and threateningly--and you assent to their request (that's all it is, and that's the part they don't want you to know), it doesn't matter if you didn't know that you could have refused; in the eyes of the law, it was voluntary. So, just say no to heel-toe walking, eye-shifting, nose-poking and backward alphabet reciting. They might take you down to the station for a breath BAC test (even the roadside breath tests aren't compulsory--you can even refuse these). Here's why you should always refuse: if you are drunk, you're not going to be able to do these tests well enough to fool the officer, and if you're sober, he might decide for whatever reason that you're drunk anyway. And if he tickets you because he judge you to be drunk, you can't insist on the breath test to prove that you're not. They can tell you that you failed the stupid human trick tests, write your ticket and be on their way, leaving you with no means of offering any proof that you weren't intoxicated. If you fail the roadside test, you cannot insist on a "legitimate" breathalyzer test; the officer can still administer one if he wants to, but if you say "no, I'm not really drunk, just give me the breathalyzer test and I'll prove it," he doesn't have to do it; he'll most likely say something like "no, I've got all the proof I need; have a nice day" and be on his way. Then you're right back to where I started this post: trying, often in vain, to prove to a judge that your word is more trustworthy than that of your city's "finest."
DISCLAIMER: Laws vary from state to state, and even from municipality to municipality. I'm not a lawyer, don't play one on TV (or the internet) and the law where you, the reader, live may be different from the law where I live. The above is accurate for where I live, to the best of my knowledge, but double check with an expert in your area.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: joeythecatch] 1
#4430819 - 07/20/05 10:32 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Your still going with the "Its your word against the cops" idea.
If every coordination test was filmed as evidence, then it isn't your word against his.
If the cop knows that he has to have video evidence of your lack of coordination. Then he is much less likely to fuck with you plus, if you do pass the test it will be on video tape.
Judges get very pissy with cops for tying up court for B.S. reasons. If he gets a rep for arresting people who were clearly not intoxicated then he can have him reprimanded.
|
MrBump
Third prize is you're fired
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,263
Loc: Denver, Colorado
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: joeythecatch] 1
#4430996 - 07/20/05 11:11 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
>>>his alleged experience in administering the tests and the sympathy he'll get for having a dangerous job and being just as overworked as the judge presiding over the case.
tee hee! you obviously don't work in the legal field. Judges are pretty lazy...from municipal traffic court thru circuit court. even our US supreme court takes a few straight months of vacation. but that's for another thread.
your post was very long and some correct points were made, however, you seemed to be writing mostly regarding intoxication from alcohol. there's no doubt in my mind a very stoned person could pass the field sobriety tests that a very drunk person could not. that's why i was directing this thread toward the idea of driving while high on pot. its not as easy to detect via the traditional methods of judging intoxication, i.e. field sobriety tests. also, despite the fact that many people believe they can drive better while high, there are plenty of people out there that can't. I'm definitely one of them. i hate driving high, and i do really dumb things to draw attention to the fact I'm not driving sober.
and regarding your diatribe on police not giving Breathalyzers and relying solely on these field sobriety tests to judge intoxication, I'd like to see some linkage to a statute or ordinance #, cuz I've never heard of a ticket issued for a DUI that didn't include BAC percentage. i mean, that's the empirical evidence the cop needs to book your ass. if you fail a field sobriety test, there's no doubt in a cops mind that you'd fail the Breathalyzer as well and blow a 0.1 or higher. to me, the field test is your opertunity to get the fuck out of the ticket if your borderline.
--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.
There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.
Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: MrBump] 1
#4433874 - 07/21/05 02:39 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Bottom line is; If you cannot afford a good lawyer, you are GOING to get convicted, NO MATTER WHAT.
It don't matter for shit what that video shows, a public pretender will NOT do you a damn bit of good in any case. Hell, if you can not piss on the spot for officer then it's a DUI. They'll go to the prosecuter, say..."he refused to take a piss test" even if you just can't go under pressure or didn't have to at the time. It's a DUI.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: Sycronica] 1
#4434431 - 07/21/05 04:34 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
|
MrBump
Third prize is you're fired
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,263
Loc: Denver, Colorado
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: Sycronica] 1
#4442207 - 07/23/05 10:21 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
i have never heard of a piss test for DUI's.
--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.
There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.
Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: MrBump] 1
#4442997 - 07/23/05 12:27 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
i have never heard of a piss test for DUI's.
I'm glad you have not had to experience this then. Let me enlighten you on what our protectors are legally aloud to do then.
If you get pulled over, and the cop suspects you are under the influence of ANY drug. He will pull you out of the car, give you the standard field sobriety tests, breathalizer, the usual. However, at this point if he does not have enough evidence to convict you (or maybe he just woke up in a bad mood) he can take you to the station (without any charges yet) give you a piss test and blood test and you cannot say jack shit about it. If you refuse in anyway, it is then a DUI.
Don't think the cop has to place you under arrest to take you to the station, he can do that to anyone at anytime for further testing. And refusal to comply results in a DUI even if you are stone cold sober.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 07/01/03
Posts: 16,291
Loc:
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: Sycronica]
#4443386 - 07/23/05 02:30 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Im sure that must be a local law.
I have never heard of anyone in my state having to take a piss test for a dui
--------------------
Live for the moment you are in nowDon't be bogged down by your pastDon't be afraid of what lies in your future
|
BCBudJohn
Foolhardy
Registered: 06/27/05
Posts: 150
Loc: Victoria, BC, Canada
Last seen: 18 years, 4 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl]
#4444657 - 07/23/05 08:45 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
I think most people agree that driving stoned is not nearly as dangerous as driving drunk. Most studies show that after smoking pot, the only noticeable side-affect in studies, is driving too slow. It also reduces your reaction time, and as a chronic smoker, i can testify that i've been way to baked to drive. It does reduce reaction time, and i know you can be distracted if you aren't used to the psychedelic effects.
Either way, if you were a first time smoker, smoked down some BC bud and buckled up, you'd probably cause an accident.
I think it should be a judgement call, there is no way to test for it.
--------------------
Peace
John
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl]
#4445455 - 07/24/05 12:58 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
Im sure that must be a local law.
I have never heard of anyone in my state having to take a piss test for a dui
This is NOT just a local law. I know people it has happened to in 2 states. I'm would wager very good chances it is done in other states as well.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
MrBump
Third prize is you're fired
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,263
Loc: Denver, Colorado
Last seen: 4 years, 9 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: BCBudJohn]
#4467250 - 07/29/05 12:05 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BCBudJohn said:
I think most people agree that driving stoned is not nearly as dangerous as driving drunk. Most studies show that after smoking pot, the only noticeable side-affect in studies, is driving too slow. It also reduces your reaction time, and as a chronic smoker, i can testify that i've been way to baked to drive. It does reduce reaction time, and i know you can be distracted if you aren't used to the psychedelic effects.
Either way, if you were a first time smoker, smoked down some BC bud and buckled up, you'd probably cause an accident.
I think it should be a judgement call, there is no way to test for it.
Please give me a link comparing drunk vs. stoned driving and ability. i would love to read a study.
and as for a judgment call being the grounds for decision....i think most people who have too much too drink have this grandeous idea of driving coeherently...so they drive despite obvious reasons not too.
Like i have earlier proposed, driving sober is driving safest. When the weed is legalized, it still will be regulated in manners such as traffic law.
Legalization does not equal Thunder Dome. 
--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.
There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.
Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: niteowl]
#4473390 - 07/30/05 11:33 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
Im sure that must be a local law.
I have never heard of anyone in my state having to take a piss test for a dui
*clears throat* AHEM http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4473329/an/0/page/0
Quote:
Michigan is one of ten states that have enacted so-called "zero tolerance" drugged driving laws. Under Michigan's law, it is a criminal offense for an individual to operate a motor vehicle with any detectable level of a Schedule I substance present in his or her bodily fluids
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
tak
geo's henchman
Registered: 11/20/00
Posts: 3,776
Loc: nowhereland
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: Sycronica]
#4480234 - 08/01/05 06:44 AM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
My best friend just got his DUI thrown out in court. He had his license gone for 30 days while waiting, and got fired because he spent 3 weeks in court! 3 weeks!
The cop never had a breathelizer, but instead decided to mark him as "refusal to blow" because when he didn the field sobriety test, he couldnt walk a straight line well. The cop did not care that he had a broken left ankle though. This guy who never drinks, was *obviously* drunk ...
--------------------
The DJ's took pills to stay awake and play for seven days.
|
Sycronica
Seeker
Registered: 06/15/05
Posts: 376
Loc: Inside my head
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
Re: D.U.High...legalization and traffic laws [Re: tak]
#4481259 - 08/01/05 02:25 PM (18 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
root-ninja-tak said:
My best friend just got his DUI thrown out in court. He had his license gone for 30 days while waiting, and got fired because he spent 3 weeks in court! 3 weeks!
The cop never had a breathelizer, but instead decided to mark him as "refusal to blow" because when he didn the field sobriety test, he couldnt walk a straight line well. The cop did not care that he had a broken left ankle though. This guy who never drinks, was *obviously* drunk ...
He should try to sue the police dept for damages caused to his life for going through the whole ordeal and loosing his job.
--------------------
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Forgiveness is the ultimate sacrifice.
You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds 
Kratom Powder For Sale 
Red Vein Kratom 
Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale 
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder
Edit 
Reply 
Agent Cooper
LSDempire
Baby_Hitler
Thor
1 2 all )
Ego Death
TheFakeSunRa