Setting An Arbitrary Measurement For Cannabis Driving Impairment

Ernst

Well-Known Member
Setting an arbitrary measurement for cannabis driving impairment

I was going through a few hundred emails and I thought to share this one since we are all the focus of determining just how criminal it is to be high or to want to practice Horticulture with cannabis. At every step we have someone wanting to take away from our freedom and it always has a price tag attached to it as well.
Over at Westword.com there are some good articles regarding current efforts in Colorado to set a THC driving limit at five nanograms per milliliter of blood — a level that, while better than the per-se laws in states like Illinois (where any detection of THC qualifies as impairment), is still far too low for many people, particularly regular medical marijuana users.
THC driving limits could cause more innocent people to spend months in jail, attorney says explores the problems of testing, the long delays in tests, and the fact that too few people in the criminal justice system have been trained to understand them.
The document above also illustrates another issue that would be amplified by the passage of a THC driving limits bill, in Bresee’s opinion. The results listed under the test name “Blood Cannabinoid Confirmation” read, “Delta-9-THC-COOH 30 ng/ml,” which suggest that the driver in question had a THC level six times higher than the proposed intoxication limit. But that’s not true, since the THC-COOH reading measures “the amount of THC that is stored in fatty tissue cells, but that isn’t active,” Bresee says.
​Department of heath tests later showed that the amount of active THC in the driver’s system (usually listed on forms as “Delta-9-THC,” sans the COOH) was six nanograms. And a private test that Bresee says is more accurate than ones the state runs — its methodology utilizes liquid, not gas, as does the CDPHE’s lab — registered the amount at just 1.5 nanograms.
Confused? So are many prosecutors, Bresee believes. [...]
In one case set in a small eastern Colorado county, Bresee says it took him more than nine months to make a prosecutor understand the relevance of active versus inactive THC.
THC blood test: Pot critic William Breathes nearly 3 times over proposed limit when sober – in this article, a medical marijuana patient has his blood tested after a night of sleep and not smoking marijuana for 15 hours.
Even when deemed sober by a doctor, my active THC levels were almost triple the proposed standard of 5 nanograms per milliliter of blood.[...]
The lab ran a serum/plasma test which showed my THC count to be at 27. According to Dr. Alan Shackelford, who ordered the blood work and evaluated my results, the number of active THC nanograms per milliliter count is about half of that total, or 13.5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.
In short: If this bill passes and I was pulled over by police, I would be over the limit by 8.5 nanograms. By that logic, I would be more likely to have mowed down a family in my car on my way to the doctor’s office that day than actually arriving there safely. But I didn’t — because I wasn’t impaired.
Don’t take my word for it. According to Shackelford, who evaluated me before writing the order to have my blood drawn last Wednesday, I was “in no way incapacitated.” According to him, my test results show that it would not be uncommon to see such a high level in other people who use cannabis regularly — like medical marijuana patients. “Your level was about 13.5 for whole blood… which would have made you incapacitated on a lab value,” he said. “They need to vote this sucker down based on that alone.”
I’m all in favor of getting drivers off the road when they’re impaired, but a test that doesn’t actually determine impairment and will sweep up non-impaired drivers into the net is not at all helpful.
Please follow the link for the full story
 
I dont think you'll be able to have your cake and eat it too here man.

If weed legalization is ever going to be taken seriously by the nay-sayers you're going to have to set the same strict standards for weed as you do Alcohol. I mean, dont get me wrong - we all know you can drive pretty easily while high... But non-smokers, particularly lawmakers, aren't likely to buy it. The way I see it - if I get busted driving high, that's sucky but it's nothing like going to prison over a few plants in your house.
 
I happen to think the standard impairment tests are adequate. I have had a few sobriety tests in my day.

What I see them arguing is the legal definition so they can punish people.

There is no cake agenda here mame.
Please don't encourage people to attack me. It's not MY cake it's not My agenda.
 
I happen to think the standard impairment tests are adequate. I have had a few sobriety tests in my day.

What I see them arguing is the legal definition so they can punish people.

There is no cake agenda here mame.
Please don't encourage people to attack me. It's not MY cake it's not My agenda.
okay cool, at first glance it looked like a cake agenda. For the record, I like cake... I didn't realize I was encouraging people to attack you, I apoligize.
 
man thats not good. im all for testing, but it better be accurate. we all know damn well there is something testable in the body to know whether youre stoned or not. maybe a simple THC test isnt going to work...
 
okay cool, at first glance it looked like a cake agenda. For the record, I like cake... I didn't realize I was encouraging people to attack you, I apoligize.


Well I have had a dog on my ass and I am sensitive.
Thanks for responding with more love than "fuck you."
 
man thats not good. im all for testing, but it better be accurate. we all know damn well there is something testable in the body to know whether youre stoned or not. maybe a simple THC test isnt going to work...

Well yeah and drug interaction is often misdiagnosed by Cops as well.. People having a reaction to medication but other wise not impaired have been seen as intoxication.
They also arrest diabetics having problems with their insulin levels as being drunk.

I really have problems with roadside Cop-Doctors. Now if they could see if someone is going to blow up air planes for example such as the 911 guy that was stopped by a traffic cop.. If they could test for stuff like that well maybe we have something but to bust a guy that smoked weed yesterday and has red eyes this morning??

What rules cover that? Maybe the rule of Traffic fine income?
 
No drug testing for marijuana. Not unless there is testing for testosterone and adrenaline as well. There are reaction time and cognition tests that work quite well for determining if someone is "impaired" by being overtired and sleepy, by being under the influence of cold medication, alcohol or simply being angry. Many people are not affected enough to keep them from driving. I, for one, am and I would never drive while under the influence, but the point is not blood level but ability.

On that subject, if you ever have a spare few days and want to see what actually goes on in some people's minds, hang around some of the drug testing forums. I watched a group of these nazis discuss how one gets a urine sample from a quadriplegic who had a problem urinating while being watched. "all drug users are liars". "everyone should be tested" and "we are saving the world, one sample at a time" was the tone of the conversations.
 
How are they to determine being impaired from smoking pot? A blood test won't do because THC stays in the system for 90 days. It won't hold up on court. Also, even if one were driving "under the influence," being pulled over by the cops would be such a buzz kill that one would appear stone-sober ... except for the shit-eating grin. :)
 
Back
Top