NY Times: Few Problems With Cannabis for California

[Bennyboy]

By ADAM NAGOURNEY and RICK LYMAN
Published: October 26, 2013

LOS ANGELES — In the heart of Northern California’s marijuana growing region, the sheriff’s office is inundated each fall with complaints about the stench of marijuana plots or the latest expropriation of public land by growers. Its tranquil communities have been altered by the emergence of a wealthy class of marijuana entrepreneurs, while nearly 500 miles away in Los Angeles, officials have struggled to regulate an explosion of medical marijuana shops.
Interactive Feature: Milestones in U.S. Marijuana Laws

Over the last century, the laws relating to marijuana have gone through an evolution.


But at a time when polls show widening public support for legalization — recreational marijuana is about to become legal in Colorado and Washington, and voter initiatives are in the pipeline in at least three other states — California’s 17-year experience as the first state to legalize medical marijuana offers surprising lessons, experts say.

Warnings voiced against partial legalization — of civic disorder, increased lawlessness and a drastic rise in other drug use — have proved unfounded.

Instead, research suggests both that marijuana has become an alcohol substitute for younger people here and in other states that have legalized medical marijuana, and that while driving under the influence of any intoxicant is dangerous, driving after smoking marijuana is less dangerous than after drinking alcohol.

READ MORE: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/27/us/few-problems-with-cannabis-for-california.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1382900497-IAJzKHq%2F3bh89ygmwhwS4g&

[musiclawyer]

1. If you have not smoked, vaped, of ate ( like many cops) there is no reason to chime in

That said. The entire mountain west will be bud legal by the end of the decade. Very little doubt
What we need more than anything is a mobile test that proves impairment, not residual amounts in the blood. Once such a test exists, legalization will proceed beyond its current glacial pace ...

[Bennyboy]

2. What if there is no impairment?

I personally don't think there is. it doesn't affect motor skills. notice how nobody has devised a roadside test for impairment? That's because there is none. All those skills I can do no problem high or straight. I'd get in a car with anyone that was high any time. No problem. Wanna drive to Washington and puff tuff all the way there, yeah let's hit it. But when we stop at the brewery we get a room next door so we don't drink and drive....

Most tests indicate that for some groups it is actually beneficial. (males 18- 30 especially)


There is also the thing about THC where one time you get much higher than another. One hit gets you off one day, but another you gotta puff tuff.....so the THC volume I don't believe is how to go about it. Big variables.

Also medical patients use a lot more cannabis than people that are using for enjoyment. Oil treatments. (right now I am curing a squamish carcinoma with oil) Edibles ( I know people that do a lot of edibles a day, about five times more than say I would...serious pain issues....)

I do understand why the legal profession wants some level of impairment (and also why they are all for the war on drugs as a body) so they still have clients when the DWI numbers go down.

[musiclawyer]

3. Everything can be quantified nowadays

The guy with a spinal fusion who smokes 3 blunts a days has a tolerance off the chart for most people. So his motor functioning still works fine when most casual users would be quite wasted Perhapd there should be a higher level threshold for medicinal users and a lower lever threshold for everyone else The existing thresholds in Washington and Colorado are bullshit. They capture people who smoked or vaped but are not impaired. That is why we need a NEW test based on another metric that measures whether your motor skills are gone. Legally speaking , we don't want people arrested for no reason.

[Bennyboy]

4. EXACTLY...

We need proof of impairment, not some random number. But again I am not sure what is impairment. Can you be impaired to the point of being more dangerous than say fast food or cell phones? I don't think you can.

[musiclawyer]

5. Not disagreeing

Given the unique nature of bud and it's ubiquity and rapid trajectory towards legal, I almost think old school is the only way --field sobriety test followed by another in the police lab that is recorded and in evidence. That will discourage cops from bringing people in unless they are truly and unambiguously stoned beyond kilter. Thing is, as any experienced stoner knows, very very few will get behind a wheel impaired. The State is going to be really disappointed once it finds out there is no money in looking expressly for stoned drivers ....