Obama Drug Policy Calls For Drugged Driving Charges For Unimpaired Marijuana Users

[Greenlife]

Leo will require you to go to the hospital to take a blood test similar to the procedure if you refuse a breathalyzer. In terms of court, unfortunately it is up to the "suspect" to prove that he wasn't impaired although his blood test shows THC levels. Horrible law either way

 

 

hmmm i wana see a leo pull me over on the side of the road and ask me to pee in a cup not gonna happen (INDECENT EXPOSER) or try to take me to the station to get a sample for those who can afford an attrny they will eat that up for those who cant REFUSE "im not peeing in a cup that is a violation of my rights" this should get u out for a few days b/c i and i hope many otheres see this as a violation of ure 5th ammendment right. then http://www.totalnaturaldetox.com/?gclid=CJKfgo3n0aECFY9M5QodjzQgIg there is lots of stuff out there to pass so hopefully this helps somebody

[jacklash69]

Leo will require you to go to the hospital to take a blood test similar to the procedure if you refuse a breathalyzer. In terms of court, unfortunately it is up to the "suspect" to prove that he wasn't impaired although his blood test shows THC levels. Horrible law either way The whole impaired driving,duid, is complete horseshit.

 

[Kevin]

We say the war on drugs has failed, and it has, but as long as they continue to make a profit from this insanity, it will continue...be assured of that.

 

I swear an oath. If I ever get busted for my meds for any reason, I will never pay a single cent to their system. They can keep me jailed as long as they want, but the day they set me loose, we're even. I will give them no money.

 

 

Peace.

[confused]

From the Obama Administration's recently released National Drug Control Strategy (hat tip to NORML reader Glen):

Encourage States To Adopt Per Se Drug Impairment Laws [ONDCP]

State laws regarding impaired driving are varied, but most State codes do not contain a separate offense for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). Therefore, few drivers are identified, prosecuted, or convicted for DUID. Law enforcement personnel usually cite individuals with the easier to prove driving while intoxicated (DWI) alcohol charges. Unclear laws provide vague signals both to drivers and to law enforcement, thereby minimizing the possible preventive benefit of DUID statutes. Fifteen states have passed laws clarifying that the presence of any illegal drug in a driver's body is per se evidence of impaired driving. ONDCP will work to expand the use of this standard to other states and explore other ways to increase the enforcement of existing DUID laws.

 

Here are the states President Obama would like the others to emulate:

 

Arizona: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

Delaware: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Georgia: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Illinois: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Indiana: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 60 days upon conviction.

 

Michigan: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 93 days upon conviction, vehicle immobilization for up to 180 days.

 

Nevada: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites.

 

Ohio: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 72 hours in jail, up to 6 months upon conviction, 6 month to 3 year license suspension.

 

Pennsylvania: DUID for cannabis metabolites, amount unclear.

 

South Dakota: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites for persons under the age of 21.

 

Utah: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 48 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

 

Nine of the fifteen states cited have "zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites". What this means is that if the inactive (read: non-impairing) THC metabolite (THC-COOH) is detected in the urine of a driver, that driver is impaired in the eyes of the law. (There are actually 17 states that have per se DUID laws, but Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin exclude metabolites of cannabis.) Nevada and Ohio have 15 ng/ml levels which are very low; most workplace pre-employment screenings set the initial screening limit at 50 ng/ml. At the confirmation level of 15 ng/ml, the frequent cannabis user will be positive for perhaps as long as 15 weeks.

Of course, faithful NORML readers and most of the public know that cannabis metabolites can remain detectable in the urine for up to 100 days or longer for a regular cannabis consumer and up to fifteen days for the casual consumer, even after quitting cold turkey. Metabolites in urine don't tell you a driver is actually impaired, they tell you someone used cannabis, but not when. Even the US Department of Transportation admits that a positive test for drug metabolites is "solid proof of drug use within the last few days, it cannot be used by itself to prove behavioral impairment during a focal event."

 

Cannabis metabolites are funny things; they don't eliminate from the body in any predictable fashion. In fact, when you think about it, a metabolite is produced when the body metabolizes, or breaks down, a substance. The presence of metabolites for THC tells you the body has already broken down the THC! You could actually call a urine screening for metabolites a non-impairment test!

 

Now some of these laws do have per se standards for actual THC in the blood and you could argue that is a more realistic determinant of current impairment, but do you think most cash-strapped city, county, and state police are going to use an expensive, invasive blood test when a cheap urine screen is available and more likely to get them a conviction for DUID?

 

These per se DUID "zero tolerance" laws are nothing but discrimination against cannabis users, plain and simple. Metabolites for every other drug, legal and illegal, are eliminated from the body much more quickly:

 

PCP ("angel dust") = up to 2 days detection.

 

Cocaine (and "crack") = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Opiates (heroin, oxycontin, etc.) = up to 1-2 days detection.

 

Amphetamines (meth, speed) = up to 1-3 days detection.

 

Barbiturates (Seconol, etc.) = up to 3 days detection.

 

Benzodiazepenes (Xanax, Valium, Clonopin, etc.) = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Alcohol (Budweiser, Jim Beam, Reisling, etc.) = you can actually be considered unimpaired with current blood alcohol levels up to 0.08%, so long as you pass the roadside sobriety test!

 

Cannabis (marijuana, hash, pot) = up to 7-100 days detection.

 

 

So you could smoke some dust, snort some coke, shoot some smack, and pop some pills at the party Friday night, and possibly be considered an unimpaired driver by Monday (you could even have a couple of drinks before you got pulled over), but if you smoked a joint last month, in eleven states you could be going to jail and losing your license for endangering the public on the roadways.

These "zero tolerance" laws are criminalizing an entire population - cannabis users - for molecules in their bodies that have nothing to do with impairment or driving ability. Can you imagine the uproar if police harassed drivers based on the melanin content of their skin... whoops, never mind.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-belville/obama-drug-policy-calls-f_b_574483.html

 

NO SWEAT! Provisions have been put in the new MM law that Medical Patients can have metabolics in their blood. Not to worry!

[confused]

 

NOT YET!!

[TheSmartestManAlive]

NOT YET!!

 

 

You will soon

[confused]

They don't have too, Michigan is a ZERO tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Hate to burst anyones bubble but driving with metabolites in the blood is OK for MM patients as long as you are not high at the time of driving. Driving provisions have been made to allow patients to drive with metobolites in their blood. So cheer up. Metabolites have no harmful effects on your ability to do daily things including driving.

[CataplexyCat]

THAT'S how we should treat the sick! Yay Government! *ahem*....bite me

[confused]

From the Obama Administration's recently released National Drug Control Strategy (hat tip to NORML reader Glen):

Encourage States To Adopt Per Se Drug Impairment Laws [ONDCP]

State laws regarding impaired driving are varied, but most State codes do not contain a separate offense for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). Therefore, few drivers are identified, prosecuted, or convicted for DUID. Law enforcement personnel usually cite individuals with the easier to prove driving while intoxicated (DWI) alcohol charges. Unclear laws provide vague signals both to drivers and to law enforcement, thereby minimizing the possible preventive benefit of DUID statutes. Fifteen states have passed laws clarifying that the presence of any illegal drug in a driver's body is per se evidence of impaired driving. ONDCP will work to expand the use of this standard to other states and explore other ways to increase the enforcement of existing DUID laws.

 

Here are the states President Obama would like the others to emulate:

 

Arizona: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

Delaware: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Georgia: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Illinois: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Indiana: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 60 days upon conviction.

 

Michigan: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 93 days upon conviction, vehicle immobilization for up to 180 days.

 

Nevada: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites.

 

Ohio: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 72 hours in jail, up to 6 months upon conviction, 6 month to 3 year license suspension.

 

Pennsylvania: DUID for cannabis metabolites, amount unclear.

 

South Dakota: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites for persons under the age of 21.

 

Utah: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 48 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

 

Nine of the fifteen states cited have "zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites". What this means is that if the inactive (read: non-impairing) THC metabolite (THC-COOH) is detected in the urine of a driver, that driver is impaired in the eyes of the law. (There are actually 17 states that have per se DUID laws, but Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin exclude metabolites of cannabis.) Nevada and Ohio have 15 ng/ml levels which are very low; most workplace pre-employment screenings set the initial screening limit at 50 ng/ml. At the confirmation level of 15 ng/ml, the frequent cannabis user will be positive for perhaps as long as 15 weeks.

Of course, faithful NORML readers and most of the public know that cannabis metabolites can remain detectable in the urine for up to 100 days or longer for a regular cannabis consumer and up to fifteen days for the casual consumer, even after quitting cold turkey. Metabolites in urine don't tell you a driver is actually impaired, they tell you someone used cannabis, but not when. Even the US Department of Transportation admits that a positive test for drug metabolites is "solid proof of drug use within the last few days, it cannot be used by itself to prove behavioral impairment during a focal event."

 

Cannabis metabolites are funny things; they don't eliminate from the body in any predictable fashion. In fact, when you think about it, a metabolite is produced when the body metabolizes, or breaks down, a substance. The presence of metabolites for THC tells you the body has already broken down the THC! You could actually call a urine screening for metabolites a non-impairment test!

 

Now some of these laws do have per se standards for actual THC in the blood and you could argue that is a more realistic determinant of current impairment, but do you think most cash-strapped city, county, and state police are going to use an expensive, invasive blood test when a cheap urine screen is available and more likely to get them a conviction for DUID?

 

These per se DUID "zero tolerance" laws are nothing but discrimination against cannabis users, plain and simple. Metabolites for every other drug, legal and illegal, are eliminated from the body much more quickly:

 

PCP ("angel dust") = up to 2 days detection.

 

Cocaine (and "crack") = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Opiates (heroin, oxycontin, etc.) = up to 1-2 days detection.

 

Amphetamines (meth, speed) = up to 1-3 days detection.

 

Barbiturates (Seconol, etc.) = up to 3 days detection.

 

Benzodiazepenes (Xanax, Valium, Clonopin, etc.) = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Alcohol (Budweiser, Jim Beam, Reisling, etc.) = you can actually be considered unimpaired with current blood alcohol levels up to 0.08%, so long as you pass the roadside sobriety test!

 

Cannabis (marijuana, hash, pot) = up to 7-100 days detection.

 

 

So you could smoke some dust, snort some coke, shoot some smack, and pop some pills at the party Friday night, and possibly be considered an unimpaired driver by Monday (you could even have a couple of drinks before you got pulled over), but if you smoked a joint last month, in eleven states you could be going to jail and losing your license for endangering the public on the roadways.

These "zero tolerance" laws are criminalizing an entire population - cannabis users - for molecules in their bodies that have nothing to do with impairment or driving ability. Can you imagine the uproar if police harassed drivers based on the melanin content of their skin... whoops, never mind.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-belville/obama-drug-policy-calls-f_b_574483.html

 

 

Hate to burst anyones bubble but driving with metabolites in the blood is OK for MM patients in Michigan as long as you are not high at the time of driving. IE: blood shot glassy eyeballs and smelling of pot) Driving provisions have been made to allow patients to drive with metobolites in their blood. So cheer up. Metabolites have no harmful effects on your ability to do daily things including driving.

[master.caregiver]

What I don't understand... short of failing a roadside sobriety test how can the presence of THC metabolites be proof of DUID when they stay present in the body for weeks? Doesn't the entire idea fail the logic test?

the logic test to most leo is that we all are criminals and if we smoked last week we are still high b/c there are thc metabolites in our system

[confused]

They don't have too, Michigan is a ZERO tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Only if you are not a MM patient. Provisions have been made to cover MM patients while driving!

[Zombiefied]

Hate to burst anyones bubble but driving with metabolites in the blood is OK for MM patients in Michigan as long as you are not high at the time of driving. IE: blood shot glassy eyeballs and smelling of pot) Driving provisions have been made to allow patients to drive with metobolites in their blood. So cheer up. Metabolites have no harmful effects on your ability to do daily things including driving.

 

 

Where did you get this information from? Did they change the DUID law? Yes I agree that metabolites have no effect on your functions, but how are you going to argue to the court that you were not

"under the influence" at the time of the "incident"? They should have to argue that you were intoxicated, but with THC metabolites in your system, well you get my point.

[confused]

Where did you get this information from? Did they change the DUID law? Yes I agree that metabolites have no effect on your functions, but how are you going to argue to the court that you were not

"under the influence" at the time of the "incident"? They should have to argue that you were intoxicated, but with THC metabolites in your system, well you get my point.

 

There are several things leo can look for to detect your being high. ie: glassy eyeballs, drooping eye lids, or smelling of pot. It's up to leo to determine if you fit one of the "Are you high?" categories and to tell you which category you fit. So don't drive while high, MM patient or not. Provisions from MMMA have been put into the new law to allow MM users having metabolics in their blood stream to drive while not being high.

[confused]

 

Heavens No ---- I mean Hell No!

[Zombiefied]

There are several things leo can look for to detect your being high. ie: glassy eyeballs, drooping eye lids, smelling of pot, finding of pot. It's up to leo to determine if you fit one of the "Are you high?" categories and to tell you which category you fit. So don't drive while high, MM patient or not. Provisions from MMMA have been put into the new law to allow MM users having metabolics in their blood stream to drive while not being high.

 

OK man, there are several things they can look for, but finding of pot and glassy eyeballs I will contest that. Finding of Pot. You mean to tell me that I can not drive out to my CG's house, pick up 2oz's and come home? Glassy Eyeballs. Cigarette smoke in the eye causes this, so does allergies and a bunch of other stuff that is completely un-related to Cannabis use. I agree with you kinda, dont drive while intoxicated, on anything! Where are the Provisions at in the law, can you give me a link so I can be better educated if I find myself in this situation?

[wolfman]

I have talked to some leos about this I am the pres.of the bay county comp club.They felt that the laws need clarification But they stated they would not stop or harass my members that was 2 months ago All has been good Not every law enforcement group feels this way Lets get a pettition to our senate about this problem and make this a law we can abide by Presently it is impossible and obama want's to adopt a universal o tolerence for thc making whoopee LUDICURS So any ideas steveyray THE WOLFMAN

[tutman2006]

So that just goes to show you, dont smoke pot, do EVERY other drug out there (that kills thousands of people) cuz you are less likely to get caught with it in your system....

 

Good post!

 

 

 

YEAH EXACTLY! This is why the government is just that messed up!!! FREE THE WEED!

[confused]

If you don't seem intoxicated why would they every even check?

 

They don't unless they get suspicious of you being high!

 

Section 333.26424

4. Protections for the Medical Use of Marihuana.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.

 

The above quote "business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau" covers drivers licences too. Don't let anybody tell you it dosen't. If your worried, don't drive.

[confused]

I have talked to some leos about this I am the pres.of the bay county comp club.They felt that the laws need clarification But they stated they would not stop or harass my members that was 2 months ago All has been good Not every law enforcement group feels this way Lets get a pettition to our senate about this problem and make this a law we can abide by Presently it is impossible and obama want's to adopt a universal o tolerence for thc making whoopee LUDICURS So any ideas steveyray THE WOLFMAN

 

 

Section 333.26424

4. Protections for the Medical Use of Marihuana.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.

 

The above quote "business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau" covers drivers licences too. Don't let anybody tell you it dosen't. If your worried, don't drive.

[confused]

They don't have too, Michigan is a ZERO tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Read and Heed:

 

Section 333.26424

4. Protections for the Medical Use of Marihuana.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.

 

The above quote "business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau" covers drivers licences too. Don't let anybody tell you it dosen't. If your worried, don't drive.

[confused]

Driving questions?

 

Read and Heed:

 

Section 333.26424

4. Protections for the Medical Use of Marihuana.

 

Sec. 4. (a) A qualifying patient who has been issued and possesses a registry identification card shall not be subject to arrest, prosecution, or penalty in any manner, or denied any right or privilege, including but not limited to civil penalty or disciplinary action by a business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau, for the medical use of marihuana in accordance with this act.

 

The above quote "business or occupational or professional licensing board or bureau" covers drivers licences too. Don't let anybody tell you it dosen't. If your worried, don't drive.

[Irishgreen]

Captain Obvious~~I would Focus on this Part of the Act listed below to Defend Yourself from DUID.

 

 

All other acts and parts of acts inconsistent with this act do not apply to the medical use of marihuana as provided for by this act.

 

 

That is exactly what I was going to say. Any law that doesn't jibe with the new law does not apply.

 

Now~~Will it have to go to court? Sadly, probably.......

[dutch&Dutchess]

Where did you get this information from? Did they change the DUID law? Yes I agree that metabolites have no effect on your functions, but how are you going to argue to the court that you were not

"under the influence" at the time of the "incident"? They should have to argue that you were intoxicated, but with THC metabolites in your system, well you get my point.

MMMA clearly states that patients may not drive while impaired which is a much more problematic determination to prove in court

[tooldini]

I wouldn't wanna drive while impaired it is dangerous. If they don't sense your high there will be no problems.

[dlovas]

From the Obama Administration's recently released National Drug Control Strategy (hat tip to NORML reader Glen):

Encourage States To Adopt Per Se Drug Impairment Laws [ONDCP]

State laws regarding impaired driving are varied, but most State codes do not contain a separate offense for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). Therefore, few drivers are identified, prosecuted, or convicted for DUID. Law enforcement personnel usually cite individuals with the easier to prove driving while intoxicated (DWI) alcohol charges. Unclear laws provide vague signals both to drivers and to law enforcement, thereby minimizing the possible preventive benefit of DUID statutes. Fifteen states have passed laws clarifying that the presence of any illegal drug in a driver's body is per se evidence of impaired driving. ONDCP will work to expand the use of this standard to other states and explore other ways to increase the enforcement of existing DUID laws.

 

Here are the states President Obama would like the others to emulate:

 

Arizona: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

Delaware: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites.

 

Georgia: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 24 hours jail, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Illinois: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 12 months upon conviction.

 

Indiana: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 60 days upon conviction.

 

Michigan: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, up to 93 days upon conviction, vehicle immobilization for up to 180 days.

 

Nevada: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites.

 

Ohio: 15 ng/ml for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 72 hours in jail, up to 6 months upon conviction, 6 month to 3 year license suspension.

 

Pennsylvania: DUID for cannabis metabolites, amount unclear.

 

South Dakota: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites for persons under the age of 21.

 

Utah: Zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites, mandatory 48 hours jail, up to 6 months upon conviction.

 

 

Nine of the fifteen states cited have "zero tolerance for cannabis metabolites". What this means is that if the inactive (read: non-impairing) THC metabolite (THC-COOH) is detected in the urine of a driver, that driver is impaired in the eyes of the law. (There are actually 17 states that have per se DUID laws, but Iowa, Minnesota, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Wisconsin exclude metabolites of cannabis.) Nevada and Ohio have 15 ng/ml levels which are very low; most workplace pre-employment screenings set the initial screening limit at 50 ng/ml. At the confirmation level of 15 ng/ml, the frequent cannabis user will be positive for perhaps as long as 15 weeks.

Of course, faithful NORML readers and most of the public know that cannabis metabolites can remain detectable in the urine for up to 100 days or longer for a regular cannabis consumer and up to fifteen days for the casual consumer, even after quitting cold turkey. Metabolites in urine don't tell you a driver is actually impaired, they tell you someone used cannabis, but not when. Even the US Department of Transportation admits that a positive test for drug metabolites is "solid proof of drug use within the last few days, it cannot be used by itself to prove behavioral impairment during a focal event."

 

Cannabis metabolites are funny things; they don't eliminate from the body in any predictable fashion. In fact, when you think about it, a metabolite is produced when the body metabolizes, or breaks down, a substance. The presence of metabolites for THC tells you the body has already broken down the THC! You could actually call a urine screening for metabolites a non-impairment test!

 

Now some of these laws do have per se standards for actual THC in the blood and you could argue that is a more realistic determinant of current impairment, but do you think most cash-strapped city, county, and state police are going to use an expensive, invasive blood test when a cheap urine screen is available and more likely to get them a conviction for DUID?

 

These per se DUID "zero tolerance" laws are nothing but discrimination against cannabis users, plain and simple. Metabolites for every other drug, legal and illegal, are eliminated from the body much more quickly:

 

PCP ("angel dust") = up to 2 days detection.

 

Cocaine (and "crack") = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Opiates (heroin, oxycontin, etc.) = up to 1-2 days detection.

 

Amphetamines (meth, speed) = up to 1-3 days detection.

 

Barbiturates (Seconol, etc.) = up to 3 days detection.

 

Benzodiazepenes (Xanax, Valium, Clonopin, etc.) = up to 2-3 days detection.

 

Alcohol (Budweiser, Jim Beam, Reisling, etc.) = you can actually be considered unimpaired with current blood alcohol levels up to 0.08%, so long as you pass the roadside sobriety test!

 

Cannabis (marijuana, hash, pot) = up to 7-100 days detection.

 

 

So you could smoke some dust, snort some coke, shoot some smack, and pop some pills at the party Friday night, and possibly be considered an unimpaired driver by Monday (you could even have a couple of drinks before you got pulled over), but if you smoked a joint last month, in eleven states you could be going to jail and losing your license for endangering the public on the roadways.

These "zero tolerance" laws are criminalizing an entire population - cannabis users - for molecules in their bodies that have nothing to do with impairment or driving ability. Can you imagine the uproar if police harassed drivers based on the melanin content of their skin... whoops, never mind.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russ-belville/obama-drug-policy-calls-f_b_574483.html

 

The old republican Conservatives that enacted all these Jim Crow laws are slowly dying off...as the younger more liberal crooks get into office the laws will change.