Jump to content

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

MI Compassion

Recommended Posts

MI Compassion Advanced Member

MI Compassion

Posted
Posted

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Greenlife Newbie

Greenlife

Posted
Posted

Everybody I know who has recieved a DUI for marijuana had previously been smoking in their vehicle and were found in possession of marijuana. There's gonna be serious trouble if LEO starts running blood tests on everybody with a MM card as THC will stay in the body for up to 90 days in some circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ernst Advanced Member

ernst

Posted
Posted

So basically if we use mm legally (with a card) we have a good chance of losing our licens?

So if iam on my way home from my caregivers house after picking up my meds get pulled over go through the whole run around with card check id blah blah blah.....now there is a chance they could take my right to drive away?

I jus dont understand this "war"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
screwy1 Member

screwy1

Posted
Posted

I'd still like to see them prove even 1 death attributed the use of MMJ and I'm not talking about the cartel member that kills someone for stealing/losing a load of illegally imported marijuana.if they wanted to discuss the relationship between marijuana and terrorism...? cut out the middle man and let us grow our own I mean think of all the money that would'nt be goin' to those particuliar groups of unsavory characters and whatnot anyways just a thought>??? peace &love & happy harvests

Link to comment
Share on other sites
christinax4 Advanced Member

christinax4

Posted
Posted

'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.'

 

wow, u said it.

 

are there alot of DUID cases here now with cannabis? anyone have stats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FloridityNow Advanced Member

FloridityNow

Posted
Posted

LOL you said Irishmen. That whole thing is freakin crazy. I can't see it happening though thats just too crazy

 

There was in fact an Irish man that tried that logic as a defense in an Orlando court case a few years back. While on vacation, the man got drunk and crashed his rental car then refused to pay damages, claiming in court that the rental car company should have known better than to rent a car to an Irishman. The defense was prepared to give months of testimony, references equating drinking with Irishmen but the judge put the kibosh on the whole thing and declared him guilty. True story. I thought the guy had a good case.

 

Meanwhile, Notre Dame (football) receiver, Mike Ragone was recently busted for MJ possession when the car he was riding in (with his girlfriend) was stopped by state police. The officer claimed he smelled MJ, and searching, found two bags in the lady's purse.... And another one bites the dust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marijuana Ranch Advanced Member

Marijuana Ranch

Posted
Posted

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.huffingto...f_b_574483.html

 

 

420Peace Nathan,

Thanks for the post

I enjoyed the read and learned something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Silverblue Advanced Member

+Silverblue

Posted
Posted

The war on drugs has failed, but they're still waging on, despite many admitting failure, including the current drug czar who admits it's not working, they still don't get it- the incentives for drugs are still there. They can't make people "just say no," especially not with their current tactics. My father threatened to kill me if he caught me using drugs, and kill whoever gave them to me, even after I left home. Then one day I hear the hypocrite talking about selling mj to make ends meet, though he never got to, he wouldn't know where to get it and never asked me or my friends; then another time, someone invited him to smoke with us, and he did! He told us quite a story of why he wouldn't go near it anymore. Since then he never threatened me again. This proves beyond a doubt that if someone wants to use drugs, mj included, they will not let anyone get in their way. That incident was many years ago, I won't go near it now till I'm legal, with card in hand.

 

Sb

Link to comment
Share on other sites
master.caregiver Advanced Member

master.caregiver

Posted
Posted

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zombiefied Advanced Member

Zombiefied

Posted
Posted

That quote below me should protect our license if you are not driving while intoxicated. But try to prove to the court that you were not driving while intoxicated. Now what we really need, is a THC test that only tests for "intoxication" not test just for THC metabolites.

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nsmn8r Advanced Member

nsmn8r

Posted
Posted

That quote below me should protect our license if you are not driving while intoxicated. But try to prove to the court that you were not driving while intoxicated. Now what we really need, is a THC test that only tests for "intoxication" not test just for THC metabolites.

 

 

How about the pigs try to prove to the court that you WERE driving while intoxicated instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zombiefied Advanced Member

Zombiefied

Posted
Posted

How about the pigs try to prove to the court that you WERE driving while intoxicated instead?

 

That sounds even better man, but that test you were forced to take to show that you smoked within approx 1 day - 30 days - to in some cases 100 days is that "proof" that you were "intoxicated". And you know that is the lie they are selling, and by the looks of it, business is doing good....

 

I am afraid to drive in any circumstance, and that is not only cuz of MM, its also the Morphine and Hydrocodone that I am taking. What should be illegal is the words on my prescription bottle.

 

May Cause Drowsiness. Alcohol May Intensify This Effect. Use Care When operating A Car Or Dangerous Machinery.

They should change it to

May Cause Drowsiness. Alcohol May Intensify This effect. It May Be Illegal, In Your State, To Operate A Car Or Dangerous Machinery While Using This Medication
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dutch&Dutchess Advanced Member

dutch&Dutchess

Posted
Posted

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

You have hit upon the method by which prison's for profit maintain GROWTH.

these laws are designed to fill jails that locals often have local ties to monetarily.

Cannabis prohibition is Capitalism at its best. The manipulation of government to craft laws favorable to one industry over another such as the pharmaceuticals and others who have benefited from decades of insane cannabis prohibition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...