Should driving during or right after smoking pot be legal?

Yeah, yeah, just messing with you.

The reason you can drive on pot is that it makes the road so much more interesting that you don't want to take your eyes off it. So, you slow to about 7 mph and smell the roses.

X Factor said:

If the effects of being drunk on wine were substantially different from being drunk on Everclear then they should be treated differently, shouldn't they? The effects are the same though because the intoxicant is the same.

Click to expand...

Serenity said:

3 Second google. Link headline is incorrect. It says 3 were killed. It was actually 4 when you read the article.

Click to expand...

Actually you'd have to know more about the cause of the accident before you could attribute it to the m/j. I'd be interested to know what caused the car to "launch". (I will look at the link, it's getting to be too late to do it now)

X Factor said:

Since it appears from many arguments I've seen that pot actually has no ill or dangerous effects either to the user or any one around them and causes basically zero impairment of judgment or reflexes, shouldn't driving while high be legal? If not, why not?

Click to expand...

Cannabis is not universally harmless. It has strong potential for psychological habituation, and causes lung and cognitive impairment with regular use. Some people describe themselves as "addicted" to cannabis and have minor withdrawal symptoms if they stop it after using for a very long time. That said, the physical impacts of cannabis all resolve within less than a month after quitting.

None of this matters though, because nothing that cannabis does to the body is comparable to what alcohol abuse does to the body. The social, health, and economic fallout from alcohol is far greater than any other drug, legal or otherwise. Since cannabis is far less harmful than alcohol, it is the reason why I think it should be legal. I thought I'd clarify that point before addressing your poll.

There should of course be legal penalties for people who drive under the influence of any mind altering substance. I would broaden this to include legal pharmaceuticals that have psychotropic impacts, such as benzodiazpines, opiates, and other anti-psychotics. If their medication label says "do not operate machinery after taking this drug", then to do otherwise is IMO illegal and should bring equivalent charges to drunk driving. People should simply not be driving if they are not able to be fully cognizant in present reality. Unfortunately, impaired driving law enforcement mainly focuses on alcohol and not the rest. If someone doesn't have alcohol in their blood and they're in an accident, then they were considered "not impaired", despite the act they may be loaded on pharmaceuticals.

The problem with pot is that there isn't yet an efficient means to test for use like there is with a breathalizer test. Cannabis can be detected in the blood stream up to a week after the last use since cannabinoids are fat-soluble molecules, and therefore it's hard to prove when a person last smoked.

I will, however, vote "no" in principle.

My philosophy is that if it isn't effecting me, I don't give a **** what you do to yourself or other consenting adults. If you're driving normal and not doing anything that would get the attention of a cop, why should I care how stoned you are?

X Factor said:

Since it appears from many arguments I've seen that pot actually has no ill or dangerous effects either to the user or any one around them and causes basically zero impairment of judgment or reflexes, shouldn't driving while high be legal? If not, why not?

Choices will be yes, no, and I don't know.

Need a second to get the poll up.

Click to expand...

Pot impairs people's reflexes leaving potential for bad driving. I am for recreational legalization, and of course it should be illegal to drive while high.

I once drove across town in Savannah GA while massively stoned...on a motorcycle. When I got to my destination, I had no memory of the ride. None. I could have killed someone and I wouldn't have known it.

I say NO!! to driving while stoned.

X Factor said:

I think you may have hit the wrong button.

Click to expand...

I know I did.. I read the question wrong then noticed the second I hit send.

What is kind of misleading is driving sleep impaired is more dangerous than driving drunk. But that seems to be okay.

Weed doesn't affect balance. It enhances the senses. Many of my friends and I would smoke while enjoying the road. No accidents. Careful driving if anything.

X Factor said:

Since it appears from many arguments I've seen that pot actually has no ill or dangerous effects either to the user or any one around them and causes basically zero impairment of judgment or reflexes, shouldn't driving while high be legal? If not, why not?

Choices will be yes, no, and I don't know.

Need a second to get the poll up.

Click to expand...

That can't even pass the science test. You are burning something just like tobacco. It's going to damage your lungs eventually, it burns hot. I need to see a report that says there are zero effects. Where's your vote?

specklebang said:

Yeah, yeah, just messing with you.

The reason you can drive on pot is that it makes the road so much more interesting that you don't want to take your eyes off it. So, you slow to about 7 mph and smell the roses.

Click to expand...

You do realize that someone driving too slow is almost as bad as someone driving too fast? People wanting to move the correct speed will have a tendency to want to pass, causing additional issues.

sookster said:

What is kind of misleading is driving sleep impaired is more dangerous than driving drunk. But that seems to be okay.

Weed doesn't affect balance. It enhances the senses. Many of my friends and I would smoke while enjoying the road. No accidents. Careful driving if anything.

Click to expand...

Actually, several states have passed laws regarding driving while sleep impared. Tickets can be issued for it, especially truckers.

Nope, driving under the influence is just that. [just as with alcohol or other drugs]

No texting, eating, smoking, make-up application, etc......distraction is also *under the influence*

GottaGo said:

Actually, several states have passed laws regarding driving while sleep impared. Tickets can be issued for it, especially truckers.

Click to expand...

They've taken it a step further [with more serious implications] for truckers. GPS units on the trucks to make sure you don't drive too long.

X Factor said:

Here's my problem (well, one of many, lol). Every time the subject is legalization of marijuana, the pro side almost invariably compares pot to alcohol and almost always concludes that pot is actually better and safer so shouldn't our traffic and criminal laws be changed to reflect that one is just not as bad as the other?

You're ok with non-violent people spending time in jail for such a minor thing?

Click to expand...

You are misrepresenting the argument, assuming that pot is less harmful this does not mean that actions while under the influence are not harmful. Even if marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol when someone is behind the wheel it is still an intoxicant and there should be laws against this reckless behavior.

The argument is not that certain behaviors while under the influence are not harmful, but rather that the effects of the drug itself is less harmful. For example - as one drinks more and more alcohol their inhibitions and decision making ability is severely compromised, the worse off they are the more likely they are to say that they are "fine". While Marijuana may cloud judgement, it is not as severe as in the case of alcohol.

Regardless, if one acts irresponsibly while under the influence and puts others at risk, then there is a problem, and there should be laws against this - regardless of what the substance is. If someone is using responsibly then there is no issue. It is ok to drink alcohol in a responsible setting - but when it causes other issues such as driving or violence, then there are problems. Marijuana should be held to this same standard. Punishing people for mere usage is punishing for potential crimes, if someone breaks the law while intoxicated then they need to incur the penalty for their actions, regardless of what the intoxicant is. The intoxication itself should not be criminal.

X Factor said:

As far as you know, has anyone ever been injured or killed by a driver who was under the influence of pot? I've been told that there is not one single fatality attributable to m/j.

Click to expand...

This is typically in regards to the intoxicant itself. The argument is that marijuana the drug has not killed anyone (usually the assumed position is via overdose); whereas alcohol intoxication has and does cause deaths via overdose.

Actions that are indirect effects of the drug are a different story. Another misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the argument it seems.

RabidAlpaca said:

I know I did.. I read the question wrong then noticed the second I hit send.

Click to expand...

Well you have company on that one

X Factor said:

Since it appears from many arguments I've seen that pot actually has no ill or dangerous effects either to the user or any one around them and causes basically zero impairment of judgment or reflexes, shouldn't driving while high be legal? If not, why not?

Choices will be yes, no, and I don't know.

Need a second to get the poll up.

Click to expand...

This question is a tough one....

Why does the state need to have the authority to protect people from themselves. If you want to smoke a dooby the size of churchill or robusto cigar, than who the hell has the moral or legal right to tell you what you cannot ingest, imbibe or smoke.

But when you're right to smoke infringes upon my right to life, for example, if your hallucinations while operating a motor vehicle an caused my son/daughter/cousin or whoever to be involved in your accident....than you have formally infringed on their right to life...

So I guess to answer your question... within reasonable limit yes it should be legal.

X Factor said:

Here's my problem (well, one of many, lol). Every time the subject is legalization of marijuana, the pro side almost invariably compares pot to alcohol and almost always concludes that pot is actually better and safer so shouldn't our traffic and criminal laws be changed to reflect that one is just not as bad as the other?

You're ok with non-violent people spending time in jail for such a minor thing?

Click to expand...

It's a different situation because the drugs are different.

Alcohol is disinhibitory.

Pot makes you a little paranoid.

Drunks hurtle.

Potheads drive 45mph on the freeway and signal a mile ahead of a turn.

Its more about attention drifting than "impairment" as with alcohol.

You can absolutely be impaired on pot. And you shouldn't drive when you are. And I don't have a problem with legal consequences if you do.

That said, "dui" for pot at this point is presence of it in your bloodstream.

Which means you can get a dui for a joint you smoked weeks ago.

Some means of determining impairment needs to be developed.

Potheads can usually pass field sobriety tests, even when high enough to e actually impaired.

It doesn't screw with your equilibrium like alcohol does.

They are working on it in places like Colorado.

How is this even a question?

Heck no.

X Factor said:

As far as you know, has anyone ever been injured or killed by a driver who was under the influence of pot? I've been told that there is not one single fatality attributable to m/j.

Click to expand...

First, how about you actually provide some links or quotes of people "saying" these things rather than just stating it as if it's a fact. The reality is MOST Of the people I see arguing for legalization DON'T say these things in the way you are saying it. It's an extremely small minority that usually gets shouted at even by people on their own side. It's like taking some extreme anti-government patriot militia type and proclaiming what they say about things to represent the "conservative argument".

Second, you're being idioticly and needlessly obtuse. The statements regarding deaths relating to Pot is in terms of individuals themselves dying FROM pot itself. Alcohol can kill via alcohol poisoning, where as in a general sense you can't smoke so much pot it kills you. Again, I've yet to see anyone but the most extreme of pro-pot people suggest that Marijuana has not been involved in deaths in a greater scope of things...IE in the blood stream of someone who kills another person, a car accident, etc.

Third, to answer the question to the question. No, it shouldn't be illegal. You are intoxicated .Is that intoxication different than alcohol? Yes. So is being intoxicated on narcotics...and yet that will still get you a DWI potentially.

Cardinal said:

Non-violent or not, people who smoke pot are absolutely horrible judges of the benefits of pot. How many stories have you seen that are liked on Facebook or shared through email on the hundreds of dubious benefits of marijuana (the one about cannabis curing cancer probably being my favorite)?

People should be allowed to smoke pot, but they shouldn't be allowed to drive a two ton vehicle on it.

Click to expand...

On the cancer thing, powerful antioxidents have proven beneficial in cancer treatment.

Pot has some powerful antioxidants.

If the feds allowed research, they might actually find something.

Many of our most pktent medicines are plant derived.

Theres also a mental component to cancer treatment. So it may be the high itself that is helping.

It you get into an accident and you are impaired I think the EMTs should be allowed to save us the cost of a trial and smother you on scene.

I've seen too many dumbasses on the road and I was almost killed by someone who was high on pot. They killed a 3 year old 5 minutes down the road...before I completed my phone call to law enforcement about someone driving in the wrong lane.

It is proven it impairs functions and slows reaction time. There is no argument for DUIs regardless of chemical.

Marijuana has effects. To deny so is dishonest, but I don't think even (most) legalization supporters suggest there is no effect. What they argue, as I interpret it, is that the potential effects are similar to alcohol, as in similar undesired consequences, i.e.: driving injuries and fatalities, etc., yet not guaranteed. This, IMO, is why it should be treated similar to alcohol.

As far as the question about driving after using... this presents a problem. With alcohol, you can reasonably measure current intoxication levels. As I understand it, you cannot do the same with marijuana, so enforcement would be more difficult. I would not favor relying on tests that only say you have it in your system, but could be 10 days ago and thus zero effect on 'right now'.

X Factor said:

zero impairment of judgment or reflexes.

Click to expand...

But that's just not true. Marijuana is an intoxicant. No reason to keep it illegal, even if the Idiotic War on (some) Drugs were not such an unmitigated disaster, but it certainly should not be legal to drive under influence. Just apply the same rules as with alcohol.

X Factor said:

As far as you know, has anyone ever been injured or killed by a driver who was under the influence of pot? I've been told that there is not one single fatality attributable to m/j.

Click to expand...

I've heard the same thing, and even without stats and numbers handy, the notion is patently absurd. Nobody? Ever? Really? :roll:

Irresponsible blanket statements like that only serve to hinder the pro-legalization movement because they portray the supporters as lacking reasonable credibility.