• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

'The Drug Whisperer': Drivers arrested while stone cold sober

I bet that training involves a numbers game. If you pull x amount of people over, y amount will be high on marijuana. So it's best to arrest z amount of people, because if people see how likely they are to go to jail for driving under the influence of marijuana. They won't do it.

They think this overt zealous type of police work is a deterrent. And that if they say a month long training course can do something addiction workers go to years of school for with more accuracy than a urine test (30 days for marijuana). That's them counting on the CSI effect. People believe the police have more capability than they do from shows like CSI.

The legal limit for alcohol is .08, meaning you can have a beer or two depending on your body weight and not considered impaired. It's much the same for marijuana. Depending on weight and time since last smoked, the effects could have worn off in as little as 3 hours.

Someone who is impaired by marijuana, wouldn't be able to pass a field sobriety test geared towards marijuana. Which would involved shining the flashlight in the eyes and conducting a test much like your eye doctor does when he has you follow his finger.

It's not that hard to come up with a simple solution to Marijuana DUI, law enforcement is throwing a hissy because seizures from marijuana busts are a sizeable part of their budget they don't want to lose when the laws inevitably change. If they make a big stink about how difficult it is to detect impaired drivers, it might worry people enough to hold out. Here's a question, if it's so difficult to detect impairment, is the person even impaired? There's vegged out on the couch can't move high (Impaired), and just got a head change high (undetectable).

I equate head change to 1 or 2 beers and don't consider that impaired. I support a field sobriety test, but think medical professionals should design it. And I think there should be a legal limit set.

I bet that training has everything to do with increasing the Counties revenue stream and little else. If DUIs are down so are DUI fines and the revenues that result from DUI arrest. Towing fines, impound fees, Car siezures and fines have been a finacial boon for cities who are typically given grants to pay for the increased enforcment

Car seizures at DUI checkpoints prove profitable for cities, raise legal questions | California Watch

" An investigation by the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley with California Watch has found that impounds at checkpoints in 2009 generated an estimated $40 million in towing fees and police fines – revenue that cities divide with towing firms.

Additionally, police officers received about $30 million in overtime pay for the DUI crackdowns, funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety."
 
He needs to be fired immediately.
 
He needs to be fired immediately.

As should be his superior who endorsed this stupid tactic and the city should be paying out hefty payments to anybody that was found guilty under this stupid and illegal action.
 
Back
Top Bottom