DUI attorney challenges laws prohibiting driving while stoned

[meegbear]

Is driving while under the influence of THC, one of marijuana’s active ingredients, actually dangerous? One prominent California DUI attorney believes it is not nearly as dangerous as driving drunk and has issued a challenge to laws that punish marijuana users who get behind the wheel.

San Diego defense attorney Lawrence Taylor, considered “The Dean of DUI Attorneys,” according to a release by his firm, is apparently arguing that DUI laws are unfair because they do not allow consideration for the varying degrees of inebriation caused by drugs of abuse.

Drivers convicted of marijuana intoxication are usually sentenced only after authorities have taken a blood sample. However that blood sample, he notes, only measures the body’s metabolism of marijuana’s compounds, not the actual level of impairment.

Evidence of marijuana use can remain in the human body for weeks or or longer, as it has been shown to latch on to fat cells, causing some inactive users to fail drug tests after a period of weight loss. For drivers accused of operating a vehicle while stoned, the presence of blood test results showing recent marijuana consumption can become a tricky legal hurdle.

In an advisory circulated through PRNewswire, Taylor cites two recent federal studies which concluded driving stoned is less dangerous than driving drunk, particular for more experienced marijuana users.

<snip>

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/03/dui-attorney-challenges-laws-prohibiting-driving-while-stoned/

:hippie:

[SacredCow]

1. I've read studies on this....

suggesting that booze tends to make drivers more aggressive and slows their response times. Pot, on the other hand, makes drivers more laid back and doesn't seem to measurably affect response time. If that's true, then I'd have to theorize that stoned drivers aren't as impaired as drunk ones, but there's probably a limit to HOW stoned you could be, and certainly it isn't a one-size-fits-all equation.

[Warpy]

2. Not only that, but stoners know they're impaired

and tend to keep to secondary roads and drive under the speed limit.

Drunks are Superman and it's common to hear them claim they drive better after they've had a few.

[SacredCow]

4. Yeah, this is also true....

I think the "dude, I'm not drunk..." conversation with someone who is stumbling around with an empty bottle of cheap tequila (possibly throwing up) is a given at some point in one's life. And yeah- somehow, they ALWAYS have car keys and somewhere that they think they need to be.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

3. Cheech & Chong drove all over the place

& it didn't affect their driving.
It would mellow out the whole transportation grid
to have lots of potheads cruising around. :*

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, meegbear.

[Gman2]

6. As it stands, if you were to kill someone, NOT your fault, you will be tested

and if you have thc metabolites in your system, you will be charged. If you are a med mar patient, too bad, so sad. Until we have a true thc test, we cannot make Canabis legal.

[EOTE]

8. Why not simply not do a test at all?

There's nothing to indicate that THC makes a person a worse driver, so why the need to test? And if a cop wants to pull someone over for driving dangerously, he or she has that ability. A test isn't required.

[EOTE]

7. In addition to there being no test to determine if a person is stoned

only to determine if a person has used within weeks, but there are no studies which say that marijuana negatively effects one's ability to drive. In fact, the British car program Top Gear did a test with a control group, a group that was drunk off alcohol, a group that was sleep deprived and a group on marijuana. The sleep deprived group did the worst, the drunk group came next, the control group came in second and the marijuana group came in first. It seems as if the paranoia that marijuana instills in people actually made them better drivers. So to punish people for driving stoned seems counterproductive.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

10. "It seems as if the paranoia that marijuana instills in people actually made them better drivers."

That seals the deal for me. It also means that everybody
ought to be stoned to do other things better because of
paranoia, like fly planes, etc. :*

[Echo In Light]

11. Hicks humorously explores that very aspect in the clip I sourced below

[A-Schwarzenegger]

12. I'll watch it when I'm a little more paranoid.

The thing is, even if you have your whole head in a bag of Ruffles
while you're driving, and even if you do get in an accident, it won't
do much damage because you're driving so slow because of the paranoia.
Not you personally, of course, but the ideal stoned driver.

[Echo In Light]

13. Well, I wouldn't necessarily chalk the slow driving up to paranoia, per se. But in some cases, yes.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

14. I know when I used to smoke, sometimes I'd be parked in my driveway

wondering where all the other drivers were. You can't get
any safer than that. Of course, I did forget where I was
going, but it didn't matter, because I wasn't going anywhere.

[Echo In Light]

9. Bill Hicks calls for mandatory marijuana

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZqYV9KKOZQ