Take part: KOMO town hall on gay marriage, marijuana legalization

Yes, I agree that is a downside of the law.  Thanks for the link - very informative.  However, a much larger number of people are needlessly impisoned for simple possession.  That is the greater issue.  We know that is happening and it needs to stop ASAP.  How bad the DUI provisions are going to actually impact people we just don't know for sure.  This is a secondary issue such as how it will impact employement, health insurance, etc.  Of my peers who are on the fence the first thing they cite is how many more people are driving under the influence if it is legal.  This is a key issue to get the undecideds.  The law had to be written in a very restrictive way on this front to ensure passage.  Let's pass it and then work on fixing it when the issues appear.  If we rewrite this portion of the law I fear it will not pass.  I don't think we can get the whole enchilada out of the gate.  We are closer than we have ever been and we can't miss this opportunity.  It may not be here next year as this is a presidential election.  Tattoed Angel - join the fight, we need you!

 @Tattooed_Angel  Dispensaries don't want I-502 to pass because it will cut into their sales.  Do some research because you are off on a lot of what you are writing.  I-502 does not change anything concerning the medical marijuana laws already in existence.  Your current medical card does nothing except give you a reason for having marijuana if you are ever in court.  Even with it, you can still be put in jail.  If you are cut driving under the influence now, the same process will happen now, as will happen when 502 passes.  Only now, if you are caught with ANY mj in your system most jury will find you guilty.  At the very minimum 502 sets a number for jurys to go by.  Just like alcohol - are we drunk at .082?  No, not at all... Do you really think cops are going to be pulling over people who are not driving recklessly ... just because?  

 @two loons  @Shelly  @Tattooed_Angel In all fairness, I think their point was that they get charged with a DUI, not that they're involved in a DUI-related accident.

@Kriegspire Please don't misunderstand. I am all for legalization as well. However I-502 is not legalization. If you read the initiative (I posted a link above)  the line between being legal and criminal is very blurry.

 

I would love for Washington to be a pioneer in legalizing marijuana however I-502 is not the way to do it. And even if Washington does choose to legalize, marijuana is still going to be federally illegal. It's going to take a lot more than one state legalizing for the feds to take notice that marijuana needs to be removed from the schedule 1 list. I don't see that happening anytime in the near future.

 

Also, you want to be able to access marijuana products at a reasonable price. Once the state gets in the pot business, prices are going to skyrocket do to state taxes. The initiative has a financial breakdown.

 

I have done quite a bit of research when it comes to the benefits of cannabinoids. What minimal research has been done does show that certain cannabinoids could quite possibly be the missing link to finding cures for autoimmune diseases and cancer. That is one positive of I-502. Some of the funds from sales will go to research.

 

I understand where your coming from and why you want this initiative to pass however as someone to has read the initiative, I see it as a set back, not a positive step forward. You have your opinion and that is mine.

 

 

 

 

 @Tattooed_Angel read the first comment at the bottom of the article.

 

"You can ALREADY get busted for DUI with ANY THC in your system right now!   But the prohibitionists created a straw man argument, and sadly, they are convincing people to not vote for this.   This seems to happen with every legalization initiative. "

Not true. 

 

Washington’s current DUI law already includes “implied consent” and “per se DUI” provisions.·

 

If you drive on Washington roads, you are deemed to have given consent to tests of your breath and blood if you are “arrested for any offense where, at the time of arrest, the arresting officer has reasonable grounds to believe” you are DUI.

 

The fact that you are “entitled to use a drug under the laws of this state” (you have a prescription for oxycodone or a medical marijuana authorization, for example) is not a defense.

 

Having a breath/blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent is “per se” (in and of itself) DUI, even if you are an experienced drinker and feel you can drive safely at 0.08 BAC.  

 

I-502 adds a per se threshold for THC and distinguishes THC from THC-COOH. It does not change the legal requirements that must be met before a police officer can take a driver to a medical professional for a blood test.

 

I-502 establishes a per se marijuana DUI cut-off of 5 nanograms of active THC metabolite per milliliter of whole blood (5 ng/mL), analogous to the per se 0.08 BAC cut-off for alcohol.

 

I-502 does not change the fact that officers still must have probable cause for an arrest and reasonable grounds to believe a driver is impaired before requiring a breath or blood test. Nor does it change the fact that blood tests can only be administered by medical professionals.

 

I-502 clarifies that THC-COOH, the inactive marijuana metabolite also known as carboxy-THC that is sometimes used to convict marijuana users of DUI under current law, is not to be considered in determining THC concentration for purposes of the per se limit.

And yes, my card does protect me. If I get pulled over for any kind of violation (speeding, tail light out, ect) and I have marijuana in my possession, my card safeguards me from prosecution. Only if I show signs of intoxicating affects do police have the right to pursue a DUI.

 

Under I-502, all police need is reasonable cause to have my THC levels tested. Having marijuana in your possession or paraphernalia gives police enough reasonable cause to test someone, even if they weren't pulled over for suspicion of intoxication or don't appear intoxicated.  

Sec. 31.1 Any person who operates a motor vehicle within this state is deemed to have given consent...to a test or tests of his or her breath or blood for the purpose of determining the...THC concentration...

 

This is currently the law whether you have an mmj card or not.  I still don't think the levels for a regular user will be above 5ng/ml after 3 hours.  Let alone weeks. 

 

In my case, I can't wait for a better initiative.  For me, this is a plee to get the Feds to notice we are not standing up to pot prohibition anymore.  

 

I am not willing to say I'm week and have some problem that requires pot to keep me from feeling pain.  I want to smoke to relieve stress at the end of the day and enjoy time with my family. I shouldn't have to say their is something wrong with me in order to light up. 

 

And, if I do get something like cancer, like my wife has, I shouldn't have to give up my right to bear arms and protect my family from crazy orange haired wackos with guns in a movie theatre just so I can toke up.

 

And I've wrote this before, but I just want this country to research and test pot to see if it actually does kill cancer cells like research in other countries have discovered.  The only way is for the feds to take mmj off of the schedule 1 list.

 

But until then, if legalizing pot give me the avenue to provide hemp oil to my wife at a reasonable price without giving up my 2nd amendment rights, to see if we can shrink the tumors in her body,  then I'm all for I-502.   

@Kriegspire Please read this.

 

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2012/08/an_independent_review_of_washingtons_i-502_legaliz.php

 @Tattooed_Angel Your mmj card does not protect you.  The law states if a police officer thinks you are impaired, whether it is from booze, pot, or precription meds, you will get a DUI.  At least with I-502, they have to take you in to a licensed medical professional and get some blood from you, and show you are above 5ng/l.  Again, the research I found shows the levels in your blood metabolize at a rate that would have a regular user under the 5ng/l in 3 hours.

@two loons @Shelly @Tacobender I think what Shelly meant was since Tacobender was saying that he'd vote yes based on what little information I provided about I-502 so she said she hopes he'll be the first victim of a DUI for this ridiculous initiative. NOT that she hopes he gets injured, but that he is the first to get arrested for DUI under I-502 because the low DUI standards.

@Kriegspire Say someone gets pulled over for a seat belt violation or a tail light out. With I-502 even if you don't present signs of intoxication but you have marijuana on you, the cops are going to test you. For the "heavier" users like me (I use 3-4 times a week) it puts me at risk even though I DON'T DRIVE INTOXICATED. My levels are going to be higher than someone who partakes sparingly.

 

With the way it is now, I am MORE protected with my mmj card. I have to show signs of intoxication to be considered under the influence. Under I-502, all the police need is suspicion to test me and I could get nailed with a DUI even though I wasn't under the influence.

 

There HAS to be more protection put in place before it gets legalized.

 @Shelly  @Tacobender  @Tattooed_Angel wow, you really hope she gets injured? That's a shi##y thing to wish upon someone just for disagreeing with your political viewpoint.

What you don't understand is the current DUI law is worse because there is no minimum level of THC in the blood stream.  It doesn't matter if you have a card for your night blindness. YOU ARE STILL GETTING A DUI if a police officer thinks you are impaired behind the wheel.  This initiative at least requires you to be above the 5ng/l in order to get a DUI. 

 

Once again, if you get pulled over right now and the police officer thinks you are impaired, he can arrest you.  If you are at 3ng/l, you will get a DUI.  If I-502 is passed, you would not.

 @two loons  @dorimonsonfan "the weed"...?

Where was I discussing the pot initiative?  dorimonsonfan was talking about same-sex marriage. And using a "revenue stream" to justify discrimination is simply wrong. It was tried in the South with the slave market, and that failed as an argument. The same is true of the same-sex marriage issue.