What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

New Law in Cali coming, DUI for testing positive for pot in blood

S

SeaMaiden

If you're accusing me of wanting larger government, then you've stepped on mah toes. You don't know anything about me or my politics, certainly not enough to make such an accusation.

Careful, apoplexy can kill.
 

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Dead in the Water

Dead in the Water

http://www.theweedblog.com/californ...t-to-impose-unscientific-drugged-driving-law/

California Lawmaker Ends Effort To Impose Unscientific Drugged Driving Law

Assemblywoman Norma Torres has amended her proposal, AB 2552, to remove language that initially sought to expose marijuana consumers to enhanced DUI penalties based solely upon the presence of THC in their blood. Assemblywoman Torres took this action after representatives from the marijuana law reform community and the public roundly criticized the legislation as being discriminatory toward cannabis consumers, including those who use the substance therapeutically in compliance with state law.

As initially introduced, AB 2552 was unnecessary because California law enforcement already possesses the legal authority to authorize the collection of blood specimens from suspected DUI marijuana drivers. Prosecutors routinely use these results as evidence in DUI prosecutions. In fact, state prosecutors presently enjoy a nearly 80 percent conviction rate in criminal cases where suspects are charged with DUI. There was no justifiable need to lower the state’s burden of proof in these cases by establishing a new standard that fails to require definitive proof of actual driver impairment.

AB 2552 was also unscientific and could have led to the wrongful conviction of non-impaired drivers. While most traffic safety experts acknowledge that acute marijuana intoxication may impair psychomotor performance, they also agree that marijuana-induced impairment is seldom severe – particular when compared to the psychomotor impairing effects of alcohol – or long lasting. Yet the presence of THC, marijuana’s primary active compound, may be detectable in the blood of human subjects who have inhaled a single, low potency cigarette for as many as 12 hours, a length of time that is well beyond any actual period of impairment. In more frequent consumers, such as those among California’s medical cannabis patient community, residual levels of THC may be present in the blood for much longer periods of time, making them susceptible to wrongful convictions.

As amended, AB 2552 no longer includes new, discriminatory DUI penalties. NORML wishes to thank those of you who took the time to contact your member of the Assembly to help us successfully derail AB 2552.

Article from NORML and republished with permission.
 

paladin420

FACILITATOR
Veteran
New court ruling here in Michigan has this all back on the table for us.

I'm with Hash on this one. Trying to take my blood is assault. Not a wise choice. Tic Tic Tic Tic Tic... When is the boom?
 
S

SeaMaiden

WOOT! I honestly don't think that Ted really listened to me (my state senator), but I do think that Huber did. Unfortunately she's not running again next election, the woman has really surprised me, in a good way.

Good thing I didn't have to write Lundgren (yet again!) about this, he probably would have sent the SS to shut me up with yet another cannabis-related letter.
 

wantaknow

ruger 500
Veteran
it is like i have said all along ,dont legalize weed ,decrimilze it ,free it ,dont tax it ,you take controle of your state not the other way around ,very said
 

Hash Zeppelin

Ski Bum Rodeo Clown
Premium user
ICMag Donor
Veteran
New court ruling here in Michigan has this all back on the table for us.

I'm with Hash on this one. Trying to take my blood is assault. Not a wise choice. Tic Tic Tic Tic Tic... When is the boom?

yup. these kind of laws give me a fever and the only medicine is more cowbell..... oh wait that's not it. the only cure is voting these law makers out and restoring the constitution.

needs-more-cowbell.jpg
 

VirginHarvester

Active member
Veteran
You stoners are not reading the bill = Zero tolerance IN CALIFORNIA for herb in your system!
Blood or urine ... the Doc I talked to mentioned something about mouth swabs being developed to test for THC.
In my county the have at least 2-3 DUI checkpoints a month. Imagine the revenue LEO could generate from this when you consider 5-10K that just results from alcohol DUI's

Here is CaNormal's press release!

Stop California's Unscientific and Unnecessary Drugged Driving Law

March 20, 2012 - A bill to establish a "zero-tolerance" DUI standard for marijuana has been introduced to the legislature by Assemblywoman Norma Torres (D-Pomona). The bill, AB 2552, would make the presence in blood or urine of any non-zero amount of cannabinoids (the distinctive ingredients of marijuana) presumptive evidence of driving under the influence. Included would be not only synthetic cannabinoids but also non-psychoactive metabolites, which can reside in the system for weeks after last use.

California NORML strongly opposes the bill. "AB 2552 would effectively criminalize every pot user in California who drives," says Cal NORML Director Dale Gieringer, "The scientific evidence is unequivocal that the presence of cannabinoids in the system does not constitute impairment."

Non-psychoactive cannabinoid metabolites, which have no effect on driving ability, are typically detectable in the urine for days or weeks after last usage. The primary psychoactive ingredient of marijuana, THC, which does have impairing effects, is detectable in the blood for many hours or days after use - over a week in heavy users -long after any impairment has faded.

Have to believe it eventually gets overturned. Sure, they'll try to get it on the books but eventually I doubt it holds. Maybe they end up devising something that's more reliable but truly, not everyone with thc metabolites will be under the influence so I doubt influence or impairment can be proven with reasonable doubt in front of judge or jury.
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top