Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Cannabis

puffy socks

(1,473 posts)

3. If a person isn't driving irratically

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 08:01 PM

May 2016

why should a person be tested to discovered if they are high?

Wouldn't traffic accidents in Washington and Colorado involving marijuana have spiked dramatically by now if smoking and driving were so dangerous?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/14/1421209/-Since-Colorado-legalized-marijuana-highway-fatalities-are-way-down

The fact is it's not alcohol and no matter how much someone smokes they never act as irrational as someone who can't walk or talk and is obviously out of control because they knocked down a half a bottle of whiskey.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Blood THC levels after smoking pot are useless in defining “too high to drive” [View all] n2doc May 2016 OP

Ding a freaking ling ghostsinthemachine May 2016 #1

Reefer Madness is undetectable!!! Mnpaul May 2016 #2

If a person isn't driving irratically puffy socks May 2016 #3

There is only one true test. The Johnny Cash field sobriety cake test CentralMass May 2016 #4

Its true, impairment should be the standard. Warren DeMontague May 2016 #5