Skip

Phew! It's okay to drive stoned in Idaho now.
January 15, 2002 12:25 PM   Subscribe

Phew! It's okay to drive stoned in Idaho now. Assuming you can pass a field sobriety test, that is. To quote the attorney, "just having smoked marijuana doesn't give somebody cause to arrest you for that when driving." This seems to be a technicality, and you have to assume it's going to be overturned. If not, anyone up for a road trip to Boise?
posted by emptyage (10 comments total)

 
this most certainly qualifies as good thread post to MetaFilter, for there is nothing more fresh & unusual than common sense being applied to anything marijuana-related in america. Bravo!
posted by danOstuporStar at 1:07 PM on January 15, 2002


You'd have to be stoned to want to take a road trip to Boise.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:13 PM on January 15, 2002


I maintian that I drive better when I'm high. I'm more careful and I pay attention to the road, where as when I'm sober I don't pay much attention at all.
posted by bytecode at 1:14 PM on January 15, 2002


Look, man, if there's one thing I know, it's how to drive while I'm stoned. You know your perception is completely fucked so you just let your hands work the controls as if you were straight.
posted by bondcliff at 1:32 PM on January 15, 2002


i think the 9th Circuit decision should stand. there's a reason states and Congress pass laws specifically defining things as narcotics and such. if the state screwed up, then they screwed up. and really, i doubt Idaho would care about going after that pot smoker except that:

The circuit's decision also reverses Patzer's illegal weapons convictions. In his Chevrolet Blazer, police found four illegal homemade grenades, a sawed-off shotgun and a modified rifle with a homemade silencer.

The court said that because of his unlawful arrest, authorities illegally searched his vehicle.


besides, if they want to call you impaired for smoking pot, shouldn't it be like alcohol? below a specific threshold, you're ok to drive; above it, you're not.
posted by tolkhan at 1:33 PM on January 15, 2002


eh, i guess pot is completely illegal and alcohol's not. ne'ermind.
posted by tolkhan at 1:34 PM on January 15, 2002


Fair Disclosure: I burn the Rope (all the time).
Fair Disclosure: I drive stoned without thinking twice about it even though I would never and have never driven while intoxicated ever.

That being said, anyone who says MJ doesn't impair the skills needed to operate a vehicle hasa really good connection.

I think the real issue here is that AFAIK, there is no way to prove someone is stoned other than to list symptoms like red eyes and twinkie wrappers in the car, both of which are ripe for misinterpretation owing to other causes (allergies / a liking for synthetic food).

Urine tests can only show metabolites which prove some use somewhere in the alst 60 days, pretty much useless as evidence of driving while under the influence.

Does anyone know exactly how they bust someone for driving while stoned? IOW, if they say I was driving stoned and I say "no I wasn't" how do they prove that I was in fact stoned at the time?
posted by BentPenguin at 1:46 PM on January 15, 2002


Using the Electric Enema, all truths will be forthcoming.
posted by Mack Twain at 2:02 PM on January 15, 2002


All truths, yes, and a whole lot more.
posted by thebigpoop at 3:22 PM on January 15, 2002


mj does impact reaction times. therefore, it could be argued that it negatively effects the safety of a driver.
i remember the bbc did a *funny* programme that involved giving various illegal drugs to people and making them drive around an obstacle course. needless to say the (foregone) conclusion was that all illegal drugs negatively impact driving skills as they effect perception.
so what, say i. talking on the phone, or having a conversation with a passenger or listening to the radio all cause 'accidents' on the road as the driver's attention is divided.

i believe mr bill hicks once proposed this idea:

if driving on marijuana were legalised, the only crashes would be people getting rear-ended by pizza delivery vans; as the stoners would all be driving along at about 10 miles an hour, in a mellow haze.

nb. a motorcyclist friend of mine was almost killed by a skag-head in a car. it was a hit and run, but as the windscreen of the car had shattered the stoopid skag head didn't get very far before hitting another vehicle (pregnant lady inside) and coming to a halt.

so i am aware that drug-driving isn't all fun and games.
in fact, thinking back over the years, a good proportion of the crashes that my, ahem, friends have had have been either drink or drug related. alot due to searching for a lost tape or cd whilst driving.
posted by asok at 7:30 AM on January 16, 2002


« Older MTV sets Powell for global meeting.   |   How long before all animal... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post