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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Newsjock

(11,733 posts)
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:22 PM Feb 2013

Calif. Attorney General Hopeful (D) Wants to Ban All Marijuana Users From Driving -- Ever

Source: SF Weekly

... Legally, of course, all of the drivers were well above that state's five-nanogram limit -- and all of them would be subject to DUIs in California for up to a week after their test if a "zero-tolerance" drugged-driving bill introduced this week becomes law.

And, yes, legal medical marijuana users, this bill criminalizes your driving habit, too The bill, SB 289, is the bright idea of state Sen. Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), a hopeful to succeed San Francisco's own Kamala Harris as attorney general in 2018.

... As currently written, SB 289 does not apply to any driver who has a "valid prescription issued to the person by a licensed health care practitioner."

This is a problem for medical cannabis patients. Medical cannabis is not prescribed in California, common misuse of the term aside. Doctors cannot prescribe an illegal substance -- but they can recommend it. And that's what paperwork from a doctor allowing for the possession, cultivation, and use of cannabis is: a recommendation.

This means that every medical user in California would risk a DUI behind the wheel -- even if their last toke was days or up to a week ago.

Read more: http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2013/02/lou_correa_dui_marijuana.php

19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

green for victory

(591 posts)
10. to show that everyone that said washington "legalized" pot was wrong or lying
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:49 PM
Feb 2013

why DID the media keep saying something clearly false?

Words and the definitions of those words matter. How can anyone debate anything if words mean different things to different people?

maxsolomon

(33,345 posts)
16. Did you mean to link to DeCRIMINALization?
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 05:04 PM
Feb 2013

I still don't get what Decimalisation has to do with it.

The current situation is better than the previous situation, no? Posession is legal, but production & sales are not until the WSLCB comes up with regulations.

Are you saying 5 nanograms for a DUI is too stringent? Are you Vivian McPeak?

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
19. Heh. This guy has to be part of the "No on I-502" ultra faction.
Sun Feb 24, 2013, 01:55 AM
Feb 2013

I'll concede that the Washington initiative isn't perfect--it was written too cautiously and conservatively to try to placate opponents--the no home cultivation sucks and so does the DUID giveaway, but it is legalization of personal amounts, and we'll see how this tax and regulate works out.

And it was a huge political victory. Newspaper headlines around the world screamed out "Washington Legalizes Marijuana!" not "Washington Voters Duped into Supporting Something That Isn't 100% Perfect Marijuana Legalization"

And...Colorado showed that you don't need to give away home cultivation and DUID--it won by the same margin without them. I'm sure initiative organizers in the next couple of rounds will keep that in mind. No unneccesary concessions, please.

Romulox

(25,960 posts)
5. The Drug War has long since ceased to be about rationality, logic, evidence, science...
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:33 PM
Feb 2013

It's about power. That's all. And the same people who "understand" the need for killer drones will "understand" this, too. Book it.

 

green for victory

(591 posts)
13. it was always about power. And pharma. Can't have "consumers' treating themselves
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:51 PM
Feb 2013

with natural solutions

Webster Green

(13,905 posts)
6. That is insane.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:37 PM
Feb 2013

Nobody is impaired a week after smoking marijuana.

And this is proposed by a Democrat? That's great!

What an idiot!

 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
7. Kamala Harris is pro pot
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:42 PM
Feb 2013

This asshole doesn't stand a chance in hell 2018. And this is a ridiculous law. Almost better to keep it illegal than have the fuzz follow you home from the med shops. At least if they are going to bust you, they might have the decency to nab you before you spend your money in the shop, and get that stuff confiscated too.

They have saliva tests that test for hours or days. Days isn't fair either, but better than weeks. Us pot smokers will have to learn to drive with breath mints or lemon candy to scramble their tests.

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
9. Well, that will reduce fossil fuel use, won't it?
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:47 PM
Feb 2013

I guess the labor rates for the life-time non-marijuana users will go way up.

Can people get more whacky?

What about aspirin users?

SoCalDem

(103,856 posts)
12. Nah.. he just wants to create more vehicular "criminals"
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:50 PM
Feb 2013

from whom the state can extract mucho dinero in the form of fines & legal fees..

People WILL drive out here.. they HAVE to.. rampant denial of licenses will not stop people from driving.,.it only makes them criminal while doing it.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
14. +1. Seems to be the trend these days; turn the working class into 'criminals' who can be
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:53 PM
Feb 2013

fined and forced to work for free -- in prison or as 'restitution' for their terrible crimes.

Meanwhile, the big shots steal, murder, and otherwise rape the populace at will.

I was just down at a big (national & international) charity organization that runs a second-hand store locally. There were a ton of people working there -- hard labor, too (I won't go into detail, just that it involved moving huge items around a huge area).

As I spoke with the director, it became clear that 99% of the people working were 'criminals' paying restituion for traffic tickets, drug offenses, etc.

All this free labor translated to $$$$ for the charity, and allowed them to undercut similar second-hand goods offered by small private operations (your traditional 'thrift shops').

I thought "How much would it cost to run such an operation if you actually paid wages?"

Lots. Which is why old-style second-hand is going out of business, same as the old-style second-hand bookstores before them.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Calif. Attorney General H...