California Pot Referendum: A Political Land Mine for Democrats

CBS News ^ | Oct. 26, 2010 | Stephanie Condon

[La Enchiladita]

Illinois is not exactly a leading light of America, either, is it?

Thanks for Oprah. Thanks for Obama. Thanks for Rahm and Messy Jessie. Dick Durbin. Et al.

Your state is possibly an even bigger haven for illegals.

Check yourselves.

[La Enchiladita]

The issue is all about California wanting something else to tax, anyway,

Exactly!

[Minn]

Says you. I guess you haven't known someone injured by a driver on this.

No. But I logged many tens of thousands of trouble free miles back in a more foolish time. It causes absent mindedness and inatentiveness that obviously isn't a good thing. But it just doesn't cause the motor skill impairment that makes alcohol so deadly. I'd estimate that, compared to cell phone users, your average stoned driver with two hands on the wheel is one tenth the risk.

The thing about not knowing anybody injured is demonstrative of nothing. I know numerous people killed and injured by perfectly sober drivers. Should we go after sober driving? Any accident has a few contributing factors. Marijuana use on its own is rarely at the top of the list. I'm not saying it should be legal to drive stoned. It is certainly a hazard to some degree. But there are far bigger hazards on the road.

[untrained skeptic]

If it was legal, the person could say they smoked it three days ago. The test can't prove otherwise.

They can say the same thing in Ohio.

The crime is driving while impaired, not pot use. A test showing that they smoked pot at some time in the last month is not proof of impairment regardless of if it is illegal or not.

The test can prove they broke the law regarding using pot, but it does not prove they were impaired while driving. That gets proved with a sobriety check. Follow the finger with your eyes. Stand on one foot and touch your nose. All that stuff.

[ansel12]

So in Ohio, it isn’t the alcohol percentage, it is whether you can handle it or not?

[zeugma]

Thanks for posting. This thread hasn't brought out quite as many nanny-staters as you usually find on this kind of thread.

It will be interesting to see how enthused the feds are in prosecuting every last joint as a federal case. I'm sure the federal judiciary will be thrilled.