The only issue I have with weed, and most other drugs, is that you can’t easily test for them in a person’s system, meaning that you can’t know if someone’s driving under the influence. This wouldn’t be as much of a problem if not for the fact that we have have such a car centric society. I don’t like people endangering other people just for a buzz.
I honestly … for calling me “car brained”. That insult hurt me more than any other I’ve received. I want to protect pedestrians and cyclists from people driving cars under the influence. I want to limit driving people’s freedom to make life better for everyone.
That’s honestly a very odd reaction, for what it’s worth I meant it lightheartedly.
Of course I think pedestrians and cyclists also deserve safety.
I would like to point out however that a majority of incidents are drunk drivers who do not already have a device like that in their car, so it’s a tad bit absurd to indicate your hard line for legalization is that when it would only apply after the fact anyway.
I don’t think this is “car brained”. They’re not saying anything around public transit, just that we need to have a test for DWI and weed. People shouldn’t be jailed for 30 years regardless of the presence of the test or not, but we do still need some other test. Otherwise I guarantee that “don’t drive while baked” will be the next infomercial you see in a few years.
They can be used when pulled over just like a breathylyzer (although this is the law in my state and I’m in USA all places may not have the same rules) but I do see what you are saying about hooking it up to the car like the breath machines.
Man, someone could potentially make a lot of money to be the first ones to roll that out.
All that means is the person consumed THC within the last 24h. Even blood is 12 hours, and there’s really no correlation between THC levels and impairment, especially with regular users.
Eh, you can still do a blood test in conjunction with a field sobriety test. Its not as cut and dry as something like alcohol, but to be honest it really shouldn’t be anyways considering how much more dangerous driving while drunk is.
Blood THC levels aren’t indicative of impairment. Even high levels are only weakly associated with impairment in occasional users, and there’s no correlation in regular users.
Yep, William Randolph Hearst fucked everything over for his textile businesses long before Nixon, but it is true that racism played a big factor, namely beginning to refer to it as marijuana instead of cannabis and linking that to those pesky Latinos
Weed is such a harmless little bullshit drug to be so ridiculously over-the-top hyper criminalized in some countries like bruh.
Weed is gonna ruin your life because if you have it on your person imma sens you to prison for 30 fucking years and ruin your life.
It does not. Make. Sense.
I did it all day every day for 12 years, then quit and went back to work like nothing happened. Try that with any other drug
The only issue I have with weed, and most other drugs, is that you can’t easily test for them in a person’s system, meaning that you can’t know if someone’s driving under the influence. This wouldn’t be as much of a problem if not for the fact that we have have such a car centric society. I don’t like people endangering other people just for a buzz.
The best way to eliminate this risk is public transit.
Yes. I want to ban cars too.
You can easily test if they’re in someone’s system with a saliva test, so your argument doesn’t make any sense.
Blood test is better for weed. It’s only detectable for 12h vs 24h with saliva.
But levels of THC aren’t really correlated with impairment.
12 to 24h seems good (maybe even too long imho) in the context of driving a car.
Not when the levels have no bearing on intoxication.
Can you hook a saliva test to a car’s ignition system to only allow sober people to start the car?
Imagine being so car brained that you base personal freedom around it
I honestly … for calling me “car brained”. That insult hurt me more than any other I’ve received. I want to protect pedestrians and cyclists from people driving cars under the influence. I want to limit driving people’s freedom to make life better for everyone.
That’s honestly a very odd reaction, for what it’s worth I meant it lightheartedly.
Of course I think pedestrians and cyclists also deserve safety.
I would like to point out however that a majority of incidents are drunk drivers who do not already have a device like that in their car, so it’s a tad bit absurd to indicate your hard line for legalization is that when it would only apply after the fact anyway.
Sorry, that was too rude, I just got really upset… It’s odd, I’ve never really gotten angry at internet comments until now.
I just wanted to point out my single issue with weed, which is more an issue with car centric infrastructure.
Nothing you said was rude. In fact everything you said was correct on all counts. I think the other person was just joking
I don’t think this is “car brained”. They’re not saying anything around public transit, just that we need to have a test for DWI and weed. People shouldn’t be jailed for 30 years regardless of the presence of the test or not, but we do still need some other test. Otherwise I guarantee that “don’t drive while baked” will be the next infomercial you see in a few years.
Missing the point a bit, we shouldn’t base legalization around if people are going to drive their cars on a substance.
I am 100% on bike I see no argument on there. Just don’t smoke 3 day before you have to drive.
They have mouth swabs they use now that can tell for smoking.
Those can’t be used on the road and can’t be integrated into a car’s startup system.
They can be used when pulled over just like a breathylyzer (although this is the law in my state and I’m in USA all places may not have the same rules) but I do see what you are saying about hooking it up to the car like the breath machines.
Man, someone could potentially make a lot of money to be the first ones to roll that out.
All that means is the person consumed THC within the last 24h. Even blood is 12 hours, and there’s really no correlation between THC levels and impairment, especially with regular users.
Eh, you can still do a blood test in conjunction with a field sobriety test. Its not as cut and dry as something like alcohol, but to be honest it really shouldn’t be anyways considering how much more dangerous driving while drunk is.
Blood THC levels aren’t indicative of impairment. Even high levels are only weakly associated with impairment in occasional users, and there’s no correlation in regular users.
Outlawing cannabis products was essentially an exercise in deliberate systemic racism in the US. (Nixon).
Unsure about the rest of the world.
Making cocaine illegal was for black people. Weed was for the hippies.
Oh yeah. To suppress the anti (Vietnam) war protests.
Yup. The goal was to make both groups felons to prevent them from voting.
They wanted Mexicans out too.
India here, colonial penal code outlawed it but we’re too prudish to change it after independence
I thought it was about paper prices?
Yep, William Randolph Hearst fucked everything over for his textile businesses long before Nixon, but it is true that racism played a big factor, namely beginning to refer to it as marijuana instead of cannabis and linking that to those pesky Latinos
IIRC the US heavily pressured other countries with tariffs to also ban it
It goes farther back than that. DuPont and Hurst had a hand in making cannabis look bad.
And hemp makes for a garbage printing medium anyway
Meanwhile alcohol, one of the most harmful substances, is being consumed like water 😐
Delicious, masterfully distilled, barrel aged, water of life 👉😉👉🥃
Ew, who drinks water?
It’s the dudes with the bud light cans.