Will Marijuana be legalized under Trump?

[ATM]

Some people just prefer a big intrusive government and want it to solve all our problems with force.

They must have loved OBAMACARE.

 

[NKBJ]

The fight has always been about prohibition money empowering ops and corrupting officials.
People with big money want to keep their big money and people with power want to keep their power.
Here's brief presentation to explain the matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhjuKNOLSNM

 

[BugI02]

Legalization at the federal level is one of the most fraught examples of the law of unintended consequences I can imagine, unless contol of circumstances of use is retained (which according to y'all is the triumph of big brother over absolute liberty)

Pilots, railroad engineers, CDLs, air traffic controllers, anybody with a security clearance, active duty military yada yada yada

Your side could probably get major support money from the people who develop and market drug screening tests

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Legalization at the federal level is one of the most fraught examples of the law of unintended consequences I can imagine, unless contol of circumstances of use is retained (which according to y'all is the triumph of big brother over absolute liberty)

Pilots, railroad engineers, CDLs, air traffic controllers, anybody with a security clearance, active duty military yada yada yada

Your side could probably get major support money from the people who develop and market drug screening tests

Are those folks being allowed to smoke pot in the states where its now legal and retain their jobs?

What's the difference between this and alcohol as far as employee and safety regulations? I can drink off duty if I choose, unless I'm on call. I can't drink on duty or show up to work impaired. If marijuana were legal tomorrow, what changes? UCMJ still prohibits it for the military, my general orders still prohibit it for me, etc. I'm sure if you work for Joe's Trucking and show up baked you're going to have the same reaction as if you showed up drunk. What's federal law got to do with any of that? The feds aren't coming for me for a cigarette pouch of pot.

 

[Jimb]

Gluttony applies to all things human...too much of any one thing is probably going to have negative consequences. We deem ourselves responsible enough to practice moderation with all things legal, or at least this sounds nice in theory, but in reality it's really just about tax dollars on both ends;supply and enforcement. MJ is just another wedge issue with which we allow politicians to fog reality to drive their economic and reelection engines. It is no more detrimental in excess than alcohol, and should be treated as such. Get on the common sense bus, off the fake news train; regulate and tax it, take it out the border issue equation, and direct the attention where it's deserved: heroine and meth.

 

[BugI02]

Are those folks being allowed to smoke pot in the states where its now legal and retain their jobs?

What's the difference between this and alcohol as far as employee and safety regulations? I can drink off duty if I choose, unless I'm on call. I can't drink on duty or show up to work impaired. If marijuana were legal tomorrow, what changes? UCMJ still prohibits it for the military, my general orders still prohibit it for me, etc. I'm sure if you work for Joe's Trucking and show up baked you're going to have the same reaction as if you showed up drunk. What's federal law got to do with any of that? The feds aren't coming for me for a cigarette pouch of pot.

How long after last use does impairment last? Have any good data? Its the Feds in the form of the DOT that mandate drug-free exercise of some licensing, will this be more difficult if recreational use is legalized federally? Will new tests need to be designed and implemented after acceptable residual MJ levels are determined and incorporated in statutes (I believe MJ can be found in residual quantities for 28 days or more)? With such a long half life, how much research will need to be done on rates of metabolism in order to get tables that pass judicial notice and enable determining whether Joe Throttlejockey last imbibed at sufficient seperation from his duty time? Who will pay for all this new infrastructure? Will it be adopted in a co-ordinated way or installed haphazardly and piecemeal?

Would you want a partner who you knew was 'baked' all weekend and only sobered up at the minimum necessary remove from duty? Would you bet your life on someone like that? Would you want that person operating on your wife or your children? Would the remedies available through the courts if they do be satisfying?

In closing, how do you find the memory/cognitive skills of stoners? I would call attention to the fact that the Asiana Air crash in SFO was caused by a pilot mistakenly disabling one small part of a complicated autopilot system (the auto throttles) and that complicated autopilot diligently trying to do what its (presumably) fully competent human had directed it to do. And it almost made it

 

[BugI02]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3570572/

Cannabis has a long half-life in humans (67 days) (57). In chronic cannabis users, it is particularly difficult to determine whether a positive result for cannabis represents a new episode of drug use or continued excretion of residual drug (62). Algorithmic models have been devised to determine whether THC levels represent new use or the carry-over from previous use (62, 64). However, these models are not very accurate in discriminating new use and carry-over in chronic users (66).

Biological Properties of Alcohol - Toxipedia

The metabolism of most drugs or chemicals is proportional to the concentration of the compound in the blood. This allows us to calculate the rate of metabolism or a half-life. However, ethanol is different; its metabolism is relatively constant over time and the rate of metabolism does not increase with rising blood concentrations. We also know that metabolism is proportional to body weight; thus the bigger you are, the higher the rate of metabolism, but on average, ethanol is metabolized at a rate of 120 mg/kg per hour or about 1 oz (30 ml) in 3 hours.

Can't make a direct half-life comparison, but using the 1 beer = 1 shot = 1 glass of wine comparison, someone who went on a 12 drink bender spread over two hours would be at 0% BAC 38 hours later. If somebody went on a similar weed bender, how long before they are no longer of diminished capacity

 

[Timjoebillybob]

5 Facts About Marijuana and Driving High

1. Marijuana slows your reaction time and ability to make decisions
2. The higher you are, the more risks you take while driving
3. The effect of marijuana is strongest during the first hour
4. Drivers can be tested for THC after being pulled over
5. Combining alcohol and marijuana is even more dangerous

Hurting me and mine through carelessness and indifference can be ... dangerous

You know you could replace tired and sleepy in there and it would fit as well, except for #3.

As as non user of alcohol, tobacco and drugs I would hope our president would lead the way to programs to un-glamorize their use. As the close brother of a man who drank himself to death at an early age, he could do a lot in his brother's name.

No drugs? Caffeine, theobromine, otc cough/cold meds? Prescriptions?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Marijuana DUI: Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana | Criminal Law

Do I have good data on impairment per unit per ml of blood? No. I'm not a scientist or researcher. Obviously some one has already approached this, though, and states have a way to determine OVWI for drugs. DRE officers are trained on the various tests. I'm not one. Maybe they can chime in.

Alcohol is legal again. Still rules about drivers and pilots. Not seeing the connection. Has CO seen an uptick in plane crashes or CDL involved crashes?

 

[TheMachine]

I expect self-driving cars to make the DUI issue even less important in the next decade or 2.

 

[BugI02]

http://www.heraldnet.com/news/with-legalization-fatal-crashes-involving-marijuana-spiked/

Fatal Car Crashes Involving Pot Use Have Tripled in U.S., Study Finds ? WebMD

NTSB: Pilot in fatal Minnesota plane crash was stoned | NewsCut | Minnesota Public Radio News

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...ID=20070215X00194&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=FA

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...=20121003X24635&AKey=1&RType=Summary&IType=FA

Toxicology testing indicated the pilot used cocaine, hydrocodone, and marijuana at some point in the recent past.

Pilot?s THC impairment contributed to 2014 Durango plane crash that killed 2, NTSB finds ? The Denver Post

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...ee_types/ame/fasmb/media/201404_editorial.pdf

New NTSB Study Shows Increasing Drug Use in Pilots

A cursory search on "ntsb aircraft accidents involving marijuana" turned up 1.25 million hits

 

[BugI02]

Marijuana DUI: Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana | Criminal Law

Do I have good data on impairment per unit per ml of blood? No. I'm not a scientist or researcher. Obviously some one has already approached this, though, and states have a way to determine OVWI for drugs. DRE officers are trained on the various tests. I'm not one. Maybe they can chime in.

Alcohol is legal again. Still rules about drivers and pilots. Not seeing the connection. Has CO seen an uptick in plane crashes or CDL involved crashes?

From your cite:

Laws defining what it means to be “under the influence” of marijuana vary by state, as do applicable punishments.Any amount = under the influence. In some states, any amount of marijuana in the driver’s system will conclusively establish that the driver was under the influence.
Above the threshold = under the influence. In other states a driver who is above a certain blood or urine concentration level will be considered under the influence.
The defendant’s behavior or actions= under the influence. A minority of states require the prosecutor to prove that the driver was under the influence, by pointing to his behavior or driving, regardless of the amount of marijuana in the driver’s system.

Three different standards and standards that vary from state to state. If legalized for recreational use, you see no problems establishing a federal standard (other than zero tolerance, which would effectively be status quo)

I don't get the impression that the Leafertarians have such a strong desire for legalization so that they can only use within safe guidelines

 

[bwframe]

Medical Marijuana and Guns - Davis Miles McGuire Gardner, PLLC...Therefore, any person who uses or is addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her State has passed legislation authorizing marijuana use for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance, and is prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition. Such persons should answer “yes” to question 11.e. on ATF Form 4473 (August 2008), Firearms Transaction Record, and you may not transfer firearms or ammunition to them. Further, if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law, then you have “reasonable cause to believe” that the person is an unlawful user of a controlled substance. As such, you may not transfer firearms or ammunition to the person, even if the person answered “no” to question 11.e. on ATF Form4473.[13]...

 

[Woobie]

If you are seriously arguing that pot use is contributing to a significant number of accidental deaths, then you need to be working on outlawing alcohol. There is no comparison to the two numbers.

I'm also not sure how legalization by the government correlates to employment policies. If you cause damage exceeding a certain amount at your job, most employers require a drug test. If you fail that test, refuse that test, or are obviously impaired, you will lose your job. And alcohol is part of the test.

And then there is the whole free market thing. Would you fly XYZ Airline if they allowed aircraft or maintenance crew to smoke dope? Would their insurer continue to cover them? That solution is free to taxpayers, and gives no power to the government.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

http://www.heraldnet.com/news/with-legalization-fatal-crashes-involving-marijuana-spiked/

Fatal Car Crashes Involving Pot Use Have Tripled in U.S., Study Finds ? WebMD

NTSB: Pilot in fatal Minnesota plane crash was stoned | NewsCut | Minnesota Public Radio News

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...ID=20070215X00194&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=FA

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...=20121003X24635&AKey=1&RType=Summary&IType=FA

Pilot?s THC impairment contributed to 2014 Durango plane crash that killed 2, NTSB finds ? The Denver Post

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...ee_types/ame/fasmb/media/201404_editorial.pdf


A cursory search on "ntsb aircraft accidents involving marijuana" turned up 1.25 million hits

.

Right. I didn't ask if any pilots ever crashed with THC in their system. I asked if it went up in CO, as the claim is apparently if the Feds legalize it pilots will be more smokey. The number of Google hits is...what, exactly? An indication of how many articles are written on the topic?

 

[Woobie]

.

Right. I didn't ask if any pilots ever crashed with THC in their system. I asked if it went up in CO, as the claim is apparently if the Feds legalize it pilots will be more smokey. The number of Google hits is...what, exactly? An indication of how many articles are written on the topic?

Yeah, the Google results argument is silly. If you get 4.8 billion hits on a cute kitten search, does that mean 2/3 of the planet is posting about cats? There are probably more people in the world who have eaten a cat than have taken a picture of one. But you wouldn't know it by comparing Google results.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

From your cite:


Three different standards and standards that vary from state to state. If legalized for recreational use, you see no problems establishing a federal standard (other than zero tolerance, which would effectively be status quo)

I don't get the impression that the Leafertarians have such a strong desire for legalization so that they can only use within safe guidelines

.

Why do we need a federal standard? Are Feds doing OVWI arrests and I missed it? You do know states historically have varied allowable BAC as well, right? Indiana lowered it to 0.08 because the feds tied it to highway funds.

[FONT=&quot]On March 3, 1998, President Clinton addressed the Nation on setting new standards to prevent the many tragic and unnecessary alcohol-related deaths and injuries that occur on the Nation's roads. (In 1999, there were 15,786 alcohol-related traffic fatalities in the U.S. - 38% of the total traffic fatalities for the year. This represents an average of one alcohol-related fatality every 33 minutes.[/FONT][SUP]1[/SUP][FONT=&quot]) Among other measures to deter impaired driving, the President called for the promotion of a national limit, under which it would be illegal to operate a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or higher.

Prior to the Fed's push, .10 was the per se limit in Indiana.

I fail to see how this makes a case to leave it illegal. Reasonable standards can be applied, same as alcohol.


[/FONT]

 

[Bummer]

I no longer freak out when a Volkswagon starts smiling at me.

Yeah, but when the doors start breathing...

Oh wait, that was acid.

 

[Bummer]

I don't get the impression that the Leafertarians have such a strong desire for legalization so that they can only use within safe guidelines

There's this thing called the Constitution. Republicans don't care any more about it than do Democrats.

It took an Amendment to ban alcohol. When Harry Anslinger wanted to keep his job at the government trough it only took the whim of Congress to ban pot.

Novel idea: Punish people for the bad stuff they do to others, not the stuff they do to themselves we/you don't like.

Yes, I'm a libertarian. No, shaming won't work. Why? My first sentence above.

 

[BugI02]

.

Why do we need a federal standard? Are Feds doing OVWI arrests and I missed it? You do know states historically have varied allowable BAC as well, right? Indiana lowered it to 0.08 because the feds tied it to highway funds.

[FONT=&amp]On March 3, 1998, President Clinton addressed the Nation on setting new standards to prevent the many tragic and unnecessary alcohol-related deaths and injuries that occur on the Nation's roads. (In 1999, there were 15,786 alcohol-related traffic fatalities in the U.S. - 38% of the total traffic fatalities for the year. This represents an average of one alcohol-related fatality every 33 minutes.[/FONT][SUP]1[/SUP][FONT=&amp]) Among other measures to deter impaired driving, the President called for the promotion of a national limit, under which it would be illegal to operate a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .08 or higher.

Prior to the Fed's push, .10 was the per se limit in Indiana.

I fail to see how this makes a case to leave it illegal. Reasonable standards can be applied, same as alcohol.


[/FONT]

The NTSB accident database is not readily searchable by this particular finding, which is quite often secondary with primary causes being things like CFIT (controlled flight into terrain) or insufficient altitude for the maneuver intended. As I do not intend to pull all the CO reports and read them, I will concede the point

You would need a Federal standard because the licensing is federal, no states can issue pilots licenses. Thus standards that govern the licensing must be federal. My pilot license was issued by the FAA after I met federally mandated standards, not by Ohio

You have not answered this question

Would you want a partner who you knew was 'baked' all weekend and only sobered up at the minimum necessary remove from duty? Would you bet your life on someone like that? Would you want that person operating on your wife or your children? Would the remedies available through the courts if they do be satisfying?