Colorado Drivers

M

mrboote

...
Once again CO>WA when it comes to pot laws. The opposition to legalization here in WA (elements of the mmj community) really seized upon the DUI component as one of the key reasons to not accept 502. The reason this is pretty lame is that you could already get a DUI in the state of Washington based on probable cause alone. With cannabis being illegal PC was possession of any amount, even empty containers or paraphernalia. Now that at least it's not a controlled substance, the cops will have to be more delicate when handling out a "green DUI".
 
mrboote,
OO

OO

Technical Skeptical
Unfortunately, you can still receive a DUI even if you are driving perfectly fine, and have very low blood plasma levels of the active compound in the bloodstream.

Do they do DUI checkpoints in WA like they do in CA?
 
OO,
  • Like
Reactions: SD_haze
C

Chill Dude

Well-Known Member
The article states that the under the proposed law you could be found guilty of DUI if you have 5 nangrams of THC or greater in your blood. I don't know what that means. What does 5 nangrams equate to ? Can someone vape a bowl and then 5 hours later still have concentrations above 5 nangrams even though the effects have long worn off. If that's the case... That's pretty fucked up....
 
Chill Dude,
  • Like
Reactions: ShipDit
t-dub

t-dub

Vapor Sloth
It depends on how much you use. Chronic pain patients, like me, could test positive at this level having ingested the evening prior . . .

If you really want to understand cannabis pharmacokinetics and the significance of blood & urine test results, try this: http://www.idmu.co.uk/drugtestcan.htm

fig4.png
 
OO

OO

Technical Skeptical
Chill Dude said:
The article states that the under the proposed law you could be found guilty of DUI if you have 5 nangrams of THC or greater in your blood. I don't know what that means. What does 5 nangrams equate to ? Can someone vape a bowl and then 5 hours later still have concentrations above 5 nangrams even though the effects have long worn off. If that's the case... That's pretty fucked up....
Click to expand...
It's nanograms, five thousandths of one millionth of one gram, or 5*10^-9 grams.

There's been talk about what that is, all over the internet if you're curious.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=5 nanograms of thc is how much

Remember the rules of this site?

mrboote said:
No, random checkpoints are not allowed thank god. You theoretically need probable cause in this state.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has challenged it yet in this state, but it is complete crap.
 
OO

OO

Technical Skeptical
t-dub said:
Nice to see peeps here "get it" when it comes to liberty . . . :peace:

Edit: With liberty comes responsibility.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
One reason I think my state should work towards making all our drivers the responsible kind. Start with incentives, then eventually make it mandatory that you are a capable driver. So few are.
 
OO,
ShipDit

ShipDit

1%
If I followed my better instincts right now, I would put this computer in the Camaro and drive to the home of the nearest politician – any politician – and hurl the goddamn machine through his front window ..flush the bugger out with an act of lunatic violence then soak him down with mace and run him naked down Main Street with a bell around his neck and black lumps all over his body from the jolts of a high-powered ‘Bull Buster’ cattle prod.
82e5b800404120235c7c2a7e4d117d8b_zps755d64b1.jpg
 
ShipDit,
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom