A person can't get high/effected from second hand alcohol breath. Lawsuits are out now just from second hand smoke. Of course Pot smokers would then argue about smoking bans that are even now in place for cigs.
Unlike a DWI based on BAC, an officer would then be responsible to determine if a driving Pot smoker was Under the influence? BAC can be used in court, what would be the legal limit/medical ruling on the amount of Pot in one's system while driving?
More fodder to the argument.
Point 1: Marijuana smoking (if legalized) should be held to the Dutch standard. Places that cater to the smoker, or keep it in the home. If it was legalized, I doubt it would be across the board and I dont support an across the board legalization. Smoking bans in public places should apply to any type of smoking, be it cigarettes, pipe tobacco or pot.
Point 2: Already been covered. DWI for marijuana is a judgment call, if a cop smells it or sees paraphernalia he has just cause to make an arrest same with seeing the person. Court matters are different because theres no way to measure THC levels in the body for a pertinent call on making the distinction akin to BAC levels. Every person reacts to marijuana differently, where one hit can make you high. Any ingestion + driving would be/is a DWI. Its not like alcohol where the majority of people can get away with one beer and not feel the effects. You can get a DWI now for driving on prescribed drugs like Vicodin.
Edited by ghdi, 10 September 2007 - 03:44 PM.
