Jump to content

Medical marijuana grower busts - an ongoing saga


tvashtarkatena
 Share

Recommended Posts

tvash you used to be so anti-weed i can see ivan has used his jedi mind tricks on you.... you'll be spearheading the tea party before ya know it :)

 

Different Tvash, apparently. That sentiment ain't in my past. I'm a live and let live kinda guy. Always have been.

 

If somebody laid down a line on a mirror at my place they'd be out on there ass right quick for several reasons:

 

1) Prison doesn't sound nice

2) Coke = shitloads of crime

3) Cokeheads get fucking tiresome pretty quickly

 

And that's why I'm for legalizing all drugs.

 

 

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I always assumed part of the crux for the law enforcement side if the issue is how you determine of a user is under the influence? Pretty easy to do with other drugs and alcohol, but since pot stays in your system so long, how are they going to determine if one is high or just have lingering thc in the blood system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is an ability to follow simple commands.

 

  • Walk a straight line
  • follow my finger with your eyes
  • Tell the testee a simple story and ask them to repeat it or answer questions related to the story

 

You're right blood testing wouldn't tell you much. Perhaps exhaling air into a bag and measuring the percentage of retained THC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always assumed part of the crux for the law enforcement side if the issue is how you determine of a user is under the influence? Pretty easy to do with other drugs and alcohol, but since pot stays in your system so long, how are they going to determine if one is high or just have lingering thc in the blood system?

 

They only test active not the metabolite tht hangs around for a month, but for heavy users it sounds like that's not an accurate measure of sobriety. Seattle Weekly had a good article: http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2012/03/the_science_behind_stoned_driv.php

 

The SPD, however, says you have to fail a field sobriety test first before being asked for a blood sample. I guess if you refuse, they need probable cause and a warrant?

Edited by rob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DUI and THC

 

Blood samples must be taken by a health care professional at a testing facility. Cops don't do it in the field, nor do they ever see the results - that's fo da Judge's eyes only.

 

If you're taking a field sobriety test, probable cause has already been established.

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always assumed part of the crux for the law enforcement side if the issue is how you determine of a user is under the influence? Pretty easy to do with other drugs and alcohol, but since pot stays in your system so long, how are they going to determine if one is high or just have lingering thc in the blood system?

 

They only test active not the metabolite tht hangs around for a month, but for heavy users it sounds like that's not an accurate measure of sobriety. Seattle Weekly had a good article: http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2012/03/the_science_behind_stoned_driv.php

 

The SPD, however, says you have to fail a field sobriety test first before being asked for a blood sample. I guess if you refuse, they need probable cause and a warrant?

If you can't pass a field sobriety test while high, you should prolly just quit, just sayin. Do they put out Doritos & Ben/Jerry's and see if you drool or what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If you're taking a field sobriety test, probable cause has already been established.

 

At least they will CLAIM they've established it. And they can claim whatever they want.

 

Of course a cop can always ASK you to take an FST without even claiming to have probable cause.

 

Glad to see this measure pass but the DUI language in it seems like a time bomb to me.

Edited by KirkW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for legalizing all drugs immediately and will vote accordingly, and don't think that the Constitution has ever endowed the Federal government with the power to enforce drug prohibition.

 

Having said that I'm going to enjoy watching people who argued that the commerce clause grants the government the power to force people to purchase a private good or service when they were arguing in support of the ACA contend with the reality that a government with the power to force you to buy insurance certainly has all of the power it needs to prohibit any and every aspect of marijuana cultivation, distribution, and consumption.

 

This absurd abuse of the commerce clause was already established by Raich v Gonzales in 2005, but good luck finding a legal arument in which there's a logically and legally consistent interpretation of the post-ACA commerce clause under which the Federal government can use it to force you to buy health insurance,but not prohibit commerce in marijuana even in states that pass laws legalizing it.

:lmao:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should have kept the state liquor stores around a while longer and we would have had and easier weed transition. And what will the Feds do now with wayward WA and CO?

 

It was amusing to watch a handful of long-time weed users laugh hysterically at the notion of buying "Corporate McWeed" at state-run stores, much less doing all of their buying during the old state liquor store's operating hours.

 

They evidently get much better price, quality, service, and convenience from private sellers and have zero intention of patronizing any state monopoly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having said that I'm going to enjoy watching people who argued that the commerce clause grants the government the power to force people to purchase a private good or service when they were arguing in support of the ACA contend with the reality that a government with the power to force you to buy insurance certainly has all of the power it needs to prohibit any and every aspect of marijuana cultivation, distribution, and consumption.

 

i'm really going to enjoy this too. i'm just gonna pull up a chair, maybe grab a soda, and really enjoy myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having said that I'm going to enjoy watching people who argued that the commerce clause grants the government the power to force people to purchase a private good or service when they were arguing in support of the ACA contend with the reality that a government with the power to force you to buy insurance certainly has all of the power it needs to prohibit any and every aspect of marijuana cultivation, distribution, and consumption.

 

i'm really going to enjoy this too. i'm just gonna pull up a chair, maybe grab a soda, and really enjoy myself.

 

The Obamacare mandate was upheld by the SCOTUS based on the Taxation, not Commerce Clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...