DEA to reclassify Marijuana from schedule I to schedule III

[Coyotesfan97]

I don’t like the smell of drunks but that’s not a good reason to ban something or limit someone’s freedom.

I don’t like the smell of drunks either after 33 years. I don’t like the smell of cigarettes either. I think there’s a lot of bullshit tobacco users have endured. But I don’t see the draconian crap for public marijuana smoke the tobacco users have had to endure. I think the irony is crazy.

[RoyGBiv]

I don’t like the smell of drunks either after 33 years. I don’t like the smell of cigarettes either. I think there’s a lot of bullshit tobacco users have endured. But I don’t see the draconian crap for public marijuana smoke the tobacco users have had to endure. I think the irony is crazy.

I almost replied with a very similar thought. Glad I read the next page first.

I smoke the occasional cigar. Always outside.
Hard to imagine ever smoking weed inside my house, or in any public place not specifically designated for weed, ala Amsterdam "coffeeshops".

I was in Houston a few months ago, stayed at a nice Hilton. Went outside to enjoy the patio with a cocktail after dinner and gave up because the weed smoke was too annoying. And weed is not at all legal here. Good luck telling those folks to go somewhere else without police backup.

[Odin Bravo One]

[BillSWPA]

Re: tobacco smoke: I knew a man who never smoked himself, but worked in an office where others smoked. He was told by his doctors that his lungs looked like he smoked 2 packs of cigarettes per day.

For those who smoke but choose to do so where it does not bother others, thank you. Please consider your own health, but that is your choice.

For those who do not consider others, regardless of whether it is tobacco, marijuana, or anything else, the “right” to enjoy that stuff must end where the right of others not to take it into their own bodies begins.

[MistWolf]

On the subject of drunk driving, my state is currently advancing bills to lower the BAC threshold to .05 for DUI through the monoparty legislature. Pretty sure it’s going to happen. I personally think this is a bad idea, since it will have a major impact on our craft winery, beer, and overall entertainment industries, globally—large industries that are a big part of our economy that already ate a mountain of shit during the shutdown.

This is coming from a guy who—along with his wife—almost got killed by a drunk driver on our wedding anniversary by a van that ran through 2 red lights, hit the intersection of our driver’s door/engine compartment/A pillar (thank God, or I’d not be here typing this) and pinned us up against a building, wedging us between a traffic light pole and the front door of the corner business (which was a dive bar, ironically). First responders eventually pried us out via our sedan’s back doors; our crash scene was on the evening news of our local channels. Rest assured, I take a VERY dim view of drunk driving, but I also know that the 3 guys in the van that made a mockery of our lives for 6 years ALL were over .20. All 3 had suspended licenses for repeated DUI, and all 3 had multiple felonies on their records. Had the police been able to figure out which one was actually in the driver’s seat, that person would have gone away for good under WA’s 3-strike laws. I *know* (knew) people who were killed by drunk drivers; none of those drivers were blowing anywhere near as low as .05. The last one was hit by someone blowing well into the .2 range (.28, IIRC)

So there’s “drunk driving” and then there is DRUNK driving. That’s just my experience of things. No doubt there are career street cops who have more expert input. I’d be very interested in opinions from resident P-F blue on .05 limiting as the threshold for DUI. Given that 2 6oz glasses of red wine will reportedly put a guy my weight (175ish) at over .05, I’d guess that 50 percent of any audience hearing me play classical music at a winery concert series are hitting .05 at some point during the gig, but I don’t have any way of knowing for sure.

This a hot topic for me, since I’ve A, barely escaped death or life-shattering injury caused by a career drunk, and B, rely on alcohol sales and consumption for a decent chunk of my living.

It is interesting watching multiple friends, colleagues, and acquaintances who have been all “Go Dems!” as the legislature passes one uncontested gun control bill after another suddenly switch to “Wait… what? Fuck the Dems!” upon realizing that the anti-bacchanal nanny state they voted for is now pitting the threat of DUI against every brew pub, weekend concert, and movie night.

But I digress. Input on .05 welcome.

Having lived in Lynwood while working nights at ATS in Everett, it’s my opinion it’s more about generating funds than curbing DUIs. A DUI arrest in Washington starts up a money sucking machine with big fines, outrageous court fees, re-education classes, lawyer fees and more with a large chunk going directly to the coffers the state and local jurisdiction. I’d be coming home from work during OhDrunk:30 and get pulled over once or twice a month for some minor infraction, real or imagined, and the officer would immediately start looking for signs I’d been drinking. I know they were just doing their jobs, but it was annoying as hell. After the third time being pulled over by the same officer, I finally asked him to please put out the word. I’m just coming home from work, taking the same route, Monday through Thursday at the same time except when working OT and do not drink any alcohol or take even prescription drugs. After that, they left me alone.

Yeah. Lowering the BAC is more about generating more funds than effective enforcement.

[DDTSGM]

For those who do not consider others, regardless of whether it is tobacco, marijuana, or anything else, the “right” to enjoy that stuff must end where the right of others not to take it into their own bodies begins.

Amen. I caught a little bit of guff at work from my co-workers who smoked (fewer and fewer as the years passed) when I complained about the location of smoking areas by entrance doors. They were moved.

It is hilarious, in a sad way, to see folks at convenience stores standing and smoking under these signs:

[DDTSGM]

Yeah. Lowering the BAC is more about generating more funds than effective enforcement.

I don't know about generating more funds, but it is also feel good legislation if you consider the documented difficulties many officers have detecting impaired drivers at .10 or below.





https://www.responsibility.org/wp-co...ger_VER-2d.pdf

[Coyotesfan97]

I guess on of the ironies about trying to lower the BAC to .05 is the overwhelming number of DUI DRE drug cases that occur now. I retired four years ago and even then Motors would be surprised if they took an alcohol DUI.

The point about trying to detect and test a driver at .05-.08 is pretty hard. The traffic motors I worked around used to laugh at us K9 handlers because when we called them to take over a stop they’d say it was a K9 DUI with a high BAC. Generally it was the deuce you can’t put blinders on for.


If I was on a jury with a DUI reported at .05 without extenuating circumstances I’d probably vote not to convict.



Here’s a Fridays with Frank throwback episode where the first part is stop where he arrested a 19 year old for a DUI DRE involving Marijuana. During the FSTs the suspects says “ it’s not illegal it’s weed”