{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/22/2017 10:25:03 PM
4
I have a couple points on marijuana legalization.
A) If the most dangerous part of a drug is the punishment it carries if you're caught with its possession, the recreational and/or medical status of the drug should be revisited. It's mathematically impossible to overdose on marijuana; the amount you would have to ingest is too large for the amount of time you would have to do it in to have a lethal effect.
B) My only balk at full recreational legalization is that we don't have a way of addressing public intoxication with marijuana. To my knowledge, there is not yet a field test for marijuana that can determine intoxication level. Unlike alcohol, marijuana effects different people in different ways. Alcohol generally effects people in a linear fashion with regards to drink numbers, ABV, and the person's height/weight. Marijuana doesn't work the same way, and we don't have a "breathalyzer for weed" type test.
English
-
I'm with you Max. The repercussions should not be worse than the substance. As for any testing, the best they have right now is the "swab" test. And all that tells is if you've consumed in the last 24-48 hours. But when you look at the practice, you can get a DUI for such things as sleep deprivation, emotional distress, exhaustion, etc. Basically anything that impairs your ability to drive safely. Most of that is done at the discretion of the officer. Blood testing seems to be the most reliable method, but then folks are gonna start getting tagged for opiates when they eat their poppyseed bagel in the morning.
-
I took a swab test once, granted it was 6 or so years ago but I remember the lady commenting "I don't know why we even use these, they're so unreliable."
-
They aren't exactly unreliable. More non-indicative.
-
Good points
