A Breathalyzer for Marijuana

That also must mean that some scale be established for the legal limit for driving while stoned.

I see a giant disaster/discrepancy if these laws are left for individual states to enforce. Legislatures in many states whose voters have voted for pot have repeatedly disregarded the will of the voters.

That would be true if legislatures had to be either legal or logical.

We both know that neither is gonna happen.

You'd think that some of these pot companies would just purchase enough lobbyists and legislators to assure legalization, like big oil, pharma, coal, hospitals, insurance companies and the rest of those who don't like to earn money the old fashioned way have done.

The NRA is a great example. $30 million in one candidate's pile.

The next research needed should be about what constitutes an "impaired" reading on the breathalyzer. This will inevitably vary from state to state.

This will probably also vary from individual to individual. The mild paranoia marijuana can induce might make a few more attentive in their driving. Wouldn't that be an interesting paradox?

The Washington State Patrol did a small study ~1970 that found just that for small amounts of marijuana, but not for large amounts. I don't know where the border was between small and large.

A mere doddle for potheads with the ability to maintain.

Another "test" may be that the officer hands the breathalyzer tube, held by a roach clip, to the suspect while saying "Duuuuuude, this is some good sh_t." If the suspect sucks on the tube (instead of blowing) he just may be impaired.

Might be considered entrapment though.

"Will of the people?What's that?"

"The avalanche has started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Kosh, Believers(From Babylon 5)

States rights guarantee that an individual state can create it's own mandates. Our rights and how we use them dictate our sovereign citizenship.

If you had a poppy roll that morning, your problems might multiply.

A good number of states are already experimenting with this now. It will remain to be seen if there is a significant cost to society with the legalization of marijuana.

I wouldn't trust a single thing that the ACLU has to say. If there ever was an organized subversive force in the U.S., they are it.

Believe what you want.

Likewise.

Back in 2000, friend of mine had a wedding in Colorado Springs, CO.

while there I visited Garden of the Gods park. Upon leaving I came across Monitou Springs, it was quaint little stop with nice shops a real relaxing time.

4 years later, I visited him again, and did it change, when I left Garden of the Gods, and Manitou spring change to head shops, pimply face unemployed musicians, tents set up next to sidewalks, unsupervised little kids with tattered cloths and dirty faces running around.

rather sad, but believe what you want.

For whatever reason there was no mention of a fellow by the name of Randolph Hearst (I believe I have his first name correct) who owned a newspaper in San Francisco. The fellow had a huge investment in timber, and hemp was a very big threat to him. Look it up and see what you find. If I'm wrong, I apologize......but I believe that the fact was that you could grow maybe four crops of hemp a year (fast growing) and produce lots of paper from it and considerably cheaper as opposed to using wood pulp. His newspaper used lots of that stuff....

For what it's worth.

Hemp , Hearst , and Prohibition

Before Anslinger took the helm of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in 1930, marijuana was called Indian Hemp or Cannabis India. In a political spin move, Anslinger pointed to immigrant Mexicans and blacks as the prime users of illicit cannabis, and he began publicly referring to it as marijuana (the Mexican name) as a weasel word to associate it with low-status or criminal immigrants.

Many laws had been passed making cannabis illegal decades before the alleged conspiracy between Hearst, DuPont and the others. California had banned non-prescription cannabis in 1913 as part of a campaign against drugs that was largely anti-Chinese; New York City in 1914; Texas in 1915. Enforcement was almost entirely against Mexican and black communities.

Since legalization in Canada was almost a year ago we should soon get some statistics on impaired driving involving cannabis.

The advice that's been given is not to drive within 4 hours after smoking pot. And really emphasized, not to combine marijuana and alcohol. Apparently that's a worse impairment then either separately! Any reasonable adult would take that advice seriously...

Currently, some marijuana dispensaries are allowing perspective customers to test samples of products in house.

Special sections within the same occupied space as over the counter sales offer both edibles and inhalant products.

Sales stores, positioned at locations that lack the services of public transportation, require consumers to self ambulate. Thus, those that sample then purchase products, leave the bounds of the property under their own power and accord.

There currently is no regulation in place to govern how many products, at a given visit, a potential customer can sample.

This is the same type of exploited loophole that purveyors of brewed and distilled alcohol enjoy.

A saloon sells drinks to a patron, that person then drives and is later detained by law enforcement for an infraction. The establishment that sold the device, continues to operate without impunity.

CDTFA: Samples of Cannabis – How Does Tax Apply? | Cannabis

That's because the staff at the <...establishment...> have no control over the individual's behaviour after the consumption has taken place; with it comes a lack of liability.

Just think a moment: these <...researchers...> can do such things legally.

Consider the fact that they can analyze the atmospheric gas composition form planets billions of miles away.

Tell me they cannot analyze the atmosphere inside of a car remotely with the windows closed,traveling at interstate speeds from a remote sensor.

The technology is there,and they may be using it.

Who would know?

A random checkpoint,or a planned stop for a detected vehicle?

What are the over height detectors really seeing?

"You better be good,cause Santa Clause is watchin' you." "He's everywhere..he's everywhere" Lighten up!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mER2fGuSqF8

It will take a long time for a breathalyzer or any other product to be commercially possible to produce. It will take even longer to put regulations in place on limits. A lot of research will need to be conducted to see the correlation between how impaired is a driver and the amount of marijuana he/she consumed. I am sure each of us is different and reacts differently to this substance. It will be hard to set limits, also will there ever be political will for such change.

I just read on some research that natural supplements can help reduce THC amounts in your body if consumed daily. I would not worry at all about this, too many unknown variables.

I think a Breathalyzer for marijuana is an interesting idea, but honestly, I'm not sure how accurate they'll be just yet. The science behind detecting THC levels in breath is still catching up, and it's a bit tricky since THC isn't the same as alcohol when it comes to how it stays in your system.

Right now, they’re trying to measure things like how much THC is in your saliva or breath, but it’s still a work in progress. If you’re curious, you might want to read up more on it at places like thc a flower. They dive deep into how marijuana affects your body.