I think people are too quick to jump on the "it's an intoxicant, you CANT drive on it" bandwagon. I'm not a fan of bunch people baked driving either but you need to pick your battles.
If study after study shows that the effect is negligable then why do we have to spend money and resources fighting something that isn't a problem? Because you have a preconcived notion that it just has to be bad? "I got stoned and could barely hold the spoon for my half baked ben and jerry's".
It'd be like going after drivers with a BAC under .08 (which they're doing and I disagree with) instead of increasing resources fighting those that are over.
People jump right to the conclusion that everything must be done to keep people under the influence of marijuana off the roads simply cause when you say it outloud, it makes perfect sense, but they're ignoring studies that say otherwise. I'd prefer you invest the money and resources into combating people over the legal BAC limit and more importantly, people driving fatigued, something that is just as bad in some cases and almost nothing is done to fight it.
I haven't read the articles posted here specifically, just going off what I've seen in the past.
|