Although I don't get super stoned and drive I do want to point out there is a massive difference between drinking and driving and being stoned and driving and I will say that from personal experience, not random opinion.
This is the crux of my concerns with legalization.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
Yeah sorry I should have clarified, I consumed the edibles about 30km away from our hotel. It was actually perfect timing. That being said, edibles are measured ie 10mg, 20mg etc. So for someone of my size I know exactly how hard and when 20mg will hit me. No different than someone buying a 40 of vodka and knowing exactly how many ounces before they feel good. No different than someone who has never drank before taking too many shots and feeling it. If you know your body, how much you are about to consume then it's perfectly fine. It's when you bake it yourself you don't know exactly how many mg are in it but the edibles you get in Washington state are really well labelled. Although I don't get super stoned and drive I do want to point out there is a massive difference between drinking and driving and being stoned and driving and I will say that from personal experience, not random opinion.
Yeah I don't get it, when I drink and drive I'm perfectly fine, its walking that gets me.
I wish this was done earlier but Im glad its on the way. The stigma around weed and the difficulty in finding decent edibles prevented me from helping my sick Mom when she needed it the most during chemo.
I have zero tolerance for people who are against legalizing weed. It's such selfish bull####, trying to impress your ideals on others no matter the consequence.
Good job Libs.
The Following User Says Thank You to White Out 403 For This Useful Post:
But from what I have read in this thread (correct me if I am wrong) it is often difficult to say with any level of certainty how quickly or for how long edibles will affect you.
This is true for sure. If you are someone who uses it on the regular, you will know, but obviously that is kind of beside the concern. Part of legalization is the ability to research the effects more thoroughly and through that likely come up with some decent ways of measuring "stonedness". But there should really be a zero tolerance policy with both weed and alcohol (and many other types of medication) behind the wheel. Having "legal limits" on booze was a mistake in the first place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASP#26525
Hitler's birthday? Anniversary of Columbine?
We DO NOT have a 4/20 in Canada. I repeat. We do not write dates that way :/
Lord knows we need weed on those two days. That is how I say dates. That is how my computer shows dates. That is how my old job at the bank logged dates.
I would love to see you wandering around Robson Street on 4/20 trying to tell everyone about proper date notation.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Now that they have legalized it, maybe they can come up with some that doesn't smell like crap.
What the hell happened to weed? It sure didn't smell this way 15-20 years ago?
Pretty much every strain smells fairly different. Some smell like old cheese, some smell like chocolate, some smell like strawberries. They are often named for their scent.
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Zero tolerance would not work in a place where you have to drive everywhere. Unless you plan on not driving for 24 hours anytime you have more than a beer or two. Good bye pubs.
Imagine how much Flames tickets would cost if they didn't have any where close to the beer sales they do now.
Pretty much every strain smells fairly different. Some smell like old cheese, some smell like chocolate, some smell like strawberries. They are often named for their scent.
Serious? Then why the hell would people want to smoke hobo ass or rotting tuna in their mouths? Is it a better high?
I wish this was done earlier but Im glad its on the way. The stigma around weed and the difficulty in finding decent edibles prevented me from helping my sick Mom when she needed it the most during chemo.
I have zero tolerance for people who are against legalizing weed. It's such selfish bull####, trying to impress your ideals on others no matter the consequence.
Good job Libs.
People expressed concern over being stoned and driving, and you have zero tolerance for that concern?
This is the crux of my concerns with legalization.
Driving stoned is a lot closer to driving tired than driving drunk. States that have legalized have seen a decline in impaired driving fatalities and accidents. I would say that current laws and methods for dealing with impaired drivers are sufficient.
Serious? Then why the hell would people want to smoke hobo ass or rotting tuna in their mouths? Is it a better high?
I'm not sure of the science behind it. It's just about preference of high, not that it's necessarily better.
Most people choose it based on smell at dispensaries. It's like going to David's Tea and choosing a tea. They give you the jar and you take a big whiff, take a look at the buds and most shoppers don't go beyond that.
Sure, something like UK Cheese smells like I used KD cheese powder on athlete's foot, but it almost becomes part of the charm of it. Some people like really stinky cheese, some people like egg salad sandwiches, some people like dank weed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by polak
When is the last time there's been any story about someone getting a DUI for weed?
I guess "Man gets DUI after giggling in a McDonalds drive thru for 15 minutes" doesn't get the same level of press.
You don't think not having a proper testing device plays into that just a little bit?
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Driving stoned is a lot closer to driving tired than driving drunk. States that have legalized have seen a decline in impaired driving fatalities and accidents. I would say that current laws and methods for dealing with impaired drivers are sufficient.
Wait you know that driving while tired isn't good either right?
My comment was more on the viewpoint held by individuals like that poster.
I have said this before, but if the pro-legalization crowd, just came out and said "yip it changes your ability to drive and no one should be driving while stoned" much of the concern would be diminished.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.
The Following User Says Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
You don't think not having a proper testing device plays into that just a little bit?
If you had a bunch of stoners causing accidents while ripped I think you'd hear about it?
I think the fact that you don't hear about it is either:
A) Accidents are really rare.
B) Cops can't tell they're impaired and if you can't tell that someone is impaired in a situation like that (heavy, detail oriented conversation with police) I think it's debatable if they're actually impaired.
I mean wouldn't you expect to hear about THC levels in toxicology reports from stoners causing serious accidents?
Driving stoned is a lot closer to driving tired than driving drunk. States that have legalized have seen a decline in impaired driving fatalities and accidents. I would say that current laws and methods for dealing with impaired drivers are sufficient.
Sure but again that's the question, how do you test for it, and if its a blood screening you have a right to refuse the screening.
An article in the globe and mail that talks about an increase in fatal accidents in the States with legalized dope where drivers tested positive for THC, which goes counter to your argument,
Let me ask you a question? IF its only that your driving tired, do you want people operating motor vehicles under the influence of a drug that makes them tired and maybe inattentive?
The one big thing for me in terms of legalization is the laws around driving.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Driving stoned is a lot closer to driving tired than driving drunk. States that have legalized have seen a decline in impaired driving fatalities and accidents. I would say that current laws and methods for dealing with impaired drivers are sufficient.
Sure but again that's the question, how do you test for it, and if its a blood screening you have a right to refuse the screening.
An article in the globe and mail that talks about an increase in fatal accidents in the States with legalized dope where drivers tested positive for THC, which goes counter to your argument,
Let me ask you a question? IF its only that your driving tired, do you want people operating motor vehicles under the influence of a drug that makes them tired and maybe inattentive?
The one big thing for me in terms of legalization is the laws around driving.
Wait you know that driving while tired isn't good either right?
My comment was more on the viewpoint held by individuals like that poster.
I have said this before, but if the pro-legalization crowd, just came out and said "yip it changes your ability to drive and no one should be driving while stoned" much of the concern would be diminished.
My point is that there are great number of things that impair to an equal or more severe degree than driving stoned and as such, the current laws are sufficient, we don't need anything new. People who are afraid that a smokey wave of death will soon be flooding the highways are jumping at shadows.
