The Straight Dope
Ignore the Speculation and Silly Rumors—Here Are the Most Important Things You Need to Know About Washington's Vote to Legalize Marijuana
mike force
Washington State voters legalized pot last week. It was not just a gesture. It was not simply a statement. Starting on December 6, adults 21 and older may legally possess up to one ounce of pot, and the city's prosecutor says there's nothing the Feds can do about it.
This alone is the biggest blow to prohibition in 85 years. Before Initiative 502 passed here and Amendment 64 passed in Colorado last Tuesday, 90 percent of all pot arrests were solely for possession—so this will end thousands of pot arrests every year.
Stranger Personals
Still, lots of folks are spreading misinformation, and even fear. "You can't under this initiative have an ounce of marijuana that doesn't come from a state-issued provider," Jack Driscoll, the chief criminal deputy for the Spokane County prosecutor, claimed last week. The Spokesman-Review credulously printed that statement, misleading readers to believe that until the state licenses stores, you can't possess marijuana. Meanwhile, a friend complained to me that he heard police were going to use "mouth swabs" to test drivers for marijuana intoxication, and everybody who wants a driver's license will now be piss-tested at the DMV.
That's all horseshit.
Possessing pot will be legal in three weeks, it doesn't matter where you got it, and officers cannot subject drivers to roadside marijuana tests (they couldn't do that before and they still can't). If you hear something that sounds impossible about I-502, it probably is.
But there are legitimate questions. In additional to legalizing possession, I-502 triggered a complex process to create an above-board marijuana market. For the first time in US history, we'll establish state procedures for growing, licensing, and selling marijuana. Some legal experts say those regulations may potentially create a conflict with federal law, others say they won't. But put that out of your head for just a second. We'll start with the most important stuff:
Possessing Marijuana
This is why Driscoll, the county prosecutor in Spokane, was wrong when he said you need to purchase pot from a state store to possess it legally. Section 20 of I-502 states unequivocally that "possession, by a person twenty-one years of age or older, of useable marijuana or marijuana-infused products in amounts that do not exceed those set forth in section 15(3) of this act is not a violation of this section, this chapter, or any other provision of Washington state law." Those amounts, specifically? Up to one ounce of bud, 16 ounces of solid-form marijuana in food products, and 72 ounces of cannabis in liquid form (such as lotions or, like, a shocking volume of hash oil)—no matter where it came from. You can also have pot paraphernalia.
This portion of the law, explains Seattle city attorney Pete Holmes, who is a prosecutor and was a cosponsor of the initiative, "is simply not preemptable." In other words, Holmes says that the Feds may challenge the future pot stores—but not the possession portion of the law. Furthermore, "The Feds cannot make the state criminalize that kind of conduct."
Marijuana possession technically remains a federal crime, but as a practical matter, Feds don't arrest or prosecute people for small-time possession, unless people do it on federal property. Nor can the Feds make local cops or prosecutors in Washington bust people under federal law.
Sergeant Sean Whitcomb, a spokesman for the Seattle Police Department, says: "For us, the law has changed, and people can expect no enforcement for possession."
Again, just because some people will claim otherwise, Whitcomb reiterates: "What you can expect is no enforcement on possession—that is a reasonable expectation." Prosecutors in King and Pierce Counties have already dismissed 220 pending pot possession cases.
A few caveats: Pot remains illegal for people under 21. You can't smoke pot in public or have an open package of marijuana in public (just like you can't drink in public, which is a dumb rule, but that's parity with alcohol law). Using pot in public will be a $50 infraction, just like drinking whiskey on the sidewalk. You also can't drive high. These parts of the law can't be challenged by the Feds, Holmes insists.
Growing and Selling Marijuana
Anyone who tells you that they know how marijuana is going to be grown and sold—it's gonna be farmed by Monsanto, it's gonna be packaged by Marlboro, it's gonna be taxed till grams cost $100—is full up to their ears in shit. How do I know this? Because regulations haven't been made yet.
The law stipulates that the Washington State Liquor Control Board must license marijuana growers, distributors, and sellers. A rule-making process is under way and won't end until December of 2013. They'll decide things like the location of stores, hours pot can be sold, where it can be grown, rules for advertising, standards for quality, and other details. They'll be holding public hearings, so if you want a say in the outcome, go to those hearings.
But be warned: I-502 did not legalize home growing or the unlicensed selling of pot—both remain a felony. This means that until the state sets rules for a marijuana market, there's no legal way to obtain it. But let's be honest here, buying pot has never been difficult.
The Feds
Again, anyone who tells you they know what's gonna happen with the Feds is bluffing.
The US Department of Justice may challenge the part of I-502 that concerns licensing the legal marijuana market. They could file a lawsuit that seeks an injunction, thereby preventing the regulations for marijuana growing and sales from taking effect. But is their case a slam dunk? Will they file a lawsuit next month, next summer, next December when the new rules for growing and selling go into effect? Nobody knows.
Governor Chris Gregoire of Washington and Governor John Hickenlooper of Colorado have both begun talking to federal prosecutors. "Our goal is to implement the law according to the will of the voters," says Gregoire spokesman Cory Curtis, adding, "If the US Department of Justice has any clarity on their position, we'd like to know it."
If there is legal challenge, all we can be certain of is this: A federal case over how to legalize marijuana is exactly what this country needs to make marijuana legalization a mainstream issue. A federal challenge is a political opportunity.
Driving
Driving under the influence of marijuana remains illegal. I-502 says that adults 21 and older who are driving with more than five nanograms of active THC per milliliter of blood are automatically guilty of DUI. Of the handful of available scientific studies, most show people below that level after a few hours. Not one peer-reviewed study shows even the heaviest pot user above that level the next day. Officers would still require probable cause to stop someone and test their blood (just like now); blood tests could only be conducted at a medical facility.
Medical Marijuana
Can an average Joe buy pot from a medical marijuana dispensary now? Does I-502 create new rules for those dispensaries? Do authorized patients lose their right to grow pot at home? Has anything changed about medical marijuana—at all?
No, no, no, and no.
I-502 doesn't touch the state's Medical Use of Marijuana Act, passed in 1998, so the rules for dispensaries, patients, and health care providers remain the same.
But things will get better for medical marijuana patients. Before I-502 passed, patients had zero legal protection from arrest (only a defense in court). Now they won't be arrested for possession of up to an ounce, while retaining all their other rights as a patient, such as the right to grow marijuana at home.
All That Other Shit
What's gonna happen when people go to the airport? Will Washington someday be a state for marijuana tourism? How would the Supreme Court vote? Stay tuned. But tune out blowhards who claim to know the answers.
By the way, here is something Dominic wrote regarding several studies: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
@45 Gregoire is our governor until January (I think it is 12th).
Raymond Yans says the approvals send "a wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad."
Yans heads the International Narcotics Control Board. His job depends on strict control. He told The Associated Press on Tuesday he hopes Attorney General Eric Holder "will take all the necessary measures" to ensure that marijuana possession and use remains illegal throughout the U.S.
Raymond Yans says the approvals send "a wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad."
Yans heads the International Narcotics Control Board. He told The Associated Press on Tuesday he hopes Attorney General Eric Holder "will take all the necessary measures" to ensure that marijuana possession and use remains illegal throughout the U.S.
so happy. i thought it was zero tolerance, which would then be impossible to prove and therefore made me nervous. but 5 nanograms means your high.
http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/drugt…
53
I also think a lot of people would be shocked to know that many of the fruits and veggies they buy are patented and didn't come to existence by good farming and petroleum alone.
52
i'd like to grow hemp on family land. For purpose of hobby crafting stuffs, as well for something to out-compete the invasive blackberry, horsetail and stinging nettles. The spot is alongside rural road. Will need be legal or risk land seizure and fines which can't be paid on this income.
Though it seems that Alex Whiteplume might finally have had a legal harvest by planting certified non-thc plants. http://www.freepress.org/departments/dis…
Implication: Employers who know or should have known their employees are cannabis users, and that the effects of this use results or could result in inability to perform a task to the needed level for safely or effectiveness will very well leave that employer vulnerable to lawsuits.
* cognitive deficits appear detectable at least 7 days after heavy cannabis use
* users show significant impairments in tasks that require more complex manipulation of learned material (so-called "executive" brain functions)
This is not to suggest that a task like driving would be influenced when not high, but only that some higher level tasks are impaired for as much as a week after a test. Should McDonald's need to test --maybe not. Should a hospital - maybe so. Should an airline -- because of the fact that a pilot could be impaired 4 days after use, they may have to. If pilot error is involved in a crash, and the pilot was known to have used in the days before hand, the potential exists for the airline to be liable. For sure.
Implication: Employers who know or should have known their employees are cannabis users, and that the effects of this use results or could result in inability to perform a task to the needed level for safely or effectiveness will very well leave that employer vulnerable to lawsuits.
* cognitive deficits appear detectable at least 7 days after heavy cannabis use
* users show significant impairments in tasks that require more complex manipulation of learned material (so-called "executive" brain functions)
This is not to suggest that a task like driving would be influenced when not high, but only that some higher level tasks are impaired for as much as a week after a test. Should McDonald's need to test --maybe not. Should a hospital - maybe so. Should an airline -- because of the fact that a pilot could be impaired 4 days after use, they may have to. If pilot error is involved in a crash, and the pilot was known to have used in the days before hand, the potential exists for the airline to be liable. For sure.
47
My plans to grow hemp next spring might be premature. But i'm not willing to wait till 2014. So i'd like to help right now in whatever way i can. Will send a few emails to state rep, but what else is happening? i know there are people who been fighting for legalization of hemp for ages now. How to hook up with them?
46
My plans to grow hemp next spring might be premature. But i'm not willing to wait till 2014. So i'd like to help right now in whatever way i can. Will send a few emails to state rep, but what else is happening? i know there are people who been fighting for legalization of hemp for ages now. How to hook up with them?
By the way, CHRISTINE Gregoire is no longer our governor. I'm not certain you've been doing enough research.
44
@28, thanks for "nuh-uh!"
@30, of course patenting natural forms of life is legal--just ask Monsanto. And if one of their patented tomato seeds ends up in your garden, prepared to get sued. It's a fucked world we live in; just smile and take it.
Why are all the hugest stoners the ones who know the least about 502 and/or are totally misinformed about its implications?
I was just interasted for web hosting..I can see your page http://photos.momlogic.com is stable, can you please advice me about web hosting provider..have you ever heard for www.elcoplanet.com offering hosting ? thanks a lot
I'm guessing the thinking among nice, well-meaning liberals is that without such a test (and to be sure: it doesn't exist and isn't on the horizon) law enforcement will tend to error on the side of letting people off the hook.
There may be some truth to that in some cases but there may be other cases where people get dragged off to jail based on their inability to pass a field behavioral test (for whatever reason [not to mention the fact that the results are ultimately a judgment call not science]) or because they fail a saliva exam. (A field saliva exam at last check was under development but it will only be able to tell law enforcement if thc is present in the bloodstream not how much or how recently the person smoked it.)
As someone who has in the past suffered seizures during blood draws (it happens to some people, incidentally, and typically doesn't have anything to do with a seizure disorder or epilepsy) I find the idea of coerced blood tests by the state almost as scary as reckless stoned kids on the roads.
It makes no sense to me the the president has a micro brew recipe and brews beer in the white house but I cant grow a house plant of a legal plant in my home or yard. I think the plant is very pretty and it smells nice and I would like to have one. I would like to grow a plant in my home just to look at. What is the logic behind this stupid stipulation of needing a prescription or a license. I can grow parsley sage, rosemary and thyme but not this controversial plant, ridiculous.
Maybe someday the plethora of proven chemical killers like MSG, tobacco, high fructose corn syrup, will be illegal and you will need to be 21 to purchase candy and crap like Franken food or sit at a McDonalds bar. Wouldn't that be great, Burger King, KFC,Wendy's and Jack In The Box etc... bars where they card you or weigh you before they are allowed to sell you that crap. Or maybe require you to get a prescription, have you prove a need to eat that poison. One can only dream.
http://www.emedicinehealth.com/script/ma…
is it true that recreational M will be taxed 25% when grower sells to distributor, taxed 25% again when distributor sells to commercial store that sells to individuals and 25% again when store sells to individual?
also, (and most important) are valid medical marijuana patients exempt from taxes when purchasing MMJ? are over-the-counter & prescription medications exempt from wa state taxes & does MMJ fall into either category?
First we need several free citizens in green states who’ll testify, who can say shit like: “Hallucinogen? Who the fuck has ever hallucinated on weed?” and give other experiential evidence without fear of reprisal (to admit to a federal crime you’ve gotta talk about much more than simple consumption). We’ll gather some empirical data with which we can refute the current schedule 1 classification, which is based on an ass-backwards understanding of harms vs benefits.
Next, more and more states need to follow Washington’s and Colorado’s leads, until we’re in majority defiance.
Finally, we’ll drop the spiritual use bomb. Then we’ve got em.
You are totally whiffing on 2 major points:
First, THC is eliminated from your blood MUCH faster than it is from your urine (or hair follicles)- your UA frame of reference is skewed.
Second, you don't seem to understand the concept of probable cause. Under the previous system, the smell of weed smoke in your car also could've (and should've) been probable cause for your arrest for DUI. Just because cops apparently sometimes let you get away with it doesn't mean they had to. Although after 502 they can still arrest you for driving WHILE INTOXICATED (are you really trying to argue that you should be able to do this?) this doesn't mean that they necessarily will. But let's not confuse selective enforcement with probable cause. Walking out of a pot store will not constitute probable cause to pull you over, unless you're observed stumbling around (like walking out of liquor store while sober isn't probable DWI now). You'll have to actually be driving like an idiot (i.e 20mph on I-5) to give them probable cause.
If you do get pulled over for nothing I suggest asking "Is there a problem officer?" and recording his answer.
Cops won't be lurking everywhere to entrap you. One of the major points of 502 is freeing them up to do the more important things they have to do. Don't you realize legalization is a burden lifted off of them as well?
I think you better get on some different shit man. You sound pretty paranoid.
28
1) Dominic Holden isn't a big enough pot smoker,
2) Someone temporarily caved to "concerns" from the medical marijuana community, and
3) I personally disagree with the results that these scientific studies measured and came up with objectively, because nuh-uh!
Strangely, I don't see how any of this serves as evidence that THC maintains levels above 5ng/mL a day after smoking.
Slave2Nannies, are you being disingenuous, or do you simply not know what the word "evidence" means?
25
You cannot be taken seriously after making such a statement.
24
Need more bro? I'm happy to oblige and do your work for you. It's really not that hard.
22
Note the results. I can read them. You can read them. Other people can read them. Yet here you are still trying to force your opinion through as fact when anyone can see that at the very least there is a very strong argument against what you are claiming to be irrefutable.
p.s. you didn't answer if you smoke pot now Dom
Example A: In the past if you got pulled over and it smelled like marijuana you got searched and got a ticket - if that. And now? Now it's probable cause to take you down for a blood test and you can be arrested for DUI (under the INFLUENCE) even when you aren't under the influence due to the way THC lingers. This has already been acknowledged by all sides. Even the Feds know it's bullshit. This is why ALL states don't already have this law on the books - because it is not based on science. Because all the studies say no it doesn't work like that with anything except alcohol.
Colorado for instance laughed at such a ridiculous law. Private citizens there took it upon themselves to show just how stupid it was. Did you happen to read those results? It's a rhetorical question because obviously you did not. Before you start addressing the public as some kind of guru maybe you should brush up on the facts.
I take it since you are such a fan boy of this prop that you support this new very harsh punishment fully even though the main proponents admit it's flawed?
"even Alison Holcomb of NAW admitted, in a Hempfest 502 debate, that "it could be fixed after 502 passes."
Last time I checked 18-20 year olds can vote and probably didn't realize the Stranger just repeats what law enforcement tells them to say.
18
False. Stop spreading misinformation. Why do you ignore the real results of said studies? Why do you support "per se" draconian laws that are clearly based on no science and clearly established to Punish marijuana smokers in much much harsher ways than before I-502 was approved? Do you even smoke marijuana, because in the past I remember you did not.
"Officers would still require probable cause to stop someone"
Wow. Just wow. Have you EVER yourself been busted?? Reality is this: Hmmmm hey that guy looks like he smokes pot let's pull him over and there is a really really good chance he'll test above 5ng because that is an arbitrary amount that in fact does Not go away anywhere nearly that quick. Ask anyone who has ever had a UA how that theory has worked out for them.
I'd be careful from now on when you leave your dispensary of choice people. Just like at bars - the cops will now hang out a little down the road and watch you leave. Seeing you leave a place where marijuana is sold is all the probable cause they need to do whatever they want.
False. Stop spreading misinformation. Why do you ignore the real results of said studies? Do you even smoke marijuana, because in the past I remember you did not.
"Officers would still require probable cause to stop someone"
Yeah as in hey that guy looks like he smokes pot let's pull him over and there is a really really good chance he'll test above 5ng because that is an arbitrary amount that in fact does Not go away anywhere nearly as quickly as you state. Thank to this law passed by some dip shit lawyer and support by a ex feds I can no longer ever drive without fear of a DUI.
14
Good on ya, Washington. Let's hope that all goes well (and why won't it - it's been readily available in Vancouver for years and there's still a Canada). The nation will be looking at you and this experiment to see how well it works. It'll be like the lotto, I'm thinking, and will ultimately catch on almost everywhere.
13
My employers require that I look professional on the job. So I no longer dye my hair bright red or wear my labret piercing. It's that, or get a job somewhere far less satisfying and that didn't pay me as well. If you want a job somewhere and they don't allow the use of THC, it's pretty simple. Sorry, but that's how it is, for better or worse.
I've been working to free cannabis for 17 years, and I can hardly fucking believe we legalized pot in Washington and Colorado. This is the largest gain I have ever witnessed for proponents of rational drug policy. Future uncertainties abound, to be sure, but I try to not let fear of change and fear of the unknown cripple me, so I'm jumping on the train and moving forward, leaving my immobilizing fear and baggage behind on the platform.
11
Will the WSLCB suddenly turn their back on their sugar daddies, or block implementation of 502 for years with bullshit "studies"? If the three WSLCB directors voted against 502 (which they were certainly paid to do), how can they possibly be fair in implementing it?
I'm guessing that and no growing your own will be one of the biggest items necessary for the education campaign.
Dom, I assume the various indoor smoking provisions passed to prohibit tobacco smoke apply to marijuana, too?
Pretty simple.
6
5
Good luck finding a jury that will convict someone for a federal arrest for possession in this state, however. Unless you're driving. I got no prob locking up drivers high on pills, pot, or booze.
What on earth does this have to do with 502? When some other initiative makes it illegal to do so?
So be discreet, and know that under the state law you are not required to tell a cop or anyone else where you got the ounce of bud you legally possess.
RSS
Twitter
Comments (65) RSS