Just because Mimi won't make it to November alive doesn't give her the right to drive under the influence and endanger my life.

Patients and stoners alike should read the I-502 factsheet.

Damn, linked to the wrong one. Here you go. Hate PDFs.

As the victim of a drunk driver's 5th DUI, the subject of driving under the influence is something I don't take lightly & after reading both proposals I didn't see any language, in either of the proposals that grants anyone, patient or not, the right to endanger all our lives by driving intoxicated. Maybe I missed it? Can someone point it out to me please? Thanks!

@Robbo1966 marijuana impairment is not the same as alcohol impairment.

@4 Your comment would be really funny if you were being sarcastic. But your avatar leads me to believe you are serious, and your comment is instead the dumbest thing I have read on the SLOG in quite some time.

I send out a big public thank-you to Mimi Meiwes for this comprehensive initiative that will further protect patients. Thank you for going the distance.
Here's my opinion when it comes to marijuana impairment and alcohol impairment. This is my attempt to respond to the concerns of WestlakeSon and Robo1966.
Based upon figures from the DEA and from the Department of Agriculture, marijuana is either the largest cash crop or the second largest cash crop, not only in Washington State, but across this entire country. That means that it is a staple in many households, and is widely used, making our enforcement laws useless and expensive. Given that so many people toke or eat cannabis-infused foods, I ask you, are you aware of an explosion of marijuana-impaired drivers killing innocent people on our roads? I've asked the question many times, and no one is aware of this. I just looked at my local Bainbridge paper's police blotter, and I see one drunk driving arrest, three alcohol-related domestic violence incidents and another alcohol-related incident. Nothing about marijuana. Yet many folks on this island use it.
The reason why i-502 has a draconian dui provision is in reaction to a misinformed public's fears of the evils of marijuana, which have been promoted by millions of dollars of taxpayer money spent on propaganda. People equate marijuana with alcohol; the fact is, these two substances are not equal. Alcohol is far, far more dangerous than marijuana. I hate what alcohol does to people. Alcohol is a very dangerous drug, despite its public acceptance. Robo1966--you found that out the hard way. Alcohol makes people angry, angry enough to beat people up and kill them. Alcohol makes people say things they should never say and leads to intense arguments. Alcohol leads to sexual encounters that should never happen, and leads to unwanted pregnancies. Alcohol encourages people to think they're better than they are, and makes them think they're OK to get behind the wheel. Once behind the wheel, alcohol leads to erratic, dangerous driving. Alcohol kills. We all understand why alcohol prohibition failed, but there were good reasons why people enacted that law.
Despite millions of people using marijuana, we are experiencing few marijuana-related accidents on the road. Drivers who knowingly get into vehicles when they're experiencing a marijuana-high should be arrested, and they are. We have an excellent DUI law in place now, and when a driver is driving erratically, the driver is pulled over, given a test for sobriety, and if they fail, they're arrested, and their arrest is dutifully reported in the paper by marijuana-hating cops. Despite public perception that marijuana is just like alcohol, the truth is that marijuana is far, far safer, and leads to fewer DUIs. Marijuana tends to make people quieter and more circumspect, so they don't start arguments, don't beat people up, don't kill people. And they tend to stay out of cars, and stay focused on what they're engaged in or simply stay on the couch.
The writer of i-502, in order to make the law appealing to the misinformed who believe that marijuana will be more of a menace than alcohol, wrote a DUI provision that is scientifically unsubstantiated and tighter than the present alcohol DUI provision. If you are caught driving with .08 blood alcohol measurement, you are presumed guilty and you have the right to rebut that presumption of guilt. I-502 will remove that right to rebuttal for thc levels in the blood, plus use a measurement that the writer of i-502 knows is scientifically faulty and will lead to arrests of people who are not impaired.
I cannot speak for Mimi, but I know her. I know that she believes, as I do, that impaired people should not get behind the wheel and drive. She also believes, as I do, that we ought not to have laws that subject innocent people to arrest. Medical Marijuana patients are all walking around with high levels of thc that have built up in their blood, and they are not impaired. I commend Mimi for working hard to preserve their right to drive. I question the ethics of people who write Machiavellian laws that jeopardize freedom. Mimi is using her last days with us to preserve patients' freedom to drive. Hats off!

i tested at 1,919ng July 2011 (of THC_COOH). I'm scared to know what my actual levels are but I doubt I'd ever be able to drive. Consuming edibles to ease spasms is what I do and when eaten THC is a multipass drug through the liver which means that 12-18 to 24 hours later it can still be passing thru and creating metabolites. the science of eating does not equal the science if smoking,..

I posted the following last year, when NAW first unveiled their plan to take away patient driving privileges. It still holds true and there is a simple explanation of why the 5ng limit does not work. I tried to keep it simple as possible, but if you have any trouble understanding how toleration and titration work after you read it, let me know and I can try to dumb it down a bit more. :)

The problem with NAW's 5ng THC blood limit levels
by Mimi Peck Meiwes on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 at 09:39

New Approach Washington recently introduced an initiative to Washington state that would seriously cause harm to many cannabis patients in the state, by using improper scientific principle to set unrealistic limits to blood THC levels, thereby making it illegal for said patients to operate a motor vehicle even if they are not actually impaired.

So let's take a look at how that science works, and why this is such a serious flaw in their logic: It's right there in the studies they use to base their numbers, a big disclaimer that states that while the average person shows impairment at these levels, some people showed no impairment at much higher levels. In the conclusion of the study, it is clearly noted that while impairment is often present at the stated level, there were individuals who were not impaired in any way at the same level.

How can that happen? It's pretty easy if you understand medical science. Many meds can cause unwanted side effects, so sometimes patients will start at a low dose and slowly increase the dose as their body adjusts. Doing this is called "titration" and it works quite effectively for a number of meds that can cause some serious issues if given in large doses without allowing the body time to adjust to the effects. When a medication is titrated in this way, the patient usually develops a "tolerance" to the effects of the drug, and is able to function quite normally once the tolerance develops adequately.

There are a number of meds that require titration, as any good doctor knows and this holds true for cannabis as well. The simple fact is that once cannabis is titrated properly and a tolerance achieved, driving abilities are not impaired at all. In fact, some studies show some subjects improving their driving skills while using cannabis. Just like any medication, there is potential for abuse, but far less than prescription drugs.

No one should drive impaired, but in the same respect, no one should be barred from driving based on inaccurate science and scare tactics. An entire population is being discriminated against so that a handful of people can have some access to recreational cannabis, while using scare tactics and hysteria to bar the most needy and vulnerable of our adults from a simple privilege. That's not only not sound science, it's cruel and inhumane for the persons who will be affected the most: the sick, the dying and the disabled.

Not on my watch!
Like · · Unfollow post · Share · Delete

" I just looked at my local Bainbridge paper's police blotter, and I see one drunk driving arrest, three alcohol-related domestic violence incidents and another alcohol-related incident. Nothing about marijuana"

If it is not a problem on Bainbridge, then CLEARLY it cannot be a problem anywhere else.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/02/…

To equate marijuana use with alcohol might be a stretch, but to even pretend that medicinal marijuana use doesn't cause real impairment when driving is foolish.

@1: I have ridden with Mimi, she is a safe driver and does not drive impaired. I trust her with my life.

@1 & 2: Just because New Approach Washington labels their PDF as a "fact sheet", does not mean that everything they write is true. A case in point, from NAW's "fact sheet", they write: "Even heavy marijuana users like medical marijuana patients should have their THC levels drop below 5 ng/mL if they wait a few hours before driving."

- This is demonstrably false.

This is a quote from the same study NAW refers to: “Substantial whole blood THC concentrations persist multiple days after drug discontinuation in heavy chronic cannabis users.”

Our own testing has concluded that the "waking blood levels" of patients, entirely sober, can start as low as 15 ng. Patients and heavy users may start their day, without having medicated, at more than three times the proposed 5 ng limit.

For more, please see the What Science Says section of our web site.

As with ANY medication, there is potential for abuse. There are those who will abuse cannabis as well. There are many medications which can cause impairment if not taken properly, but on the other hand, driving while medicated does NOT mean driving while impaired. There is a difference.

With some of the logic above, no one taking any type of medication should be driving, as over half the medications on the market have side effects that include impairment of some type. It doesn't mean that everyone who takes medication is impaired. One can take a look at research in chronic pain patients who rely on opiates long term. Some of those people will abuse those opiates, but does that mean everyone does? No, it does not. And people who medicate with cannabis don't necessarily abuse it or drive impaired.

Most blood pressure meds cause impairment until titrated to the proper dose and the body tolerates the drugs better. Does this mean we should take away the driving privileges of everyone who is being treated for high blood pressure?

It's the same thing. Think about it.

@6: First off, none of us are making the case that driving impaired is acceptable, or should ever be tolerated.

That said, #4 was correct to say that marijuana impairment is not relative to alcohol.

Alcohol affects reaction times, coordination, and balance. A drunk person may also be considerably more aggressive behind the wheel. Marijuana impairment can also slow reaction times, but typically does not result in the aggressive behavior demonstrated with alcohol.

There is more research and science to show that cannabis IMPROVES driving skills than there is to show that cannabis impairs driving skills. Here is one such link. This research was paid for b\y the USDOT...it was obviously put on the shelf and forgotten, like the cancer research ...

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/ca…

@10: I state again, no one from the pro-cannabis opposition to I-502 is making the case that impaired driving should ever be tolerated.

We are simply making the case that the limits set under I-502 do not prove impairment. The proposed law is "per se", meaning presumed guilt, and I-502 does not allow for "rebuttable presumption", which is the clause that provides defense of presumed guilt in a court of law.

In other words, I-502 will guarantee conviction rates for prosecutors, leaving defendants without rebuttal. Any frequent user will test higher than the arbitrary limits, and therefore be automatically guilty.

On the flip-side, occasional users may very well be impaired at less than 5ng, but be innocent of impairment charges, because they did not meet the standard.

If the DUI(C) provisions in I-502 are allowed to become law, guilty people will be caught, but innocent people will be wrongfully convicted, and some guilty people will go free - and we think this is unfair. Laws should only convict the guilty.

It is already illegal to drive under the influence of any drug in all 50 states. Our state's current law requires the prosecution to prove impairment, this is commonly known as innocent until proven guilty, and is an American ideal in establishing law.

Please consider the bias of LA Times article you reference. They quote Gil Kerlikowske, who has to make the case against marijuana. If he ever spoke in favor of marijuana legalization, he could be fired from his job. Please see the Drug Czar is Required by Law to Lie

Contrast the LA Times article with recent news from Colorado Report shows fewer traffic fatalities af…

The moral to the story is, understand both sides of the argument before forming an opinion.

i wish it also had prosecution protection for patients who are within the guidelines.

@18 The Safe Cannabis Act does include arrest protections for patients. Please read carefully. It is in there, I promise. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlD0H1eKy…

For those of you who are concerned with medicated patients being impaired, here is a great video of me driving a 32' bus while medicated, NOT impaired! There is a HUGE difference between "stoners" and patients, mainly that patients actually do use it as a medicine, not to get high. And there are a LOT of real patients out there. I have met a lot of them and seen what cannabis can do to help them. And most of them are impaired by their illness. Cannabis helps decrease their symptoms of illness, and helps them feel better. If they aren't impaired, why shouldn't they be allowed to drive, just like anyone else who takes medication and isn't impaired?