Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins
Exercise your freedom with pot, and you increase my peril of being hit by a dangerously intoxicated driver.

So as a person of principle you also support a return to alcohol Prohibition - correct?

No, as a person who did drug/alcohol counseling for years, I would (1) point out the differences between pot and alcohol, and (2) point out that alcohol is under legal controls.

As for point #1, there is a known blood/alcohol parameter beyond which people are driving impaired. With pot, the active ingredient is used to “get high”, and that is the first effect of the substance. IOW, “high” is driving impaired, whereas a single social drink about every 1.5 hours or so does not approach impairment at all.

That's not a difference in the substances but in their current typical patterns of use. When alcohol was illegal its active ingredient was used to “get high” - nobody went to a speakeasy to have a single social drink about every 1.5 hours or so.

And until a evidence-based limit on cannabinoid impairment can be established I'd be fine with a no-driving-with-any-pot-in-the-system law.

If there were a joint that could be smoked that did not get the person high, and they could then drive unimpaired, then I’d view alcohol and marijuana the same.

Who says a joint is the minimum dosage of marijuana? Educate yourself: https://www.google.com/search?q=one-hitter+pipe.

I don’t know your state, but in mine there must be a license to sell alcohol, hard alcohol can be sold only in state stores, there is an age limit for use, and the books are full of driving and behavior penalties for impairment by alcohol and illegal sales of alcohol.

I support and would expect similar regulations on legal marijuana (except for the state stores - go free market).

99 posted on 02/26/2013 9:57:06 AM PST by JustSayNoToNannies ("The Lord has removed His judgments against you" - Zep. 3:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]


To: JustSayNoToNannies
That's not a difference in the substances but in their current typical patterns of use. When alcohol was illegal its active ingredient was used to “get high” - nobody went to a speakeasy to have a single social drink about every 1.5 hours or so.

The above is not correct. Social drinking is thousands of years old.

Sorry, jsntn, my years of counseling say that no one wants inactive pot and they always smoke for the high. People do not say, "I only want the flavor."

Yes, we agree about controls.

Nonetheless, at this point in time, legalization without controls would only make the culture more dangerous. We don't need that.

I don't like things that make the culture more dangerous. Some things we can fix and others we simply have to keep rejecting because they are inherently dangerous or unnatural.

101 posted on 02/26/2013 10:14:56 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson