Sactowndog
VIP Member
- Jul 4, 2011
- 818
- 78
- 63
One area where the pot = tobacco argument has an issue is with impairment. I dont mind some trucker huffing down a pack of marlboro reds when on the interstate, but I would not want to be driving near someone stoned driving the same rig.
Actually as a stimulate cigarettes could make the said truck driver more irritable and aggressive as a driver. The case can easily be made that a truck driver under the influence of marijuana would be a more safe driver than one using Pot. Of course levels of dose would come into play.
But no matter which is safer regulating while operating a vehicle wouldn't affect section IX but the current prohibition seems to be a clear violation. My guess is most criminal defense attorneys slept through their constitutional law classes. Hopefully the State of Colorado will sue the government on these grounds.
I would disagree on the tobacco user being more of a danger than a pot user, but I do agree it should be legalized. Legalization, however would need to be tempered by allowing companies to prevent its use by employees in certain occupations.
Alcohol is legal, but get caught with it in your system during a random or after accident test as a truck operator, and your ass is fired. The same should be for pot, but we would have to figure out a test that measured concentration in blood vs. intoxication rather than just evidence of trace amounts.
True which will take some work given the half life of THC in the system. What amount actually causes impairment would have to be understood.