Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
but driving and buying it from some place other than a dispensary are still illegal right?....The real problem is that they are driving around. There were some before but now there are many more with state approval and pot makes you think you are smarter than you are. We have the same issue here, one good thing though, the greedy tax collectors aren't raking in the income like they thought they would because its' much cheaper to buy it illegally.
It is illegal to smoke and drive but they're finding it difficult to prove when a driver smoked most recently. Alcohol use can be determined with a certain amount of pinpoint accuracy but pot remains in fat cells and hair follicles for a long period of time so it's hard to know if someone smoked weed today or a week ago (speaking in terms of regular or chronic users).
Current Drug testing usually only looks for residuals, which cannot prove impairment. Your blood concentration of alcohol can be easily correlated to your breath concentration due to the volatility and ease of lung transfer of ethanol. THC is a far larger molecule, and I don't think a breath/blood concentration relation can be established.
A simple blood test is what is needed, as well as the empirical data to establish an "impaired" limit. I'm sure this research has been done, but the question is if it is mature enough to be made part of criminal law.
A blood test doesn't measure impairment. To date, there is no test that can measure the impairment of an individual under the influence of THC. The only effective counter to this is show of actual impairment (like swerving, driving too slow/fast) and then following that up with a field test.
Once the states do test like they do for alcohol, it will be based ff some completely arbitrary ruling on levels - intoxicated. That part is for sure.
A blood test measures concentration, and those concentrations are empirically researched to give a concentration where "impairment" is legally determined.
This requires research, i.e., getting people stoned, making them do tasks and figuring out at which point to call a person impaired. tack on a safety factor and you get something very similar to what we have now when it comes to blood alcohol content, and what is considered impairment.
What you have to watch out for is what we have now with alcohol, where the DWI line is being driven down not by science and research, but by political action.
I sell various products to a few marijuana growing facilities in the Denver area. The owners or employees often come into my retail operation too stoned to carry on an intelligent conversation. I feel like I'm speaking with Kindergarteners (sorry Kindergartners ... no offense). I have to keep my questions simple and short. If two stoned numbskulls come in at the same time I enjoy listening to them attempting to communicate with one another. They often break out laughing at the most insignificant, idiotic things.
I think it's probably you who is most unintelligible.
Not here. There are pot shops now, quite a few on one stretch of road. I never see much going on in the way of business though, so maybe the tax is keeping them away. WA adds a LOT of tax to tobacco and alcohol, so they must have done the same to weed.but driving and buying it from some place other than a dispensary are still illegal right?....
I used to smoke weed and if I still did, I would buy it from the pot shop. Everyone I know who smokes weed buys it from a pot shop because it's much more convenient and it's cheaper now that it's legal and competition is a factor.
Before it was legal, pot wasn't nearly as available - dealers were notoriously unreliable and one had to know a dealer (obviously they couldn't advertise or market themselves openly).
Pot dealers are largely a thing of the past now. Oh, I'm sure there are a few still out there, but most of them have gone into the farming business. They can make an honest living now without hiding from the law, and it's extremely profitable. And there were those who dealt pot on the side so they wouldn't have to search for a small time supplier and/or smoke for free. Now they can just pop on down to the store where there many choices in strains and products, from edibles to specialty items.
If you think the black market for marihuana is doing well, you don't know what you're talking about because there no longer is a black market for it here.
The black market is alive and well. What has happened though, is that the grower is the one now in more of a seat to sell black market to pot shops. Because of the amount of licenses established, demand is exceeding supply. Therefore, prices are still rather high. And these also branches off to surrounding states. Where a grower can do his thing legally and allow someone else to take the risk of transporting it.
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Not here. There are pot shops now, quite a few on one stretch of road. I never see much going on in the way of business though, so maybe the tax is keeping them away. WA adds a LOT of tax to tobacco and alcohol, so they must have done the same to weed.but driving and buying it from some place other than a dispensary are still illegal right?....
I used to smoke weed and if I still did, I would buy it from the pot shop. Everyone I know who smokes weed buys it from a pot shop because it's much more convenient and it's cheaper now that it's legal and competition is a factor.
Before it was legal, pot wasn't nearly as available - dealers were notoriously unreliable and one had to know a dealer (obviously they couldn't advertise or market themselves openly).
Pot dealers are largely a thing of the past now. Oh, I'm sure there are a few still out there, but most of them have gone into the farming business. They can make an honest living now without hiding from the law, and it's extremely profitable. And there were those who dealt pot on the side so they wouldn't have to search for a small time supplier and/or smoke for free. Now they can just pop on down to the store where there many choices in strains and products, from edibles to specialty items.
If you think the black market for marihuana is doing well, you don't know what you're talking about because there no longer is a black market for it here.
The black market is alive and well. What has happened though, is that the grower is the one now in more of a seat to sell black market to pot shops. Because of the amount of licenses established, demand is exceeding supply. Therefore, prices are still rather high. And these also branches off to surrounding states. Where a grower can do his thing legally and allow someone else to take the risk of transporting it.
I see your point.
For the average pot smoker, the black market is dead. For the suppliers to the sellers, your point makes sense.
That isn't what I said so you quit smoking dope too late. And I live in Washington, not Colorado. It may be different here, different state, taxes, laws, people and all that.If you think the black market for marihuana is doing well, you don't know what you're talking about because there no longer is a black market for it here.
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
There actually IS a black market for pot here in Colorado. I routinely hear about a pot shop or growing facility being broken into and the pot being stolen. The stolen weed is sold on the street for cash.
There actually IS a black market for pot here in Colorado. I routinely hear about a pot shop or growing facility being broken into and the pot being stolen. The stolen weed is sold on the street for cash.
Link?
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
There actually IS a black market for pot here in Colorado. I routinely hear about a pot shop or growing facility being broken into and the pot being stolen. The stolen weed is sold on the street for cash.
Link?
Denver marijuana shop broken into roof lit on fire - The Denver Post
Video:
Pot Theft in Colorado on the Rise Video - ABC News
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
I just noticed the lack or name calling and open
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
I just noticed the lack of name calling such as thugs and criminals. Also the lack of musings about ones upbringing and culture.
Its interesting the way things are discussed differently depending on the certain factors
but driving and buying it from some place other than a dispensary are still illegal right?....
It is illegal to smoke and drive but they're finding it difficult to prove when a driver smoked most recently. Alcohol use can be determined with a certain amount of pinpoint accuracy but pot remains in fat cells and hair follicles for a long period of time so it's hard to know if someone smoked weed today or a week ago (speaking in terms of regular or chronic users).
Current Drug testing usually only looks for residuals, which cannot prove impairment. Your blood concentration of alcohol can be easily correlated to your breath concentration due to the volatility and ease of lung transfer of ethanol. THC is a far larger molecule, and I don't think a breath/blood concentration relation can be established.
A simple blood test is what is needed, as well as the empirical data to establish an "impaired" limit. I'm sure this research has been done, but the question is if it is mature enough to be made part of criminal law.
A blood test doesn't measure impairment. To date, there is no test that can measure the impairment of an individual under the influence of THC. The only effective counter to this is show of actual impairment (like swerving, driving too slow/fast) and then following that up with a field test.
Once the states do test like they do for alcohol, it will be based ff some completely arbitrary ruling on levels - intoxicated. That part is for sure.
A blood test measures concentration, and those concentrations are empirically researched to give a concentration where "impairment" is legally determined.
This requires research, i.e., getting people stoned, making them do tasks and figuring out at which point to call a person impaired. tack on a safety factor and you get something very similar to what we have now when it comes to blood alcohol content, and what is considered impairment.
What you have to watch out for is what we have now with alcohol, where the DWI line is being driven down not by science and research, but by political action.
It's already been done. The THC only stays int eh blood stream for a few hours before turning into metabolites in several forms. Blood tests are already of use in some states for check points and accidents where impairment is reasonably established. The problem is it STILL doesn't necessarily establish impairment. That is going to be, and is based entirely of arbitrary guidelines.
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
I just noticed the lack or name calling and open
Again, no mention of thug, criminality or irresponsibility.
Driving under the influence is against the law. Do we actually need to establish it by name while discussing the matter? What are you getting at here?
I just noticed the lack of name calling such as thugs and criminals. Also the lack of musings about ones upbringing and culture.
Its interesting the way things are discussed differently depending on the certain factors
Oh, so you're still stuck like a broken record on the rce issue. Take a hike, bater.
There actually IS a black market for pot here in Colorado. I routinely hear about a pot shop or growing facility being broken into and the pot being stolen. The stolen weed is sold on the street for cash.
Link?
Denver marijuana shop broken into roof lit on fire - The Denver Post
Video:
Pot Theft in Colorado on the Rise Video - ABC News
Hour first link shows that nothing was stolen as the goods were locked away.
The second one is also easy to identify. The FED does has not established a legal status for these folks. So banks shut them out (for obvious reasons) leaving them to fend for themselves. It's a set up by government that wouldn't happen if the federal govt didnt still classify it as a schedule 1 narcotic.
There actually IS a black market for pot here in Colorado. I routinely hear about a pot shop or growing facility being broken into and the pot being stolen. The stolen weed is sold on the street for cash.
Link?
Denver marijuana shop broken into roof lit on fire - The Denver Post
Video:
Pot Theft in Colorado on the Rise Video - ABC News
Hour first link shows that nothing was stolen as the goods were locked away.
The second one is also easy to identify. The FED does has not established a legal status for these folks. So banks shut them out (for obvious reasons) leaving them to fend for themselves. It's a set up by government that wouldn't happen if the federal govt didnt still classify it as a schedule 1 narcotic.
Nevertheless, the video points out that pot (and cash) theft is on the rise since the legalization of marijuana in Colorado. Also, there are many of these thefts that don't make the headlines or even the back pages of newspapers. I sell various products to the marijuana growing industry (various gases, hoses, and other items). I get to speak with growers several times a week. There are many more thefts and/or break-ins taking place than are reported in the news.
A friend of mine who works as a Minnesota Highway Patrol Officer, told me that there is one difference he has found between someone driving stoned or drunk. Drunks are usually having a rough time keeping in their lane and a stoner's driving speed is usually erratic, usually slow and then it gets slower and then speeds up to just slow again.
