Pubdate: Tue, 24 Nov 2015
Source: Arizona Republic (Phoenix, AZ)
Copyright: 2015 The Arizona Republic
Contact: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/sendaletter.html
Website: http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/24

ANOTHER UNANSWERED QUESTION ON MARIJUANA

How far down this rabbit hole does Arizona plan to go?

Questions about driving while high on medical pot get curiouser and 
curiouser, even as some Arizonans push to legalize marijuana for 
recreational use.

These are life-and-death questions because a stoned driver can be 
just as deadly as a drunken one. The men, women or children that 
stoner crashes into can wind up just as cold as the victims of drunk drivers.

The difference is that we have set and measurable limits on how much 
alcohol a person can consume before he or she is considered legally 
too drunk to drive.

That's not the case for pot smokers.

Yet, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
"data from road traffic arrests and fatalities indicate that after 
alcohol, marijuana is the most frequently detected psychoactive 
substance among driving populations."

Drugged driving causes a variety of effects that contribute to 
traffic crashes and fatalities, including increased reaction time, 
warped distance perception, sleepiness, poor motor coordination and 
reduced attention span.

Keeping stoned individuals off the road is as important as taking the 
keys away from those intoxicated with alcohol. It's a matter of 
public safety. It should be addressed before marijuana is legalized 
for recreational use.

Arizona's laws are in conflict on a question that doesn't yet have a 
clear answer

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that a medical marijuana card does 
not provide immunity from being charged with DUI. That's a 
reasonable, straightforward statement.

Then it gets more complicated.

One state law forbids driving under the influence of marijuana, which 
is defined as having residue of the drug  metabolites  in the 
bloodstream. But the 2010 Arizona Medical Marijuana Act says the 
presence of metabolites alone is not enough to demonstrate impairment.

Chief Justice Scott Bales said last week the marijuana "patient" can 
establish an "affirmative defense" to DUI charges if he or she can 
show the metabolite level did not indicate impairment.

But there is no widely accepted level of metabolites that indicates 
impairment or sobriety.

Last year, the justices called it "absurd" to equate the presence of 
metabolites with impairment. Metabolites can remain in the blood for 
weeks after marijuana use.

So where are we?

Ask a hookah-smoking caterpillar. He might know. Arizona's Supreme 
Court doesn't. And neither do cops or prosecutors whose duty it is to 
protect the public from impaired drivers.

In the meantime, Arizona has two contradictory statutes regarding 
marijuana and DUI. That's a big problem in a state with laws that 
make it legal to use marijuana for certain approved medical reasons.

It will be an exponentially larger problem if the state legalizes 
recreational use of marijuana, as some would like voters to do at the 
ballot box in 2016.

When it comes that question, Arizonans can ask Colorado Gov. John 
Hickenlooper, who opposed that state's 2012 voter initiative to 
legalize recreational use. This year, he said Colorado still doesn't 
know all the unintended consequences.

He advice to other states: Wait and see how Colorado works through 
the problems.

The regulatory frame work surrounding alcohol use - including clear 
rules on driving while impaired - does not exist for marijuana use.

The Arizona Supreme court ruling on medical marijuana use shows just 
how much that matters.

Continuing down this rabbit hole might be mind-bending, but it wouldn't be wise.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom