• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Looks like Washington State is going to legalize weed

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,304
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
FFS we agree on something.

Now how about the actual substance. Do you agree that it should be legalized, regulated, and taxed?
I could care less if it was legalized though it should be regulated/controlled (strict age requirements ie 18 and above) and taxed just like alcohol and cigarettes.

There also needs to be accurate tests to ensure that people aren't driving or working under the influence as well.
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
There is a measure on the ballot in Oregon as well, I voted for it, even though I haven't smoked in years... Hopefully it passes.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
105,030
19,724
136
There also needs to be accurate tests to ensure that people aren't driving or working under the influence as well.

Easy:

If you suspect an employee is high, hold up both hands--bag of Funions in one hand, Li'l Debbie Sweet 16 Donuts in the other. Ask them to choose.



(Kind of a trick--if they select either, they are likely stoned. if both, certainly stoned)
 

DaveSimmons

Elite Member
Aug 12, 2001
40,736
669
126
That might work for the donuts, but nutty bars or cosmic brownies or cake rolls would get my vote and I'm sober. Mmmm, snacky cakes!
 

Agent11

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2006
3,535
1
0
If someone is high enough on weed to be impaired they will be easy to spot, the guy stopped at a green light or driving 20 mph under the speed limit... On interview they will have about a 30 second attention span.
 

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,202
6
81
I find it politically fascinating that this is one of those few issues that most people in ATPN can seem to more or less agree on but where the two main parties (regardless of what they say to their electorate) are also basically in agreement.....the opposite direction.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,079
186
106
if this passes in Washington State I'll probably be looking to buy some land there and classifying as my primary residence... Hell, maybe I'll buy a lot in ocean shores! That way my vacation state will still remain hawaii. Then I can smoke all I want in hawaii if anyone gives me any shit I'll just show them my WA drivers license! :)
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
16,948
2,340
126
I could care less if it was legalized though it should be regulated/controlled (strict age requirements ie 18 and above) and taxed just like alcohol and cigarettes.

There also needs to be accurate tests to ensure that people aren't driving or working under the influence as well.
The tests are the problem. If you get pulled over for DUI the test can't determine if you got high an hour before or a week. I don't know how that would play out in court. It gets even messier in the construction industry. I'd still have to fire anyone that tested positive for MJ, because OSHA doesn't give a rats ass about how long the stuff stays in your system. The test shows MJ, you can't work, period. It's going to be ugly.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,670
13,749
136
this will be all for naught because the Federal government (along with their big government advocates in D.C.) will step in and pull Federal funding in order to enforce its war on drugs and its authority. In fact recent past history has demonstrated that Obama administration has absolutely no qualms ramping up the war against pot as they did in California with "medical pot" distributors.
I think that's a function of state & local officials whining to the regional head of the DEA. I drive by at least half a dozen S Broadway MMJ shops on my way to work, and there are *obviously* grow houses in the industrial neighborhood nearby- the whole neighborhood reeks of skunkweed at various times of day...

Anybody and their dog can get a prescription, btw...

I don't think we'll see stepped up federal enforcement in places where local support doesn't exist.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,079
186
106
problem is if romney wins than your gonna see a lot of angry people.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Ahh yeah, our neighbors up north with that rich mountain pine kinda minty hint/linger.

Pass some on down. It's about time.
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,911
406
126
The tests are the problem. If you get pulled over for DUI the test can't determine if you got high an hour before or a week. I don't know how that would play out in court. It gets even messier in the construction industry. I'd still have to fire anyone that tested positive for MJ, because OSHA doesn't give a rats ass about how long the stuff stays in your system. The test shows MJ, you can't work, period. It's going to be ugly.
Yes, I hope they make some kind of advancement in this arena. I'm in a similar situation since I drive a company vehicle. I doesn't matter if I smoked a joint 2 weeks ago on a weekend... if some old lady plows into me outta nowhere, they'll test me on the spot anyway. If it shows up in my system, I'm canned.

Still hope it passes, anyway, even though I expect it will be a long, long time before private businesses begin to relax their policies to be more in line with alcohol consumption by employees. For that matter, it isn't so much the businesses themselves as it is the insurance companies. What incentive do they have to extend the same coverage to companies that want to let their employees get high on their own time?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
I think there is something everyone is missing here. Its all well and fine to pass a Federal law against a given substance when Federal law trumps State law. But when the Federal law becomes an unfunded mandate for the States to enforce and punish in State courts, the best the FEDS can do is to enforce the law selectively using Federal law enforcement officials. When various States tell the great white father in Washington DC that they will have to enforce their own Federal Law. When some States publicly refuse to enforce a stupid Federal law or pay for the prisons to house the various mostly harmless potheads while letting violent criminals loose because they do not have the prison space.

What do the Feds do then, maybe they can try to arrest every State official in that given State and hold them in contempt of Court. Or they can raise taxes to hire an huge army of Federal DEA officials to enforce their own law while the dimocrats and the republirats combine to decry the huge rise in Federal taxation to pay for the stupidity.
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
if this passes in Washington State I'll probably be looking to buy some land there and classifying as my primary residence... Hell, maybe I'll buy a lot in ocean shores! That way my vacation state will still remain hawaii. Then I can smoke all I want in hawaii if anyone gives me any shit I'll just show them my WA drivers license! :)
Just curious, but as a WA resident myself, what is it about Ocean Shores that you like? I go fishing a fair amount out of Westport, which is opposite of Ocean Shores at the mouth of Grays Harbor. Westport has really come a long way in the past decade, but it is definitely a smaller town than Ocean Shores, because it is not touristy.

Personally, my dream lot would be somewhere on Hood Canal or the San Juans. Being able to harvest those famous oysters right in your back yard really speaks to me.
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
Ahh yeah, our neighbors up north with that rich mountain pine kinda minty hint/linger.

Pass some on down. It's about time.
Trade for some Humbolt Purple? :sneaky:

I will throw in some smoked salmon, you can throw in what? Sourdough? Ghiradelli?
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,921
3
0
Trade for some Humbolt Purple? :sneaky:

I will throw in some smoked salmon, you can throw in what? Sourdough? Ghiradelli?
Having lived in Arcata for a couple months during college.. trainwreck is something you never forget
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
I could care less if it was legalized though it should be regulated/controlled (strict age requirements ie 18 and above) and taxed just like alcohol and cigarettes.

There also needs to be accurate tests to ensure that people aren't driving or working under the influence as well.
Pot is nowhere near on the same level as cigs or alcohol and it shouldn't be treated like the aforementioned two in taxation or regulations (aside from the driving, using heavy machinery, etc or underage scenarios).
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,921
3
0
Pot is nowhere near on the same level as cigs or alcohol and it shouldn't be treated like the aforementioned two in taxation or regulations (aside from the driving, using heavy machinery, etc or underage scenarios).
The problem with the WA referendum is the DUI bit that hopefully can get changed later. Frankly people can drive while high just fine. Not some people, not when really, really, high, but your average habitual user it is more like a caffeine jolt than an intoxication. In either case it doesn't have the same effect on motor skills that alcohol does, so the problem with WA's new rules are they treat high and drunk as equivalent evils in terms of driving. Worse, you don't really have to be high to be charged.. it's comparable to getting a DUI because you drank a beer with lunch yesterday.
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
The problem with the WA referendum is the DUI bit that hopefully can get changed later. Frankly people can drive while high just fine. Not some people, not when really, really, high, but your average habitual user it is more like a caffeine jolt than an intoxication. In either case it doesn't have the same effect on motor skills that alcohol does, so the problem with WA's new rules are they treat high and drunk as equivalent evils in terms of driving. Worse, you don't really have to be high to be charged.. it's comparable to getting a DUI because you drank a beer with lunch yesterday.
Sorry but pot does affect motor skills by lowering your reaction time and that is not in question at all. Sure it won't have you swerving all over the road like alcohol but it definitely has an effect on the reaction times of drivers under the influence of pot. In fact the reason people slow their speed while driving under the influence of pot is because they have their reaction times slowed and they are attempting to compensate.
 
Last edited:
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
Sorry but pot does affect motor skills by lowering your reaction time and that is not in question at all. Sure it won't make have you swerving all over the road like alcohol but it definitely has an effect on the reaction times of drivers under the influence of pot.
The bigger issue is that you will piss hot for alcohol for a few hours, but piss hot for THC for a few weeks. No one, and I mean no one, in the history of time, has been high for three weeks off of one joint. They don't have a meaningful breathalyzer for THC yet though, so you can be tested as high when you clearly aren't.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,921
3
0
Sorry but pot does affect motor skills by lowering your reaction time and that is not in question at all. Sure it won't make have you swerving all over the road like alcohol but it definitely has an effect on the reaction times of drivers under the influence of pot.
I'm not advocating driving high and I don't think that should be legal, but using the framework of alcohol DUI laws is a mistake in my view. It can be argued how best to address that, but the new WA law is way too restrictive.

There's just no way you can compare what we think of as criminal DUI--the drunk guy recklessly plowing through town, to being high and driving.
 

DucatiMonster696

Diamond Member
Aug 13, 2009
4,269
1
71
The bigger issue is that you will piss hot for alcohol for a few hours, but piss hot for THC for a few weeks. No one, and I mean no one, in the history of time, has been high for three weeks off of one joint. They don't have a meaningful breathalyzer for THC yet though, so you can be tested as high when you clearly aren't.
You're right but that doesn't dismiss the concerns of drivers taking to the road under the influence and the state will have to develop a test to address the issue.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY