|
POSTED: 08/29/18, 10:37 AM PDT | UPDATED: 13 HRS AGO 0 COMMENTS Maybe California Controller Betty Yee will have better luck than law enforcement and editorial writers on making the case for setting standards for driving under the influence of marijuana. Yee has at least gained attention after being hurt last month in a car crash caused by a 25-year-old driver suspected of being under the influence of pot. Yee, who is still suffering from injuries suffered in the crash, told reporters that California’s legal pot industry needs to stop complaining about taxes and state and local regulations and do something about stoned drivers. Pot growers and sellers, she notes, have a long adversarial history with law enforcement, which may make them reluctant to start advocating for new laws and tests regarding pot impairment – but, she says, “people are getting hurt. So deal with it.” We hate to say “told you so,” especially about something as serious as people getting killed or injured, but, more stoned drivers on the road is exactly what police and this newspaper warned would happen once recreational marijuana was legalized by state voters in 2016. The driver who rear-ended the car Yee was riding in with her husband – a California Highway Patrol officer was driving – and then hit it again, was arrested for driving while intoxicated and subsequently bailed out of jail. Yee opposed Proposition 64, the 2016 pot measure, because of just this issue, and says the industry should work with law enforcement to develop a test for unsafe levels of marijuana impairment for drivers. The number of pot-impaired traffic collisions has been rising in recent years, and so have fatalities. The problem is that while police have a legally defined limit for alcohol found in a driver’s bloodstream, there is no such defined level for marijuana. The CHP has estimated that if current rates of arrests for DUI continue there could be a 70 percent increase in DUI under the influence of marijuana alone by year’s end in our region of California. Cops are well acquainted with the smell of pot coming from cars they stop. Officers often put these motorists through field sobriety tests, which the driver often passes. But if it were a suspected drunken driver, the cop would use a breathalyzer test to confirm they were legally impaired by alcohol. No such measuring device exists for pot. And so, absent a definitive standard, police officers have to make a judgment call to determine if someone is driving high and the final decision on whether an arrested driver was impaired is subjective, resting with a judge or jury. California, like other states that have legalized marijuana, is relying at present on drug recognition experts — officers trained to conduct cognitive tests and notice other physical signs of drug-related impairment during a vehicle stop — to determine if a driver is intoxicated. Law enforcement officials said they believe these experts are more than capable of determining impairment, even without an objective standard. In addition to those experts, the California Highway Patrol has trained thousands of officers through its Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement program, which includes taking a subject’s blood pressure and their pulse, in addition to field sobriety tests. The good news is that research is ongoing to evaluate the effects of cannabis and how it impairs drivers – and Proposition 64 provides funding for attempts to devise more reliable law enforcement tools. One promising development is that the UC San Diego Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research is evaluating field tests that measure reaction time, attention, coordination and perception instead of THC. Yee’s serious brush with near death hopefully will provide the next push to solve a problem that is not going to go away. California needs to establish a legal definition for marijuana impairment – and do it soon, before more people get hurt or killed. Source: http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20180829/LOCAL1/180829884 |
