RE: Pot smokers being safer drivers while under the influence.
I recall several studies that support such, done by the California Highway Patrol and the U.S. Dept. of Transportation. The gist of the studies indicate the those under the influence of pot are aware of their impaired state and as such take steps to compensate for their intoxication, paying more attention to the traffic around them and their rate of travel. In essence stoned drivers tend to drive like paranoid old women.
I don't have links to the studies on hand, but if I find them I'll post them up.
People should NOT be driving while impaired, for what ever reason be it EtOH, pot, subscription sedatives or fatigue. The scariest state I've ever had to drive under was while severely sleep deprived while working a rotating shift in The Bloodmines of Boulder. Not good when the road ahead looks like a Salvador Dali painting.
IIRC, a similar initiative is due to appear on the Colorado ballots this November, mirroring Denver's recent decrimminalization of marijuana possesion in weights up to one ounce for those over the age of 21. Here is the text of the ballot issue for Colorado:
BALLOT TITLE: AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 18-18-406 (1) OF THE COLORADO REVISED
STATUTES MAKING LEGAL THE POSSESSION OF ONE OUNCE OR LESS OF MARIJUANA FOR ANY PERSON
TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER.
Summary of Amendment
Under current law, any person possessing one ounce or less of marijuana is guilty of a Class 2
petty offense and is subject to a fine of up to $100. This amendment decriminalizes the possession
of this amount of marijuana for persons 21 and older, making the crime applicable only to people
under 21.
State Revenue
Fine revenue may be reduced since fines would no longer be assessed against adults who
possess one ounce or less of marijuana. However, any change in fine revenue cannot be quantified
because the total number of persons convicted of this Class 2 petty offense is unknown.
Currently, the state only tracks data on petty offense convictions in state court when a person
is also charged with a more serious misdemeanor or felony crime. It does not track data on petty
offense convictions in municipal court. In addition, judges have discretion when assessing fines, not
all offenders are assessed the maximum $100 fine, and some fines go uncollected. As a result, any
reduction in fine revenue for possessing one ounce or less of marijuana cannot be estimated.
State Expenditures
The proposal will not affect state spending. The courts' workload will not be affected
because persons charged with marijuana possession typically appear in state court on other charges.
Similarly, the Department of Public Safety will not be impacted since state law enforcement officers
typically only search a person for marijuana possession after having probable cause that another
offense has been committed. Finally, the Department of Corrections will not be affected because
the penalty for possession of one ounce or less of marijuana does not include incarceration in a state
prison.
Local Government Impact
Since municipal and county governments retain a portion of fines collected for criminal
violations, this amendment will result in a minimal reduction in local government revenue. It is
estimated that the amendment will not impact local government spending for the same reasons it will
not affect state government spending.
Source:
http://www.state.co.us/gov_dir/leg_dir/lcsstaff/bluebook/Bluebook2006.htm
