>These observations are so straightforward that I feel like we might be getting argumentative just for the sake of it. For what it's worth, I'm in favor of decriminalization.
huh? I'm not trying to argue with you. I know that you think cannabis is a net-negative and I have no desire to argue with you about that. I respect your position and know that you're in favor of decriminalization.
I still do not understand what you're getting at. If I were to smoke a bowl, drink two beers and get in my car and got pulled over, I guarantee you I would be asked if I had been drinking because that would be far more present on my breath. Even if I had some weed in a grinder in my glove box.
>detecting marijuana anywhere in the car including its passengers is far higher than the likelihood of an officer detecting alcohol intoxication in the driver.
I have no idea how you come to this conclusion or find it obvious.
Besides, I think we're just going to disagree at the core of this. I like to think that there is more keeping people from recklessly drunk-driving than a "felony" on their record or losing their job.
I'm asked if I've been drinking virtually every time I'm pulled over (I am not an unsafe driver). I simply say "no". If I've drunk 2 beers in the last couple hours, I am driving unimpaired and won't be questioned further.
But if I'm pulled over and my car reeks of weed, a bunch of things are probably going to happen. The cop is going to shine his flashlight throughout the car looking for sources of the smell. He's going to ask me to get out of the car and will probably then frisk me for his own safety. He'll ask to search the car. He'll question everyone in the car. In many states, he is likely to call for a drug dog to effect probable cause for a search of the car.
My impression is that these things not only happen but happen routinely at traffic stops where cannabis is implicated; the state police have a whole infrastructure ready to go to make cannabis arrests happen, and they are higher-value stops (arrests) than traffic stops. None of these things happen during ordinary traffic stops, and unless you've been driving erratically or spilled high-proof alcohol on your clothes or have an open container, nothing else does either.
The problem is that cannabis stinks (literally); it has a sticky, lingering, resinous smell. Alcohol simply doesn't generate the same evidence.
huh? I'm not trying to argue with you. I know that you think cannabis is a net-negative and I have no desire to argue with you about that. I respect your position and know that you're in favor of decriminalization.
I still do not understand what you're getting at. If I were to smoke a bowl, drink two beers and get in my car and got pulled over, I guarantee you I would be asked if I had been drinking because that would be far more present on my breath. Even if I had some weed in a grinder in my glove box.
>detecting marijuana anywhere in the car including its passengers is far higher than the likelihood of an officer detecting alcohol intoxication in the driver.
I have no idea how you come to this conclusion or find it obvious.
Besides, I think we're just going to disagree at the core of this. I like to think that there is more keeping people from recklessly drunk-driving than a "felony" on their record or losing their job.