In my opinion I don’t think that’s the right solution. I think cannabis is closer to coffee.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
10 points
*

I would argue cannabis, especially of the average potency and in moderation, doesn’t impair most EVERYDAY users any more than a cigarette might (those things spike your blood pressure and dehydrate you fast!!) but I just especially have to object to treating high driving exactly the same. As another user stated, the statistics are very clear. To quote a friend’s dad “If you can’t drive and smoke weed, you can’t drive.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

As someone who has ingested a lot of weed, strong disagree. I don’t know how anyone who has experienced being high can say they are not impaired. That’s a mind blowing statement to me.

I definitely wouldn’t say it impairs you in the same way being drunk does, but I also wouldn’t say driving high is the same as driving sober. And if you are driving high you really need to cut that shit out. All it takes is one time where your reaction time is slightly decreased and it could be catastrophic.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I would say it really depends on person, tolerance, strain, etc. The issue with DUIs for THC intoxication is that it’s practically impossible to prove that someone is under the influence definitively like you can with alcohol. Even without a shred of evidence a breathalyzer will tell you if someone is over the legal limit, there is no equivalent with marijuana.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points
*

Define “a lot of weed”. Because weed hasn’t impaired me since high school, and I’ve met a lot of everyday users who feel the exact same. “Decreased reaction time” is absolutely a popular misconception IMHO, and that’s a symptom of simple tiredness too -I’d argue pot is far from the #1 cause of it. Being a stimulant to some extent. I take mine with a ridiculous caffeine dependency though too so I could be a little biased.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Decreased reaction time is absolutely not a myth. The level of impairment is related to the amount consumed (just like alcohol), but a decrease in reaction time is a very real effect of cannabis. In case of an emergency on the road that could be a major issue. Please do not drive high.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Dude, just stop driving high. We live in a time where you can have everything delivered to your door, including someone showing up at your door to drive you somewhere. People who drive drunk also insist they are badasses that are not impaired.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

If we engineered our roadways around the idea that people would be operating with a reduced reaction speed than normal, this would be fine. But we didn’t, everything is designed to be safe for normal operation.

Most isn’t good enough. If it impairs 10% of people, and increases fatalities even a little bit, it should be a DUI, unless there is some kind of medical exemption or something.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

It impairs maybe 10% of people. They should know better than to drive and the other 90% shouldn’t be held responsible for their mistake. But reduced reaction speed? Nah, THC is magical in that it’s a mental stimulant that almost slows down one’s perception of time, you clearly haven’t heard of hackey-sack or met anybody that plays FPS games at a serious level.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You don’t get special rules just because you’re special. That’s just not how law works.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that because only 10% of drivers are reckless, we don’t get to regulate the other 90% along with them. Of course if we had some magical wand that would tell us who the reckless drivers are, then we could only target the dangerous folks, but often that’s impossible.

Often the best we can do is take a look at the data and see what kind of policies would not be horribly burdensome for the general public and yet would save a lot of lives, and then we institute those.

The other part of the problem with the 10% bad drivers argument is that bad drivers change from hour to hour, and from day to day. After all, the majority of people believe that they’re good drivers, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So many functional alcoholics can drive seemingly perfectly fine, but letting people drive drunk is still incredibly stupid. Just because you have a high tolerance or whatever doesn’t mean you should be allowed to drive while stoned, regardless of if it’s just as impacting as being tired or whatever justification people use.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Trees

!trees@lemmy.world

Create post

A community centered around cannabis.

In the spirit of making Trees a welcoming and uplifting place for everyone, please follow our Commandments.

  1. Be Cool.
  2. I’m not kidding. Be nice to each other.
  3. Avoid low-effort posts

Community stats

  • 882

    Monthly active users

  • 523

    Posts

  • 5K

    Comments