millerboycott.com

As I've noted in the past, driving under the influence of marijuana ("stoned driving") is becoming increasingly common — and difficult to determine what levels cause impairment and for how long.  See, for example, Identifying and Proving DUI Marijuana.  In fact, some governmental studies indicate that marijuana has little if any effect on the ability to safely operate a vehicle.  See DUI Marijuana: Does Marijuana Impair Driving?  

Faced with the difficulties of proving that a driver was actually impaired, states are turning to the simple — but unjust — expedient of ignoring whether the driver was actually impaired and simply making it a crime to have the chemical compounds of marijuana in his body.  See, for example, Driving + Trace of Mariijuana = DUI. This is roughly the equivalent of changing the existing DUI laws to criminalize driving with any detectable amount alcohol in your system —  even if you are stone sober.  

Notice the changing focus of the DUI laws (alcohol, drugs and marijuana) away from the original goal of public safety.  The focus is shifting from the original question, "Was the driver impaired by alcohol and/or drugs so that his ability to safely operate a vehicle was impaired — and thus a potential danger to the public?" to "What is the easiest way to accuse and convict?"

A news story a couple of days ago presents a clear example of this…
 

Arizona Court Ruling Upholds DUI Test for Marijuana

Phoenix, AZ.  Feb 13 — An appeals court has issued a ruling that upholds the right of authorities to prosecute pot smokers in Arizona for driving under the influence even when there is no evidence that they are actually high.

The ruling by the Court of Appeals focuses on the chemical compounds in marijuana that show up in blood and urine tests after people smoke pot. One chemical compound causes drivers to be impaired; another is a chemical that stays in people's systems for weeks after they've smoked marijuana but doesn't affect impairment.

The court ruled that both compounds apply to Arizona law, meaning a driver doesn't have to actually be impaired to get prosecuted for DUI. As long as there is evidence of marijuana in their system, they can get a DUI, the court said.

The ruling overturns a decision by a lower court judge who said it didn't make sense to prosecute a person with no evidence they're under the influence…

The Court of Appeals said the Legislature adopted the decades-old comprehensive DUI law to protect public safety, so a provision on prohibited substances and their resulting chemical compounds should be interpreted broadly to include inactive compounds as well as active ones.

The case stems from a 2010 traffic stop in Maricopa County. The motorist's blood test revealed only a chemical compound that is found in the blood after another compound produced from ingesting marijuana breaks down.

According to testimony by a prosecution criminalist, the compound found in the man's blood doesn't impair the ability to drive but can remain detectable for four weeks…

So in Arizona you can be arrested for DUI if blood tests indicate you've smoked marijuana — possibly before driving…..And even if the chemical compounds are inactive — that is, have no effect whatever!

The insanity goes on…. 

(Thanks to Joe.)
 

DUI BLOG

More accused criminals could be released on bail to alleviate overcrowding in provincial jails if a committee reviewing Manitoba’s jail capacity gets its way.
Manitoba stories

As I’ve often pontificated in past posts, the way to reduce DUI-related fatalities on our highways is not to destroy the lives of offenders with Draconian punishment, nor to dismantle the Constitution in the process.  Rather, the solution is in recognizing that the danger lies in not the vast majority of those accused but in the "problem drinker" — the person with prior convictions and whose blood-alcohol level is usually very high, typically an alcoholic.  See, for example, my recent post A Modest Proposal. 

A recent news story about such an approach in Wisconsin is confirming the validity of this view.

DOT Report Highlights Supervision of Repeat Drunken Drivers

 
Ashland, WI.  July 1 – Pretrial Intensive Supervision Programs in 11 Wisconsin counties have saved the state tens of thousands of jail days, according to a legislative report recently completed by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.  The program began in 1993 in Milwaukee County and targets repeat drunken drivers through counseling, treatment, and monitoring…

The Department of Transportation annually evaluates the counties’ programs. In 2010, the department reported the following results:

In 2010, 80 percent of the 3,813 drunk drivers participating in intensive supervision programs successfully completed their program, which typically includes: treatment for alcohol dependency or addiction, monitoring for sobriety, a Driver Safety Plan component and compliance with court appearances and payment of fines.

From October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010 (federal fiscal year 2010), counties with intensive supervision programs that reported totals saved 74,440 jail days. (Total jail days saved does not include information from all counties in the program).

"The pretrial intoxicated driver intervention program continues to enjoy support from the Milwaukee County Court judges, who cite the program as one of the most important resources the courts have for dealing with repeat OWI offenders," said Milwaukee County Chief Judge Jeffrey Kremers. "The court appreciates that pretrial supervision of clients results in better treatment compliance."

Along with the state’s justice system, the department of transportation sees program benefits, as well.

"Most traffic fatalities are linked to motorists’ behavior such as driving while impaired, speeding and not wearing seat belts. We know that the injuries and deaths caused by the traffic crashes are preventable," said Randy Romanski of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Safety. "The intensive supervision programs work to change behaviors and prevent situations where people drive drunk and injure or kill themselves or others."

Maybe it’s time to abandon MADD’s prohibition agenda and start dealing with reality.
 

DUI BLOG