Meeting Persephone

I realize that this post is overdue.  Prop 19 failed in California (as did a few other medical propositions in other states) but Massachusetts did manage to pass yet another demand on its representatives that said they want looser laws on cannabis.   I stated support for Prop 19 only because it was a bill to legalize and once passed could have been worked on further.  Propositions are seldom perfect in their inception. 

Why did Prop 19 fail?  There are several reasons and not least of which was a poorly written proposition.  Does that mean that cannabis will never be legal?  Hardly.  But there are steps that would be beneficial and things that we learned if we bothered to listen to (instead of just criticizing) the opposition.  I will take on some of those things in a series of posts and give my own point of view.  Why not?  Nobody's listening to me no matter where else I say these things and at least saying them on my own blog gives me opportunity to say nearly all I can before being yelled at by those who misunderstand what I'm saying. 

DUI - There are people in the cannabis community who make the same claim as all too many drunks:  "I drive better/more safely when I'm high."  In fact some of the biggest advocates of legalizing cannabis have touted this line countless times as they beat their drums for legalization.  I've actually heard someone saying that "they act like there's some standard you have to meet before you can drive".  Well, yes, yes there are standards!  If you are going to get behind the wheel of a 2 ton bullet you'd better damn well be capable of handling the responsibility (not to mention that this is the reason we issue drivers licenses - to make sure you can meet a basic standard of safety). 

We need to address accountability and testing on this issue. 

Accountability - The public has had enough of the lack of accountability in all areas.  Pretending that there is no safety issue from toking and driving does not soothe the public at all - in fact it might just heighten their skepticism toward the legalization movement.  Fear is an enormous motivator for people and being afraid to be on the road with drunk and stoned drivers is no incentive to legalize when you "have no horse in this race" anyway - they are more likely to vote "no".  We can actually recruit non-users and never-plan-to-use people if we approach this responsibly and sensitively.  With auto accidents being one of the top killers in the country mocking that concern is just plain dumb.  What you don't do is blame cannabis.  You blame the moron with the poor judgment.  You hold the individual accountable for their actions.  You don't hold the entire community hostage because of a fear - and if you are supporting people's "right" to toke and drive you are just as responsible for holding the community hostage and foresaking the responsible users' rights as the prohibitionists.  If someone is driving under the influence, and it is detected, they should be prosecuted for their crime.  People have the right to expect a certain level of safety.  The cannabis community needs to demand responsibility from our people (and stop excusing people's bad behavior as they are certainly in the minority) if we're going to get through to the rest of society that we're serious about what we're doing.  There are few that benefit and really do drive more safely under the influence because of seizure or spastic health disorders (and special licensing could be issued for them). 

Testing - We need to be at the forefront of new testing advances to ensure the safety of the public and the cannabis community would go a long way in validating our sincerety if we were working in that direction rather than making ridiculous arguments for the safety of stoned driving.  My understanding about the testing is that there are finally some advances being made.  There is one test being developed that detects THC through the apocrine (sweat) glands.  It's non-invasive and seems to detect use within the past 1-2 hours.  It seems to take awhile to show results at this point (up to 4 hours oddly) but proves actual impairment at the time of testing (rather than the urine, blood, or hair tests that detect for the past weeks-months).  It's the most promising test at this point and the community would do well to promote and further its progress.  Let's lend a little legitimacy to the argument that we are responsible adults capable of making private choices for ourselves!