CDZ Is Legalizing Marijuana the Same as Legalizing Public Intoxication?

[jwoodie]

There seem to be open container and public intoxication laws regarding alcohol, but I am not aware of similar laws in States that have legalized marijuana. Am I missing something here?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

There seem to be open container and public intoxication laws regarding alcohol, but I am not aware of similar laws in States that have legalized marijuana. Am I missing something here?

Imagine until or unless they make laws specific to cannabis, they'll just use existing alcohol public intoxication ones. Stagger's a stagger.

 

[kiwiman127]

There seem to be open container and public intoxication laws regarding alcohol, but I am not aware of similar laws in States that have legalized marijuana. Am I missing something here?

No, it's the same as ending prohibition on liquor.

 

[Syriusly]

There seem to be open container and public intoxication laws regarding alcohol, but I am not aware of similar laws in States that have legalized marijuana. Am I missing something here?

Washington DC prohibits smoking marijuana in public.

Colorado doesn't have public intoxication laws

Public intoxication in the state of Colorado is not punished with criminal or civil penalties. Instead, state law prohibits the passing of local laws that penalize public intoxication, but state law provides for the creation of patrols trained to provide assistance to intoxicated and incapacitated people.

Colorado also prohibits public smoking

Can I Openly Walk Around with Marijuana?
No. Marijuana and marijuana paraphernalia may only be displayed in private in a way that "does not endanger others." You may not have your marijuana out on the streets, in public parks, or even exposed to the public from your private residence.

Where Can I Smoke?
You can only smoke in private residences where the owner of the residence says smoking marijuana is OK. You may not smoke in marijuana retail stores or in any public places. Public marijuana bars and cafes are still prohibited.

I hope I appreciate that I used Google to answer your questions, so you would not have to.....

 

[SassyIrishLass]

An associate in my husband's Denver firm office just tested positive for marijuana and promptly lost his $125K a year position.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

An associate in my husband's Denver firm office just tested positive for marijuana and promptly lost his $125K a year position.

Probably violated the contract he signed to get the gig.

 

[jwoodie]

I hope I appreciate that I used Google to answer your questions, so you would not have to.....

I appreciate it too, but that doesn't really address the issue of public intoxication. Is it desirable to have increasing numbers of substance-impaired people stumbling around in public and driving cars? Or do you feel there is a qualitative difference between alcohol and marijuana intoxication? If so, doesn't that invalidate the alcohol/prohibition comparison?

 

[Agit8r]

It isn't legal to use in public here in WA.

 

[TheOldSchool]

An associate in my husband's Denver firm office just tested positive for marijuana and promptly lost his $125K a year position.

Probably violated the contract he signed to get the gig.

Yup. It was foolish of him. I wonder if it affected his job performance at all.

 

[Syriusly]

I hope I appreciate that I used Google to answer your questions, so you would not have to.....

I appreciate it too, but that doesn't really address the issue of public intoxication. Is it desirable to have increasing numbers of substance-impaired people stumbling around in public and driving cars? Or do you feel there is a qualitative difference between alcohol and marijuana intoxication? If so, doesn't that invalidate the alcohol/prohibition comparison?

That wasn't your question in your OP.

Public intoxication is public intoxication. Colorado doesn't criminalize merely being intoxicated in public- but all States criminalize driving while intoxicated.
So far there is no indication that there is an increase of public intoxication due to legalization of marijuana. There could be several reasons for that:
a) the people smoking pot were doing so before legalization so there is no net effect.
b) some of the people smoking pot used to use alcohol and have only switched intoxicants.

To me its fairly simple- criminalize actions- not the drug use. We don't make it illegal for adults to drink- we make it illegal for them to drive while intoxicated- treat all intoxication the same, regardless of the method that the intoxication occurs.

 

[Syriusly]

An associate in my husband's Denver firm office just tested positive for marijuana and promptly lost his $125K a year position.

Must have been a particularly stupid attorney.

 

[jwoodie]

To me its fairly simple- criminalize actions- not the drug use. We don't make it illegal for adults to drink- we make it illegal for them to drive while intoxicated- treat all intoxication the same, regardless of the method that the intoxication occurs.

Is there an established legal limit for driving while stoned?

 

[Syriusly]

To me its fairly simple- criminalize actions- not the drug use. We don't make it illegal for adults to drink- we make it illegal for them to drive while intoxicated- treat all intoxication the same, regardless of the method that the intoxication occurs.

Is there an established legal limit for driving while stoned?

Google is your friend. Look it up.

 

[jwoodie]

Google is your friend. Look it up.

I'll take that as a no or you don't know (which is OK). As the title of this thread referenced, public intoxication from marijuana has yet to be addressed in any meaningful way. Those advocating for legalization frequently compare current laws to alcohol prohibition, but then abandon that comparison when it comes to enforcement. What standards would you favor regarding driving under the influence?

 

[Godboy]

Ive seen people who are too drunk to be in public; i.e. stumbling around, throwing up and generally being obnoxious, but I have yet to see someone be too stoned to be in public.

 

[Muhammed]

DUI laws should be banned IMO.

They do not take tolerance into account.

One person could slam a case of beer and drive better than another person who hasn't had a drop.

Ive seen people who are too drunk to be in public; i.e. stumbling around, throwing up and generally being obnoxious, but I have yet to see someone be too stoned to be in public.

Maybe that dude you saw stumbling around and throwing up was stoned.

 

[oldfart]

Google is your friend. Look it up.

I'll take that as a no or you don't know (which is OK). As the title of this thread referenced, public intoxication from marijuana has yet to be addressed in any meaningful way. Those advocating for legalization frequently compare current laws to alcohol prohibition, but then abandon that comparison when it comes to enforcement. What standards would you favor regarding driving under the influence?

I think that we are combining two different issues here. We have some laws that stem from specific cultural norms. Public intoxication statutes fall into this category along with prohibitions against public nudity and such.

Second are safety based statutes such as DUI ordinances. Here it really doesn't matter why someone is incapacitated, it is too dangerous for them to drive a vehicle or operate machinery. Most people don't care if the a person caused a fatal accident because they were drunk, high, in a diabetic coma, asleep because they have driven 24 hours straight, were eating and spilling pizza on themselves, reading a map, or texting a friend. If you are impaired, pull over and take care of business.

Personally I think that the first kind of statute should be restricted to the least possible limitation of personal liberties. This is going to hurt some people's feelings. I may not be wild about it, but I think we need to tolerate PDA in most public spaces, protestors and demonstrators, vagrants and vagabonds, all sorts of disreputable-looking people. For the second class of statutes, I favor strict enforcement; no one has the right to run down my grandchildren because they though checking their email while driving was OK.

 

[Syriusly]

Google is your friend. Look it up.

I'll take that as a no or you don't know (which is OK). As the title of this thread referenced, public intoxication from marijuana has yet to be addressed in any meaningful way. Those advocating for legalization frequently compare current laws to alcohol prohibition, but then abandon that comparison when it comes to enforcement. What standards would you favor regarding driving under the influence?

I'll take that as you don't know- since you haven't responded with any facts.

I say treat marijuana and alcohol exactly the same legally and I feel the same way about enforcement.

We use an imprecise measure for alcohol- as others have pointed out it doesn't really measure intoxication accurately- but it does serve a purpose. Marijuana doesn't work the same way- blood content level is not a very good analogue for intoxication.

But police have been enforcing driving while intoxicated laws for years- and busting people for being intoxicated on perscription drugs, cocaine, meth and other substances- based upon the behavior of the driver.

In a more perfect world, I would see a mental acuity/intoxication test which measures impairment, not just blood levels. Certainly we are close to being able to do that now. Of course- some seniors and drivers who have been driving 24 hours or longer may well fail the test.

 

[jwoodie]

But police have been enforcing driving while intoxicated laws for years- and busting people for being intoxicated on perscription drugs, cocaine, meth and other substances- based upon the behavior of the driver.

Police have been enforcing these laws largely through the mechanism of illegal possession. With the legalization of marijuana, how can driving under its influence be effectively determined? Yearning for "a more perfect world" doesn't provide an answer to this problem.

 

[Syriusly]

But police have been enforcing driving while intoxicated laws for years- and busting people for being intoxicated on perscription drugs, cocaine, meth and other substances- based upon the behavior of the driver.

Police have been enforcing these laws largely through the mechanism of illegal possession. With the legalization of marijuana, how can driving under its influence be effectively determined? Yearning for "a more perfect world" doesn't provide an answer to this problem.

Sigh.....

Police have been enforcing these laws largely through the mechanism of looking for signs of impaired driving.

Just as with alcohol a police officer first looks for signs that a driver is impaired- weaving, driving at odd speeds, etc.
Once pulled over, the officer can have the driver do the usual impaired tests- walking the straight line, speech slurred, etc.

Legalization of marijuana doesn't change anything. It is illegal to drive while intoxicated in California now, and it will be illegal to drive while intoxicated in the future. Officers already stop drivers who may be driving under the influence of pot or percoset or ambien or coke- and have to determine whether they are impaired first- and then determine by what second.

"How can driving under it's influence be effectively determined'? I proposed just such a method.