Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Congress Seeking To Mandate States Pass Per Se "Drugged Driving" Laws
Model law would sanction anyone driving with "any detectable amount of a controlled substance in the person's body, as measured in the person's blood, urine, saliva, or other bodily substance"
Washington, DC: Members of Congress introduced legislation last week demanding states enact criminal statutes sanctioning anyone who operates a
motor vehicle "while any detectable amount of a controlled substance is present in the person's body, as measured in the person's blood, urine, saliva, or other bodily substance." The bipartisan bill, H.R. 3922, comes five days after the introduction of a measure (H.R. 3907) seeking to withhold highway funding from state legislatures that do not amend their DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) laws to enact mandatory minimum penalties for anyone convicted of driving under the influence of illegal drugs.
"These bills represent an all out federal assault on the marijuana smoking community," NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said. "Marijuana smokers - notably state-sanctioned medicinal marijuana patients - stand to be unfairly and disproportionately targeted by this type of legislation because inert traces of marijuana metabolites remain detectable in certain bodily fluids for days and sometimes even weeks after marijuana use."
He added, "While driving impaired by marijuana or other illicit and licit drugs is never acceptable, neither is it acceptable to treat sober drivers as if they are impaired simply because they have trace levels of inactive marijuana metabolites in their blood or urine."
While virtually all states already have DUID statutes on the books, most are "effect-based" laws which forbid drivers to operate a motor vehicle if they are either "under the influence" of a controlled substance, or if they have been rendered "incapable of driving safely" because of their use of an illicit drug. To be convicted under such a statute, a prosecutor must prove that the driver's observed impairment and/or incapacity is directly associated with drug ingestion.
By contrast, per se DUID laws presume a driver is impaired simply if he or she operates a motor vehicle while a certain level of an illicit drug or drug metabolite (inert compounds indicative of past drug use) are detectable in their body. However, no scientific consensus exists determining per se impairment levels for controlled substances. As a result, ten states have recently adopted so-called "zero tolerance" per se laws, that make it a criminal offense to operate a motor vehicle while having any amount of a drug or drug metabolite in one's body or bodily fluids - even if the individual is neither under the influence nor impaired to drive.
NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup worries that the current federal crackdown on drugged driving will be used to coerce state legislatures to universally adopt "zero tolerance" per se laws, which he called unfair and bad public policy. "These 'zero tolerance' laws are neither a safe nor sensible way to identify impaired drivers; they are an attempt to misuse the traffic safety laws in order to identify and prosecute marijuana smokers per se.
"We all support the goal of keeping impaired drivers off the road, regardless of whether the driver is impaired from alcohol or other drugs. However, this proposal would unfairly define as ‘impaired’ an individual who had not smoked marijuana for several days, long after any intoxicating effects had worn off."
Stroup added that, at a minimum, laws targeting drug drivers should identify "parent drugs" (i.e., THC), not simply drug metabolites. He also said that DUID per se laws must be based on scientifically accepted criteria for determining impairment, just as blood alcohol content levels are set at .08. "Drunk driving laws have scientifically sound cut-off levels, and punish individuals for driving while impaired, not simply for having consumed alcohol. Politicians should apply similar standards to DUID legislation."
For more information, please contact either Keith Stroup or Paul
Armentano of NORML at (202) 483-5500. To learn more about H.R. 3922,
please visit: http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=5384696
Model law would sanction anyone driving with "any detectable amount of a controlled substance in the person's body, as measured in the person's blood, urine, saliva, or other bodily substance"
Washington, DC: Members of Congress introduced legislation last week demanding states enact criminal statutes sanctioning anyone who operates a
motor vehicle "while any detectable amount of a controlled substance is present in the person's body, as measured in the person's blood, urine, saliva, or other bodily substance." The bipartisan bill, H.R. 3922, comes five days after the introduction of a measure (H.R. 3907) seeking to withhold highway funding from state legislatures that do not amend their DUID (driving under the influence of drugs) laws to enact mandatory minimum penalties for anyone convicted of driving under the influence of illegal drugs.
"These bills represent an all out federal assault on the marijuana smoking community," NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup said. "Marijuana smokers - notably state-sanctioned medicinal marijuana patients - stand to be unfairly and disproportionately targeted by this type of legislation because inert traces of marijuana metabolites remain detectable in certain bodily fluids for days and sometimes even weeks after marijuana use."
He added, "While driving impaired by marijuana or other illicit and licit drugs is never acceptable, neither is it acceptable to treat sober drivers as if they are impaired simply because they have trace levels of inactive marijuana metabolites in their blood or urine."
While virtually all states already have DUID statutes on the books, most are "effect-based" laws which forbid drivers to operate a motor vehicle if they are either "under the influence" of a controlled substance, or if they have been rendered "incapable of driving safely" because of their use of an illicit drug. To be convicted under such a statute, a prosecutor must prove that the driver's observed impairment and/or incapacity is directly associated with drug ingestion.
By contrast, per se DUID laws presume a driver is impaired simply if he or she operates a motor vehicle while a certain level of an illicit drug or drug metabolite (inert compounds indicative of past drug use) are detectable in their body. However, no scientific consensus exists determining per se impairment levels for controlled substances. As a result, ten states have recently adopted so-called "zero tolerance" per se laws, that make it a criminal offense to operate a motor vehicle while having any amount of a drug or drug metabolite in one's body or bodily fluids - even if the individual is neither under the influence nor impaired to drive.
NORML Executive Director Keith Stroup worries that the current federal crackdown on drugged driving will be used to coerce state legislatures to universally adopt "zero tolerance" per se laws, which he called unfair and bad public policy. "These 'zero tolerance' laws are neither a safe nor sensible way to identify impaired drivers; they are an attempt to misuse the traffic safety laws in order to identify and prosecute marijuana smokers per se.
"We all support the goal of keeping impaired drivers off the road, regardless of whether the driver is impaired from alcohol or other drugs. However, this proposal would unfairly define as ‘impaired’ an individual who had not smoked marijuana for several days, long after any intoxicating effects had worn off."
Stroup added that, at a minimum, laws targeting drug drivers should identify "parent drugs" (i.e., THC), not simply drug metabolites. He also said that DUID per se laws must be based on scientifically accepted criteria for determining impairment, just as blood alcohol content levels are set at .08. "Drunk driving laws have scientifically sound cut-off levels, and punish individuals for driving while impaired, not simply for having consumed alcohol. Politicians should apply similar standards to DUID legislation."
For more information, please contact either Keith Stroup or Paul
Armentano of NORML at (202) 483-5500. To learn more about H.R. 3922,
please visit: http://capwiz.com/norml2/issues/alert/?alertid=5384696
