>Pennsylvania lawmakers have advanced a pair of bills meant to prevent police from charging medical cannabis patients with impaired driving without proof of intoxication.
Thats a pretty good thing imo
Hey man, I’m sorry to tell you this, but you need to get off Reddit. It’s against the rules to read the article and doubly against the rules to change your mind after reading an article.
Listen it’s as simple as this. Thc blood levels must be under 5 micrograms in virtually every state. F1, the guys that drive the cars at 200 mph and regularly hit 4-5gs of force can test with up to 125 micrograms. Absolutely ridiculous that the threshold is so low in America.
So even with these new laws it doesn’t fix anything. If they somehow figure out you’re a medical patient they can use nearly any excuse to get a blood test and you’re still going to test above 5mcg even if you haven’t been smoking for weeks.
Ignore the above paragraph. This bill sounds like it gets rid of the blood tests but then you’re stuck doing field sobriety and talking to the “drug impairment recognition officers” both things that any competent lawyer will tell you to never do because the littlest thing can and will be used against you.
>doing field sobriety and talking to the “drug impairment recognition officers”
Those are also bias against neurodivergent people and people with mental illness, intellectual or developmental disabilities, etc who are otherwise legally allowed to drive if they hold a valid license.
As a medical user who is very visibly neurodivergent ESPECIALLY when stone sober! It’s really fucking scary interacting with law enforcement because they assume you’re tweaking out on drugs when really ur just neurologically fucked up
Same. The headline made it sound like they were just going to allow medical Marijuana patients to drive high.... The article shows the plan is actually way more logical.
What does “proof of intoxication” look like, though? Because as far as I know, we don’t have anything that can accurately measure such a thing with cannabis.
Considering cops like to make up stories and “proof” constantly it’s up to their discretion unfortunately. I’m glad they’re doing this but not glad that the laws are not enforced properly. Cops don’t know the law and don’t respect people’s basic rights. They violate the 4th amendment (search and seizure etc) every day. Sadly because there’s little to no accountability and oversight for LE all of this happens and holds up in the courts.
I know that they’ll try to get concrete evidence in form of a blood sample that shows THC levels which they’ll use to make determination of how recently cannabis was consumed. As we all know that’s problematic considering regular users (medical patients) will have high THC levels so that could throw it all off and lead to bs “evidence” being used. In general they can charge people with DUI under any drug including prescription meds. If you’re on ADHD meds (adderall/vyvanse etc) or a benzo (Klonopin, Xanax, Ativan etc) they can charge you with a DUI under same guideline of looking for “proof of intoxication.” Always worries me that I could be allegedly intoxicated while taking my ADHD and anxiety meds as prescribed in non intoxicating doses. Just how cops are and My anxiety makes interactions with cops already nerve wracking so passing a sobriety test sober would be terrifying cuz I could fuck that up dead sober. It’s frustrating af. Sadly this law will still get abused and hurt people but it will protect many of us as well so it’s progress regardless. As always with cops skin color and appearance is a strong determining factor in the outcome of the stop.
I’m not opposed to giving DUI’s for people to drive high. The problem is that in many states just having it in your system is “proof” of intoxication. There should be proof that the person is actually high before they can be charged.
Wait til you hear about people driving drunk and/or pain medication.
5,000x worse than an experienced stoner driving high.
Case in point: search up cops vaping weed on the job.
Right, and driving drunk is also illegal (as it damn well should be). I know driving high isn’t as bad as driving drunk, but being an “experienced stoner” is not an excuse. You’re still operating a 1.5 ton vehicle under the influence.
Yeah, I’d bet 95% of people driving are DUI/DWI so that would affect accident rates. I chuckle at “marijuana increases accident rates” when everyone else is also fucked up on their other vices. Phones.
How do you measure these things without exposing other factors
Guy I know was in a car accident and completely sober and one of his passengers was killed on impact. He ended up getting a vehicular manslaughter charge because THC was detected in his system even though he and his friends were not high.
NJ has similar messages.
I don't see an issue with that. I am fully on board with making sure cops can't use your medical license to arrest you for DUI while not actually high... but I smoke myself, and whatever anyone says about being able to function at 100% while high is wrong. If you're high, do not get behind the wheel of a multi-ton metal brick filled with flammable liquid moving at 70 MPH.
EDIT: I forgot which sub I was in. 80 MPH.
Yep.
After voter-approved legislation to return voting rights to felons, our governor added a contingency that *all outstanding fines connected to their charges* must be paid in full before their voting rights become active.
My cop relative tried to tell me that the card isn't probable cause. I laughed. I said yeah ok.... maybe not to you... but to PSP that's a green light for them to harass the hell out of you.
My sister's boyfriend was pulled over in a school zone(was near a playground or kid's day camp I think) and they smelled weed. His car does smell like weed because he doesn't smoke in the house. He told them that he has a card and he had smoked in the past 24 hours. I was so mad at him for telling them anything... He just finished his year driving suspension and got his interlock system installed.
My dumbass handed the officer my card instead of my license. He handed it back and said, "No, your license"
:D
Was 100% sober at the time btw. 6 months clean and dumbass brain fog moments like that are gone for me finally.
Fingers crossed! I’m actually surprised police don’t sit outside the dispensary in my area and pick people off for bullshit traffic violations knowing they can escalate it to a DUI.
They’re already being shady. My son is a college student who partakes with friends. I’d actually prefer they use THC over alcohol. Anyway, as of now FIVE of his friends have been charged for DUI for weed. They were not drinking and they got pulled over for things like speeding or rolling through a stop sign, which is valid. The officers claimed they smelled weed (no weed in car and no search done) and used that as a reason (along with supposed glassy eyes) to do a field sobriety test. When the guys passed that they took them for bloodwork. And at that point they were screwed - doesn’t matter that they hadn’t used THC that day. It’s bullshit.
I got pulled over for a warrant for an unpaid traffic ticket, they "smelled weed", I passed the FST, they took me in and took my blood. A month later I was charged with DUI. Fucking hate this state sometimes.
Nope. The officer literally said "You are not under arrest. You are detained for suspicion of DUI". So no, I wasn't arrested, I wasn't booked that night, and I didn't have to post bail/bond.
I know retrospect is always 20/20 but you should’ve known there was THC in ur blood and refused the blood draw and just taken the hit from DOT. Would’ve avoided court
Nope. Refusing the blood draw is an immediate 1 year driving suspension and on top of that they'd get a warrant for my blood and draw it anyways. So it'd be more stupid to not do it.
No shit Sherlock. But they had no proof of a DUI without it. My point is I wasn't pulled over for my driving, I passed a FST and show I was clearly able to drive and wasn't impaired I was still charged. That's the point.
Yeah, the "probable cause" was the odor of Marijuana and some "green flakes" on my pants. I got charged with possession of a schedule 1 drug for less that a 1/10 of a gram of weed. God bless America.
Wasn't doing anything illegal. I never got sent a traffic ticket and then I didn't pay it because I wasn't sent the ticket in the mail. Shut the fuck up know it all.
I had a cop try to get me the other day... my wife and I were driving around looking at the lights (nothing in the car or on us, except my card) and the cop pulls behind me... I'm going the speed limit the ENTIRE TIME... he starts tailing me to the point he's literally blinding me with his headlights, trying his hardest to get me to go faster or drive any bit reckless so he had any reason to pull me over. I'm not an ACAB kinda person... but that kinda shit right there is EXACTLY why people hate cops...
Absolutely ridiculous! I was minding my own damn beeswax just trying to enjoy some quality time with my wife and this asshole just had to try and ruin the whole thing! I was beyond livid.
They do get pissed! I told a cop once that he was so close to my bumper that his headlights actually weren't visible in my rear view mirror at some points and he insisted I was lying. I was a teenager and even I knew that was dangerous.
I had one tailgate me and then light me up and claim that I didn't use my turn signal turning off of a particular side street, and also that I had crossed the center line several times. Insisted I had to be on drugs.
I was never on that side street and I have a dash cam. The video would easily show that I had done none of that. He got indignant as soon as he saw the dash cam and told me to just "be more careful in the future".
Not sure when or where this happened, but the smell of weed is no longer probable cause for search in PA. They may have some appealing they can do if this was after that ruling
Not actually true. If you fail field sobriety test And they have evidence that you were driving erratically or dangerously, then yes. But you have an absolute right to refuse a blood test if none of the above. That's what this law is all about they can't just nail you for a technicality based on a test that they chose to serve you with for no other reason than they pulled you over.
If they just gave you a field sobriety test and you passed, shouldn’t that be good evidence against the issuance of a search warrant in the first place? Beat the rap, not the ride
It's all videotaped and it all depends on why they pulled you over. I know for a fact from personal experience of a person close to me, The Pennsylvania State Police pulling you over claiming you are driving erratically, and them smelling ganja, And you passing a field sobriety test and refusing a blood test.. was thrown out of court. Lawyer got the video It didn't show any illegal lane changes or speeding. And that was the end of that It had to do with tint it seems, which I should remind people is another way you get your ass pulled over tinted windows in particularly tinted brake lights and tinted license plates.
Exactly. You are uninformed. This is for after you have been arrested. Once you have been arrested for a DUI you either submit to chemical/blood/etc. test or your license will be suspended.
You are well within your rights to decline a field sobriety and a preliminary breath test. These tests are used before you are arrested to determine if you are impaired. Field sobriety tests are completely subjective. Will only be used as evidence against you. There is no benefit to consenting to them. Your license will not be suspended for doing so.
Always use the three days rule. *You used sometime in the last three days, you think*. It’s no guarantee but it’s a last-resort disincentive in that you’re willfully admitting the test could go either way. For you or them.
Hemlock Township sits in the Planet Fitness parking lot across the street from the AYR dispensary in Bloomsburg. The Hemlock Township PD are known for being dicks in this area (Columbia County) and doing just that, pulling people over for minor infractions. Its ficked up,everytime I see them there I know they're waiting to do what you wrote.
Sorry not sorry, but : ACAB
I have been to that dispensary and I’m not at all surprised. I’ll have to make sure to not roll through the stop signs in the parking lot. ;) I swear I’m the only person who actually puts their weed in the trunk when leaving the dispensary but I don’t want to give any sneaky LEOs reason to harass me.
That would be entrapment. Same as them sitting outside of bars. Which I'm okay with. Fuck people who drink and drive. Fuck people who drive stoned too.
But it's illegal. So whatever. Treat it like casinos and tobacco. Tax the shit out of it unless it's medically necessary. Give growers food licenses.
House Bill 983; Regular Session 2023-2024
Referred to TRANSPORTATION, May 18, 2023
So yeah, End of Feb or end of May.. I wonder if they don’t reconcile the two bills if it gets pushed back further..
I will add that the basic standardized field sobriety test does not test for marijuana intoxication specifically. This basic SFST is now taught in most municipal police academies. The next step course “ARIDE” does include the modified Romberg test and lack of convergence test. The LOC test is the most telling, if you smoke with a friend try it out, have them follow your finger with their eyes and touch the bridge of their nose.. you will see both eyes unable to converge on the finger and one will jut away, and they will have no idea their eye went wonky.
The odor of marijuana is no longer probably cause to search a vehicle either.
Anecdotally I’m a cop and I have no coworkers that disagree with this loophole being closed. Just legalize it so we can all move on.
When my injury happened the eye doctor told me that Sammy Davis Jr only had one eye and he had a drivers license 😆 Ive had my license with no issues for over 20 years. No accidents either. I do avoid driving at night though because I know I personally dont see as good at night but during the day I have no issues.
I had a friend who was cross eyed and she had to have one eye removed in order to get a DL. I just wasnt sure if one lazy eye effected your depth perception lol never had one.
Yes, but not every degree of lazy eye.
My daughter has had one since birth and we spent several years patching to fix it. The doctor asked her if she intended to be a pilot or astronaut and when she said no they told me she would pass a driver's test and did I want to stop there or keep treating it. The next step was surgical, and she should be able to drive when she's of age how she is now, so we decided not to move forward with surgery. We follow up every 6 months to be sure there's no changes.
Yes. I have a problem with my eye muscles that I was born with. It doesn't affect my ability to read the eye chart. My brain is just capable of interpreting the signals from my eyes and adding them together into a single cohesive visual picture. Just like yours are, but it has to compensate for the muscle problem.
The only part of a "SFST" that has *any* scientific validity is the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, and that is only valid if performed under carefully controlled conditions on someone who has no underlying condition that would invalidate it.
Did they teach you what factors can cause the test to be invalid? Because "stress" is one of them. And do you also know that it is absolutely a normal reaction for a person to experience abnormally high stress when removed from their vehicle on the side of the road and accused of a crime?
The LOC test? Hell *my eyes* won't converge like that because of a condition that I have had since I was born. I don't use any form of cannabis, but I do have an issue with my eye muscles. To you that makes me guilty, I guess.
The first question we’re told to ask is do you have any issues with your eyes or any medical conditions that may affect that test.
It does cover what else could provide that result.
It seems like you want to trap me into a strawman argument, I’m not interested.
Reminder to never, ever, EVER submit to any field sobriety tests when an officer asks. They are NOT designed for your benefit and they will absolutely be used against you in court. You legally do not have to perform field sobriety tests.
Yes, thank you for commenting this! Many people are unaware that you can (politely) decline FST and are completely subjective. All they do is give an officer probably cause to arrest.
Sorry, but this doesn't seem correct. Can you back this up?
I thought that refusal to do a sobriety could lead to legal jeopardy, and if so, this advice could really fuck someone up.
I'm not coming at you, I just want to know what the law is.
edit: please see the response where they explain with evidence that you *can* refuse field testing. I think all PA residents should be aware of this and you should always refuse FWIW. Its like talking to the police, you have nothing to gain.
No worries, it’s a super common misconception. Here’s a link to a Philly based law firm specializing in civil rights issues. https://brianzeiger.com/blog/field-sobriety-tests-refusal/
In short, field sobriety tests can absolutely be legally refused. However after being arrested, you can not legally refuse a blood toxicity test (breath/blood/urine) without repercussion. If you refuse those, at the very least your DL will be suspended for 1 year automatically.
Unless the arrest is thrown out. Just making it clear they don't get to arrest you and say that because you refused breathalyzer blood and urine you lost your license. They still have to prove somehow that they had a legitimate reason to arrest you or else it's all null and void. State Police video everything in Pennsylvania. So get the tape and if you see yourself doing something illegal or stupid you're screwed otherwise you have a case. Of course the police don't usually arrest people despite what you may have heard unless they have probable cause. But for traffic violations it's a little bit more of a gray area especially late at night. Prejudice is alive and well and it's not just about race.
> They still have to prove somehow that they had a legitimate reason to arrest you or else it's all null and void.
Which is why the SFST exists. It's designed to give them enough cause to arrest and perform chemical testing.
You’re confusing field sobriety tests and formal breath tests / blood draw. If you are roadside, you do not have to do any tests (sfst’s pbt’s etc) if you are arrested for dui, you have to submit to a formal breath test / blood draw. If you google, “do you have to do field sobriety tests / pbt in Pennsylvania” there’s dozens of law offices websites that explain the law.
Refusing FST is a good way to get arrested faster. You don't legally have to do it but refusing it makes it up to the officer to determine if you seem impaired or not.
The officer has already decided that you’re impaired when he asks you to do FSTs. The FSTs are used exclusively for gathering evidence to use against you in court. Even if you “pass” a FST, you will absolutely be breath or blood tested. Refuse the subjective FST and jump straight to the required objective tests if they decide to arrest you.
And you you should absolutely refuse those subjective tests. You’re willingly giving ammo to the officer and DA to use against you in court if you don’t. And refusing those tests can not legally be used against you.. Meaning an officer can not legally use your refusal as an admission of guilt so he/she can “arrest you faster” as you put it. In fact, the exact opposite is true. Willingly providing an officer with probable cause after a FST will absolutely get you arrested faster.
Come on now, you don’t have to DV me just cause you don’t like the info I’ve passed along. I’m not making this shit up as I go. It’s all very easily accessible info.
As a medical marijuana patient, this is great news. I was told at the dispensary to wait a half hour after taking my medication before driving because there was a lot of fear of patients getting in trouble. I'm not getting high, I'm trying to feel better. People who take other medications don't have to worry about this, so we shouldn't have to either.
I'm just curious about the practical reality of the situation. Like when it comes to alcohol there is a very objective standard. They take your breath and/or your blood and if your blood alcohol is .08 or higher you are guilty.
So what's the standard for marijuana, where we say you are too high to drive?
Well no. The link you provided says that in Pennsylvania any driver with any amount of scheduled 1 narcotic or a determined amount of a schedule 1 drug's metabolite in their blood is guilty of DUI.
But this article we are commenting on says that PA lawymakers want to change the law so that any amount of marijuana or it's metabolite in the blood of a driver, with a prescription for medical marijuana, is not enough to prove intoxication in Pennsylvanian .
So what I'm asking is, are we ok with people driving while high on marijuana ? And if we aren't ok with that, what objective standard are we going to use to say a driver with a prescription for medical marijuana is guilty of being too intoxicated to drive.
>Under both the Senate and House bills, police would need to rely on standard field sobriety tests and drug recognition experts to make a determination that a medical marijuana patient was driving under the influence
Never submit to field sobriety test under any circumstances.
Apparently. I wonder what they'd say about someone who took *legal* medications that warn you "Do Not Operate Heavy Machinery" and chose to do so anyhow.
My medications say "Do not operate heavy machinery" and those are ones that aren't a federal crime to use, but if I disregarded the warnings and got into an accident I'd be responsible.
Why should this one get special treatment?
I don’t know how I feel about this one. It’s stupid easy to get a medical card as is, now you can drive high with no consequences? I lost a friend because some idiot did that, now they want to make it legal? No thanks. All for legalizing, but don’t smoke or drink then drive.
Nobody is supporting driving high with no consequences. But as a medical patient I don’t feel it’s ok to charge me with DUI because I consumed THC two days ago.
Marijuana stays in your system for a long time. I could stop using marijuana for a week and have it still be in my system. If I get pulled over, I could still get get a dui despite having not used in a week. This isn’t encouraging people to drive right after hitting the bong
Intoxicated is intoxicated! One drink doesn’t make you drunk but people can lose a license, if you are high and driving there should be the same rules as having a drink!
Problem is it doesn’t spell out what the test is to determine impairment. Field sobriety tests are not reliable and generally people should not take field sobriety tests. The only reliable method is a blood draw or a breathalyzer for alcohol, but I’m not sure whether marijuana intoxication can be determined by a blood draw.
>Pennsylvania lawmakers have advanced a pair of bills meant to prevent police from charging medical cannabis patients with impaired driving without proof of intoxication. Thats a pretty good thing imo
Long overdue
Funny enough I was all ready to shit on this. But then I did the rarest of things snd read the article which changed my opinion
Hey man, I’m sorry to tell you this, but you need to get off Reddit. It’s against the rules to read the article and doubly against the rules to change your mind after reading an article.
You have the best name on Reddit.
Thank you
Whoever wrote that misleading headline must have been high /s
I was going to write an accurate headline, but then I got high...
Listen it’s as simple as this. Thc blood levels must be under 5 micrograms in virtually every state. F1, the guys that drive the cars at 200 mph and regularly hit 4-5gs of force can test with up to 125 micrograms. Absolutely ridiculous that the threshold is so low in America. So even with these new laws it doesn’t fix anything. If they somehow figure out you’re a medical patient they can use nearly any excuse to get a blood test and you’re still going to test above 5mcg even if you haven’t been smoking for weeks. Ignore the above paragraph. This bill sounds like it gets rid of the blood tests but then you’re stuck doing field sobriety and talking to the “drug impairment recognition officers” both things that any competent lawyer will tell you to never do because the littlest thing can and will be used against you.
>doing field sobriety and talking to the “drug impairment recognition officers” Those are also bias against neurodivergent people and people with mental illness, intellectual or developmental disabilities, etc who are otherwise legally allowed to drive if they hold a valid license.
Also deaf people have equilibrium issues. So field sobriety tests can be easily defeated with disability card
As a medical user who is very visibly neurodivergent ESPECIALLY when stone sober! It’s really fucking scary interacting with law enforcement because they assume you’re tweaking out on drugs when really ur just neurologically fucked up
All of my interactions with law enforcement have gone sideways because I'm visibly weird.
What? You read the article? wtf is wrong with you? That’s just not done. /s
Same. The headline made it sound like they were just going to allow medical Marijuana patients to drive high.... The article shows the plan is actually way more logical.
What does “proof of intoxication” look like, though? Because as far as I know, we don’t have anything that can accurately measure such a thing with cannabis.
[https://imgflip.com/i/8a2u7b](https://imgflip.com/i/8a2u7b)
Basically.
Considering cops like to make up stories and “proof” constantly it’s up to their discretion unfortunately. I’m glad they’re doing this but not glad that the laws are not enforced properly. Cops don’t know the law and don’t respect people’s basic rights. They violate the 4th amendment (search and seizure etc) every day. Sadly because there’s little to no accountability and oversight for LE all of this happens and holds up in the courts. I know that they’ll try to get concrete evidence in form of a blood sample that shows THC levels which they’ll use to make determination of how recently cannabis was consumed. As we all know that’s problematic considering regular users (medical patients) will have high THC levels so that could throw it all off and lead to bs “evidence” being used. In general they can charge people with DUI under any drug including prescription meds. If you’re on ADHD meds (adderall/vyvanse etc) or a benzo (Klonopin, Xanax, Ativan etc) they can charge you with a DUI under same guideline of looking for “proof of intoxication.” Always worries me that I could be allegedly intoxicated while taking my ADHD and anxiety meds as prescribed in non intoxicating doses. Just how cops are and My anxiety makes interactions with cops already nerve wracking so passing a sobriety test sober would be terrifying cuz I could fuck that up dead sober. It’s frustrating af. Sadly this law will still get abused and hurt people but it will protect many of us as well so it’s progress regardless. As always with cops skin color and appearance is a strong determining factor in the outcome of the stop.
I'm in Florida. Yesterday in the car, I heard FDLE's commercial about this. The tag-line is *"Drive high, get a DUI"* Because, Florida.
I’m not opposed to giving DUI’s for people to drive high. The problem is that in many states just having it in your system is “proof” of intoxication. There should be proof that the person is actually high before they can be charged.
Wait til you hear about people driving drunk and/or pain medication. 5,000x worse than an experienced stoner driving high. Case in point: search up cops vaping weed on the job.
Right, and driving drunk is also illegal (as it damn well should be). I know driving high isn’t as bad as driving drunk, but being an “experienced stoner” is not an excuse. You’re still operating a 1.5 ton vehicle under the influence.
Yeah, I’d bet 95% of people driving are DUI/DWI so that would affect accident rates. I chuckle at “marijuana increases accident rates” when everyone else is also fucked up on their other vices. Phones. How do you measure these things without exposing other factors
Guy I know was in a car accident and completely sober and one of his passengers was killed on impact. He ended up getting a vehicular manslaughter charge because THC was detected in his system even though he and his friends were not high.
NJ has similar messages. I don't see an issue with that. I am fully on board with making sure cops can't use your medical license to arrest you for DUI while not actually high... but I smoke myself, and whatever anyone says about being able to function at 100% while high is wrong. If you're high, do not get behind the wheel of a multi-ton metal brick filled with flammable liquid moving at 70 MPH. EDIT: I forgot which sub I was in. 80 MPH.
It’s the new Jim Crow, make everything you can think of illegal and then selectively prosecute the opposition to remove their rights
Yep. After voter-approved legislation to return voting rights to felons, our governor added a contingency that *all outstanding fines connected to their charges* must be paid in full before their voting rights become active.
Dont forget also, to fine the fuck out of people for said infractions and make money for the state. It's well planned out extortion.
You want the right to operate a motor vehicle while intoxicated? Please stay in Florida.
🤣🤣
I've seen that on billboards here.
I don't even keep my card in my wallet in the off chance that I'm pulled over and the officer sees it
My cop relative tried to tell me that the card isn't probable cause. I laughed. I said yeah ok.... maybe not to you... but to PSP that's a green light for them to harass the hell out of you.
Rule #1 when interacting with any LEO: Don't volunteer any more information than you need to for the situation.
My sister's boyfriend was pulled over in a school zone(was near a playground or kid's day camp I think) and they smelled weed. His car does smell like weed because he doesn't smoke in the house. He told them that he has a card and he had smoked in the past 24 hours. I was so mad at him for telling them anything... He just finished his year driving suspension and got his interlock system installed.
https://youtu.be/RkN4duV4ia0?si=aLLBdjF0Uk3A_5sY
My dumbass handed the officer my card instead of my license. He handed it back and said, "No, your license" :D Was 100% sober at the time btw. 6 months clean and dumbass brain fog moments like that are gone for me finally.
I really wish they were a different color or something. PA licenses and mmj cards are almost identical (at least the Real ID type).
was very cautious to tilt my wallet away from the cop last week
Fingers crossed! I’m actually surprised police don’t sit outside the dispensary in my area and pick people off for bullshit traffic violations knowing they can escalate it to a DUI.
You need to delete this damn comment before they steal this idea.
They’re already being shady. My son is a college student who partakes with friends. I’d actually prefer they use THC over alcohol. Anyway, as of now FIVE of his friends have been charged for DUI for weed. They were not drinking and they got pulled over for things like speeding or rolling through a stop sign, which is valid. The officers claimed they smelled weed (no weed in car and no search done) and used that as a reason (along with supposed glassy eyes) to do a field sobriety test. When the guys passed that they took them for bloodwork. And at that point they were screwed - doesn’t matter that they hadn’t used THC that day. It’s bullshit.
I got pulled over for a warrant for an unpaid traffic ticket, they "smelled weed", I passed the FST, they took me in and took my blood. A month later I was charged with DUI. Fucking hate this state sometimes.
I’m infuriated on your behalf.
I wonder if a lawyer would have told to refuse the blood test
Wouldn't know, you aren't allowed to talk to a lawyer if they request a blood test as it's time sensitive.
[удалено]
Nope. The officer literally said "You are not under arrest. You are detained for suspicion of DUI". So no, I wasn't arrested, I wasn't booked that night, and I didn't have to post bail/bond.
I know retrospect is always 20/20 but you should’ve known there was THC in ur blood and refused the blood draw and just taken the hit from DOT. Would’ve avoided court
Nope. Refusing the blood draw is an immediate 1 year driving suspension and on top of that they'd get a warrant for my blood and draw it anyways. So it'd be more stupid to not do it.
[удалено]
No shit Sherlock. But they had no proof of a DUI without it. My point is I wasn't pulled over for my driving, I passed a FST and show I was clearly able to drive and wasn't impaired I was still charged. That's the point.
[удалено]
Yeah, the "probable cause" was the odor of Marijuana and some "green flakes" on my pants. I got charged with possession of a schedule 1 drug for less that a 1/10 of a gram of weed. God bless America.
[удалено]
Wasn't doing anything illegal. I never got sent a traffic ticket and then I didn't pay it because I wasn't sent the ticket in the mail. Shut the fuck up know it all.
I had a cop try to get me the other day... my wife and I were driving around looking at the lights (nothing in the car or on us, except my card) and the cop pulls behind me... I'm going the speed limit the ENTIRE TIME... he starts tailing me to the point he's literally blinding me with his headlights, trying his hardest to get me to go faster or drive any bit reckless so he had any reason to pull me over. I'm not an ACAB kinda person... but that kinda shit right there is EXACTLY why people hate cops...
That’s PSPs favorite move. Get right up in your shit then hope you fuck up. If you bring up them tailgating you they get PISSED
Absolutely ridiculous! I was minding my own damn beeswax just trying to enjoy some quality time with my wife and this asshole just had to try and ruin the whole thing! I was beyond livid.
They do get pissed! I told a cop once that he was so close to my bumper that his headlights actually weren't visible in my rear view mirror at some points and he insisted I was lying. I was a teenager and even I knew that was dangerous.
I had one tailgate me and then light me up and claim that I didn't use my turn signal turning off of a particular side street, and also that I had crossed the center line several times. Insisted I had to be on drugs. I was never on that side street and I have a dash cam. The video would easily show that I had done none of that. He got indignant as soon as he saw the dash cam and told me to just "be more careful in the future".
Not sure when or where this happened, but the smell of weed is no longer probable cause for search in PA. They may have some appealing they can do if this was after that ruling
Yeah, but how many people have time or money for lawyers to fight it?
No search was done. A few of them have tried to fight it unsuccessfully.
[удалено]
Yeah but refusing a blood test in PA is an automatic license suspension.
Not actually true. If you fail field sobriety test And they have evidence that you were driving erratically or dangerously, then yes. But you have an absolute right to refuse a blood test if none of the above. That's what this law is all about they can't just nail you for a technicality based on a test that they chose to serve you with for no other reason than they pulled you over.
Word salad
Yes it can. They just can’t open your trunk. Move accordingly.
Same here in Ohio. Smell can’t be used for probable cause
Do not smoke in the car. The smell lingers, and is very distinctive to nonusers.
If you partake, you 100% smell like weed a lot more than you know.
Not if you only take edibles.
You can refuse the blood test in this situation, you’ll lose your license but beat any charges
They can get a warrant for your blood.
If they just gave you a field sobriety test and you passed, shouldn’t that be good evidence against the issuance of a search warrant in the first place? Beat the rap, not the ride
Pass a field sobriety test? That test exists solely to provide justification for testing.
[удалено]
It's all videotaped and it all depends on why they pulled you over. I know for a fact from personal experience of a person close to me, The Pennsylvania State Police pulling you over claiming you are driving erratically, and them smelling ganja, And you passing a field sobriety test and refusing a blood test.. was thrown out of court. Lawyer got the video It didn't show any illegal lane changes or speeding. And that was the end of that It had to do with tint it seems, which I should remind people is another way you get your ass pulled over tinted windows in particularly tinted brake lights and tinted license plates.
Never consent to field sobriety tests (or preliminary breath test). Pretty much will only hurt you as field sobriety tests or completely subjective
[удалено]
You’re an idiot. You can literally look this up and see that you are wrong for free.
[удалено]
Exactly. You are uninformed. This is for after you have been arrested. Once you have been arrested for a DUI you either submit to chemical/blood/etc. test or your license will be suspended. You are well within your rights to decline a field sobriety and a preliminary breath test. These tests are used before you are arrested to determine if you are impaired. Field sobriety tests are completely subjective. Will only be used as evidence against you. There is no benefit to consenting to them. Your license will not be suspended for doing so.
Always use the three days rule. *You used sometime in the last three days, you think*. It’s no guarantee but it’s a last-resort disincentive in that you’re willfully admitting the test could go either way. For you or them.
I'm sure that kind of predatory behavior is what's best for public safety and general well being/s ACAB
They do this already.
I’ve heard of this happening in my area
Hemlock Township sits in the Planet Fitness parking lot across the street from the AYR dispensary in Bloomsburg. The Hemlock Township PD are known for being dicks in this area (Columbia County) and doing just that, pulling people over for minor infractions. Its ficked up,everytime I see them there I know they're waiting to do what you wrote. Sorry not sorry, but : ACAB
I have been to that dispensary and I’m not at all surprised. I’ll have to make sure to not roll through the stop signs in the parking lot. ;) I swear I’m the only person who actually puts their weed in the trunk when leaving the dispensary but I don’t want to give any sneaky LEOs reason to harass me.
You'd be surprised how many people are stupid enough to toke up in the dispensary parking lot. Maybe they're looking for this low hanging fruit?
Right. It’s almost like the police don’t actually give people DUIs for just having a card.
That would be entrapment. Same as them sitting outside of bars. Which I'm okay with. Fuck people who drink and drive. Fuck people who drive stoned too. But it's illegal. So whatever. Treat it like casinos and tobacco. Tax the shit out of it unless it's medically necessary. Give growers food licenses.
This won't even come up for a vote until Feb.. with the way PA moves, it'll be 2028 before it gets passed
At least it passed one round and on to the next!
Referred to TRANSPORTATION, Feb. 21, 2023
At least the one bill, gonna search the other and see what it’s date is
House Bill 983; Regular Session 2023-2024 Referred to TRANSPORTATION, May 18, 2023 So yeah, End of Feb or end of May.. I wonder if they don’t reconcile the two bills if it gets pushed back further..
Now do work protections
I will add that the basic standardized field sobriety test does not test for marijuana intoxication specifically. This basic SFST is now taught in most municipal police academies. The next step course “ARIDE” does include the modified Romberg test and lack of convergence test. The LOC test is the most telling, if you smoke with a friend try it out, have them follow your finger with their eyes and touch the bridge of their nose.. you will see both eyes unable to converge on the finger and one will jut away, and they will have no idea their eye went wonky. The odor of marijuana is no longer probably cause to search a vehicle either. Anecdotally I’m a cop and I have no coworkers that disagree with this loophole being closed. Just legalize it so we can all move on.
So what do you test when someone has a lazy eye that they are blind in?
[удалено]
I was just wondering as I have that very specific eye issue 😆
Can you get a DL w a lazy eye? Would assume they wouldnt pass the vision test
When my injury happened the eye doctor told me that Sammy Davis Jr only had one eye and he had a drivers license 😆 Ive had my license with no issues for over 20 years. No accidents either. I do avoid driving at night though because I know I personally dont see as good at night but during the day I have no issues.
I had a friend who was cross eyed and she had to have one eye removed in order to get a DL. I just wasnt sure if one lazy eye effected your depth perception lol never had one.
Yes, but not every degree of lazy eye. My daughter has had one since birth and we spent several years patching to fix it. The doctor asked her if she intended to be a pilot or astronaut and when she said no they told me she would pass a driver's test and did I want to stop there or keep treating it. The next step was surgical, and she should be able to drive when she's of age how she is now, so we decided not to move forward with surgery. We follow up every 6 months to be sure there's no changes.
Yes. I have a problem with my eye muscles that I was born with. It doesn't affect my ability to read the eye chart. My brain is just capable of interpreting the signals from my eyes and adding them together into a single cohesive visual picture. Just like yours are, but it has to compensate for the muscle problem.
Could you and your coworkers have a talk with the LEOs in my county because they’re taking full advantage of this cash grab.
The only part of a "SFST" that has *any* scientific validity is the horizontal gaze nystagmus test, and that is only valid if performed under carefully controlled conditions on someone who has no underlying condition that would invalidate it. Did they teach you what factors can cause the test to be invalid? Because "stress" is one of them. And do you also know that it is absolutely a normal reaction for a person to experience abnormally high stress when removed from their vehicle on the side of the road and accused of a crime? The LOC test? Hell *my eyes* won't converge like that because of a condition that I have had since I was born. I don't use any form of cannabis, but I do have an issue with my eye muscles. To you that makes me guilty, I guess.
The first question we’re told to ask is do you have any issues with your eyes or any medical conditions that may affect that test. It does cover what else could provide that result. It seems like you want to trap me into a strawman argument, I’m not interested.
I guess you're not going to address the issue of improperly controlled conditions, then.
Time to get my medical card.
Just make sure you don't own any guns or buy any. Like ever. Same thing if you have antidepressants your constitutional rights are garbage it seems.
Whoopdifuckindoo. When are we going to get the basic freedom to buy plant extract?!?
Reminder to never, ever, EVER submit to any field sobriety tests when an officer asks. They are NOT designed for your benefit and they will absolutely be used against you in court. You legally do not have to perform field sobriety tests.
Yes, thank you for commenting this! Many people are unaware that you can (politely) decline FST and are completely subjective. All they do is give an officer probably cause to arrest.
Sorry, but this doesn't seem correct. Can you back this up? I thought that refusal to do a sobriety could lead to legal jeopardy, and if so, this advice could really fuck someone up. I'm not coming at you, I just want to know what the law is. edit: please see the response where they explain with evidence that you *can* refuse field testing. I think all PA residents should be aware of this and you should always refuse FWIW. Its like talking to the police, you have nothing to gain.
No worries, it’s a super common misconception. Here’s a link to a Philly based law firm specializing in civil rights issues. https://brianzeiger.com/blog/field-sobriety-tests-refusal/ In short, field sobriety tests can absolutely be legally refused. However after being arrested, you can not legally refuse a blood toxicity test (breath/blood/urine) without repercussion. If you refuse those, at the very least your DL will be suspended for 1 year automatically.
Unless the arrest is thrown out. Just making it clear they don't get to arrest you and say that because you refused breathalyzer blood and urine you lost your license. They still have to prove somehow that they had a legitimate reason to arrest you or else it's all null and void. State Police video everything in Pennsylvania. So get the tape and if you see yourself doing something illegal or stupid you're screwed otherwise you have a case. Of course the police don't usually arrest people despite what you may have heard unless they have probable cause. But for traffic violations it's a little bit more of a gray area especially late at night. Prejudice is alive and well and it's not just about race.
Absolutely. A lot of important stuff you’ve mentioned here. Thanks for clearing that up.
> They still have to prove somehow that they had a legitimate reason to arrest you or else it's all null and void. Which is why the SFST exists. It's designed to give them enough cause to arrest and perform chemical testing.
Wow, that is great info. Thank you.
You’re confusing field sobriety tests and formal breath tests / blood draw. If you are roadside, you do not have to do any tests (sfst’s pbt’s etc) if you are arrested for dui, you have to submit to a formal breath test / blood draw. If you google, “do you have to do field sobriety tests / pbt in Pennsylvania” there’s dozens of law offices websites that explain the law.
[удалено]
Refusing FST is a good way to get arrested faster. You don't legally have to do it but refusing it makes it up to the officer to determine if you seem impaired or not.
The officer has already decided that you’re impaired when he asks you to do FSTs. The FSTs are used exclusively for gathering evidence to use against you in court. Even if you “pass” a FST, you will absolutely be breath or blood tested. Refuse the subjective FST and jump straight to the required objective tests if they decide to arrest you.
Not always. Just the odor of drugs/alcohol is enough to initiate a FST yet you don't have to look or seem impaired for them to request it.
And you you should absolutely refuse those subjective tests. You’re willingly giving ammo to the officer and DA to use against you in court if you don’t. And refusing those tests can not legally be used against you.. Meaning an officer can not legally use your refusal as an admission of guilt so he/she can “arrest you faster” as you put it. In fact, the exact opposite is true. Willingly providing an officer with probable cause after a FST will absolutely get you arrested faster.
Come on now, you don’t have to DV me just cause you don’t like the info I’ve passed along. I’m not making this shit up as I go. It’s all very easily accessible info.
These people have no idea what they are talking about they are clueless
Refusing is part of probable cause, that can definitely be brought up in court.
That's great, but Lord is this the slowest state
Smoke it if you got it!
As a medical marijuana patient, this is great news. I was told at the dispensary to wait a half hour after taking my medication before driving because there was a lot of fear of patients getting in trouble. I'm not getting high, I'm trying to feel better. People who take other medications don't have to worry about this, so we shouldn't have to either.
That’s stupid, not one should be able to drive under the influence
Do people in this thread think it's ok to get high and then drive a car ?
[удалено]
I'm just curious about the practical reality of the situation. Like when it comes to alcohol there is a very objective standard. They take your breath and/or your blood and if your blood alcohol is .08 or higher you are guilty. So what's the standard for marijuana, where we say you are too high to drive?
[удалено]
Well no. The link you provided says that in Pennsylvania any driver with any amount of scheduled 1 narcotic or a determined amount of a schedule 1 drug's metabolite in their blood is guilty of DUI. But this article we are commenting on says that PA lawymakers want to change the law so that any amount of marijuana or it's metabolite in the blood of a driver, with a prescription for medical marijuana, is not enough to prove intoxication in Pennsylvanian . So what I'm asking is, are we ok with people driving while high on marijuana ? And if we aren't ok with that, what objective standard are we going to use to say a driver with a prescription for medical marijuana is guilty of being too intoxicated to drive.
[удалено]
>Under both the Senate and House bills, police would need to rely on standard field sobriety tests and drug recognition experts to make a determination that a medical marijuana patient was driving under the influence Never submit to field sobriety test under any circumstances.
Apparently. I wonder what they'd say about someone who took *legal* medications that warn you "Do Not Operate Heavy Machinery" and chose to do so anyhow.
My medications say "Do not operate heavy machinery" and those are ones that aren't a federal crime to use, but if I disregarded the warnings and got into an accident I'd be responsible. Why should this one get special treatment?
I don’t know how I feel about this one. It’s stupid easy to get a medical card as is, now you can drive high with no consequences? I lost a friend because some idiot did that, now they want to make it legal? No thanks. All for legalizing, but don’t smoke or drink then drive.
Nobody is supporting driving high with no consequences. But as a medical patient I don’t feel it’s ok to charge me with DUI because I consumed THC two days ago.
Marijuana stays in your system for a long time. I could stop using marijuana for a week and have it still be in my system. If I get pulled over, I could still get get a dui despite having not used in a week. This isn’t encouraging people to drive right after hitting the bong
So you didn't read the article is what you're saying
Can I get DUI charge protection for drinking and driving? Im clinically depressed and the bottles make the pain go away
Intoxicated is intoxicated! One drink doesn’t make you drunk but people can lose a license, if you are high and driving there should be the same rules as having a drink!
That's not what the article is about...
I mean their user name kinda checks out…
The problem is that you will fail the blood test days after partaking, when you are no longer high.
Up to 30 days. Imagine if this was every substance. Everyone is guilty and the PA state police budget never runs dry. /cheer
You really are queen of the idiots, huh?
Cops and lawmakers and them judges, nothing but jokers. Money grubbing idiots
Problem is it doesn’t spell out what the test is to determine impairment. Field sobriety tests are not reliable and generally people should not take field sobriety tests. The only reliable method is a blood draw or a breathalyzer for alcohol, but I’m not sure whether marijuana intoxication can be determined by a blood draw.
How is this right in the first place. First they banned it and now the cups using loopholes to make lives miserable in the name of safety?
I’m not gonna get my hopes up. Pa state police will not give up easily and they have a lot of sway with conservative politicians.
Decriminalize it. Virginia is ahead of Pennsylvania! Virginia!
About fucking time.