you can thank the nevada legislature for making THC totally legal to use when driving, why they want us all to die who knows, but that is what they keep doing
From the Legislative Counsel’s digest:
“Existing law prohibits a person from driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway . . . if the person: (1) is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance; (2) has specified amounts of certain prohibited substances in his or her blood or urine; or (3) has specified amounts of marijuana or marijuana
metabolite in his or her blood. (NRS 484C.110, 488.410) For the purposes of any such offense punishable as a misdemeanor, sections 1.7 and 6 of this bill remove the prohibition against such a person having specified amounts of marijuana or
marijuana metabolite in his or her blood, thereby providing that a person who uses marijuana is subject to the general prohibition against driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway . . . if the person is under the influence of a controlled substance.”
What am I missing? The law still prohibits operating a vehicle under the influence of a controlled substance.
You can still fail a field sobriety test. Removing the per se impairment is necessary with legal weed where the marijuana metabolite is detectible for a month. It’s the same as being on any substance that doesn’t have a per se limit (ambien, cold medicine, etc.) I don’t particularly like smelling weed from the car next to me when driving, but I pay attention to the cars and it is not like alcohol. Still should be illegal to operate while impaired but proving a threshold impairment level with weed is not possible right now. Don’t be distracted, don’t drive while impaired, drive slow in school zones, quit passing on the right when there is no passing lane, raise the insurance minimums, etc.
I agree that there are major issues with detecting intoxication.
Seems like if a cop sees you smoking weed there should at least be a traffic violation.
You can smoke weed but not use a phone?
I get that can be used as a pretense to profile, or to over-charge. But if the penalty is not a DUI it can still have a deterrent effect without being a life-altering event.
I know, from a friend and/or family member, that you cops do, at least twice, ticket people for smoking weed in a car (not sure the PC is there for a vape pen though – what a world you guys)
Most don’t or won’t because of our JPD bench just dismissing the citations and our pro-stoner politicians who seem to be channeling the immortal Sgt. Stedenko when he said “The only way to catch a doper is when you yourself become a smoker” and that sweet sweet stoner vote.
Peace out!!!
you can thank the nevada legislature for making THC totally legal to use when driving, why they want us all to die who knows, but that is what they keep doing
Interesting. I did not know it was legal to use THC while driving. Can you point me to that law?
https://legiscan.com/NV/drafts/AB400/2021
From the Legislative Counsel’s digest:
“Existing law prohibits a person from driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway . . . if the person: (1) is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance; (2) has specified amounts of certain prohibited substances in his or her blood or urine; or (3) has specified amounts of marijuana or marijuana
metabolite in his or her blood. (NRS 484C.110, 488.410) For the purposes of any such offense punishable as a misdemeanor, sections 1.7 and 6 of this bill remove the prohibition against such a person having specified amounts of marijuana or
marijuana metabolite in his or her blood, thereby providing that a person who uses marijuana is subject to the general prohibition against driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle on a highway . . . if the person is under the influence of a controlled substance.”
What am I missing? The law still prohibits operating a vehicle under the influence of a controlled substance.
Chamillionaire was right – they tryna catch us ridin dirty
Come on man! Like there ain’t nobody using their wheels to ride high.
-Cheech Marin
You can still fail a field sobriety test. Removing the per se impairment is necessary with legal weed where the marijuana metabolite is detectible for a month. It’s the same as being on any substance that doesn’t have a per se limit (ambien, cold medicine, etc.) I don’t particularly like smelling weed from the car next to me when driving, but I pay attention to the cars and it is not like alcohol. Still should be illegal to operate while impaired but proving a threshold impairment level with weed is not possible right now. Don’t be distracted, don’t drive while impaired, drive slow in school zones, quit passing on the right when there is no passing lane, raise the insurance minimums, etc.
I agree that there are major issues with detecting intoxication.
Seems like if a cop sees you smoking weed there should at least be a traffic violation.
You can smoke weed but not use a phone?
I get that can be used as a pretense to profile, or to over-charge. But if the penalty is not a DUI it can still have a deterrent effect without being a life-altering event.
I know, from a friend and/or family member, that you cops do, at least twice, ticket people for smoking weed in a car (not sure the PC is there for a vape pen though – what a world you guys)
(omit “you” I obviously changed wording and didn’t edit)
Most don’t or won’t because of our JPD bench just dismissing the citations and our pro-stoner politicians who seem to be channeling the immortal Sgt. Stedenko when he said “The only way to catch a doper is when you yourself become a smoker” and that sweet sweet stoner vote.
Peace out!!!
Marijuana + legal = tax revenue
dead blog
Nye County Judges appear at the Republican Party debates, canons be damned.
https://pvtimes.com/news/general-election-candidates-meet-at-nye-county-republican-party-debates-and-town-hall-189444/
The rules don’t matter anymore. Haven’t since about 2016.
Under Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 4.1(C)(1), a judge or judicial candidate who is subject to public election may, at any time:
“attend political gatherings” and attend or purchase tickets for events sponsored by a political organization or candidate for public office.”
This rule may not apply. Are the above “candidates” etc.?
Thank you. Really wish people would read. And yes, they are candidates.
Which canon prohibits publicly associating with someone under federal indictment for fraud?
The Claiborne/Binion doctrine. duh.