Fed govt laws trump State laws. That is what the civil war was about. Just a reminder lol

Naaa

/me takes another toke

think the Chinese will let us borrow enough money for a civil war?

I bet the Chicoms are sitting back eating popcorn right about now haha

I don't think most people actually believe it's legal in Colorado. It's symbolic, just a way to show that people in at least Colorado believe the money spent fighting weed could better be used elsewhere. Add the money that you save not spent on fighting it, plus tax revenues you gain (once it actually is legal) and you are talking about a serious chunk of change on the state level.

can it be measured with a breath test like alcohol? how more would have to be spent on keeping people from driving under the influence? are the penalties going to be similar to alcohol? are people going to be able to smoke it when children are in the car?

ermmm...


this whole fed over state law talk is bogus. sure, maybe that can be loosely and circumstantially applied to certain growers and med shops - but the major point is, no consumer is getting busted for smoking a J in states that have decriminalized or legalized use.
the Feds have never and will never impose federal law on john and jane.

not to mention, the decriminalization and legalization of cannabis also marks a change in culture, and in turn, a change in public perception of the use of the substance. so to those who smoke, this is another huge plus - regardless of nonsense about it still being illegal under federal law.



AND something that seems to be overlooked:
this is precisely how the prohibition of alcohol ended. states and municipalities slowly decriminalized and lowered the scheduling of alcohol use and distribution, slowly but surely, and alas ...
within a few years of all of that, bam.
end of prohibition of alcohol.
in actuality, it will be quite the same for marijuana.


what's your problem with cannabis, red x?

There is no breathalyzer like there is for alcohol but yes law enforcement is trained to be able to determine if a person is driving while high. With that they can add the scientific tools such as swabs to be able to determine how much they have consumed in x amount of time.

Currently there is no data on how much will be spent keeping people from driving under the influence but it will be closely tied to what they do for alcohol since police can campaign against both without increasing things like checkpoints and manpower.

We will have to wait and see if the penalties are similar.

If someone is dumb enough to get stoned in a car with their children then I would hope to god there are stiff penalties. Child service type consequences I would hope.

When I had to go to Level 2 classes in Colorado there were alot of people in there that got busted for driving while high on weed. I forgot how the police proved they were high.

galleri - the police didn't prove it. it is subjective.

the police scare idiots into giving up their rights and allowing an officer to search the car without a warrant, and then they go even as far as to give up the stash.

no matter what. without a warrant. if you have something, don't let an officer in your car :p

if he begins to yell and demand you come out - they'll try anything, just explain that he'll have to speak to your lawyer.

They can do it several ways. And to your point Galleri, it's not like people didn't smoke and drive because it was illegal. Some people won't care one way or the other.

And yes Vic, Cops have not been able to put it together that if you have something to hide, you won't let them search. I think you may very well be the first person to ever think of that! To bad there is no statistic showing how many people the cops would have just let go for cooperating with them. Interesting to think about.

Have you taken a test to quantify your Intelligence Quotient?

i know plenty of old lawyers in boston, who have absolutely, precisely, decidedly nothing to hide and would never dare let a cop search their car.


this isn't a matter of what a cop might think or might do. it's a matter of unalienable rights.

never let a cop search your car without a warrant.

hehe. i let them search mine. he asked if there were any drugs in the car and i told him that i didn't have a clue. was a used car.

Erratic driving IS probable cause for a driving under the influence stop. With that probable cause they can and will haul you in for a blood test. Even if the stop is for drinking, they are most likely going to get the blood test for alcohol instead of relying on a breathalyzer in court. If your all over the road and the inside of your ride smells like snoop-dog's tour bus, your going to be donating blood.

For the record Red-X, I've never been pulled over by a Fed, so unless the FBI/DEA starts doing street patrols in Denver, I'd say the casual use of cannabis in CO is probably ok.

No, what is an intelligence quotient??

I like your perspective on rights... By the way it's not just your right to say no, it's also your right to be able to say yes. If you think the best way to go about your business is to piss off police officers by being that typical punk teen that knows somebody, who knows somebody, who knows somebody who is a lawyer then be my guest partner. If you actually knew any cops you would know that crap gets old. Everybody and there 3 year old son is a lawyer when an officer pulls them over.

I have been asked if they can search my vehicle, I tell them go ahead. Not once have they actually searched my vehicle. You say it is not a matter of what a cop might think or do and I say you and you old Boston lawyer friends are full of crap. Can you please come back here to the EE forums the day you are caught with drugs in your car and you start pissing off cops because you have a friend that is a lawyer?? I would love to hear the part where police say "K9 is on the way wisenheimer"

Actually, they don't need a warrant to search your vehicle, in certain conditions. Google "reasonable suspicion" (Terry search) and "probable cause" (property/personal). If an officer sees you doing something that is indicative of a crime having been committed, is being committed or about to be committed (i.e., your vehicle moving erratically with you at the wheel), the officer can and will take you out of the vehicle, put you in handcuffs (detain, not arrest), and (after smelling the alcohol on your breath/ganga smoke) he/she will search the vehicle until he/she finds the source of the problem (and then arrest you).

Asking you if you'd like to let them search your vehicle is an empty courtesy if the officer has probable cause.

Smoke it...Obama is so fricken dumbass..he don't even know Fed Laws...Really

Massachusetts State Supreme Court ruled that the 'smell' of marijuana is subjective, can not be proven, and is not reason for an officer to search a car.

So in Boston, you can smoke a joint. Be pulled over. The cop can know full well you just did it. And there's nothing he can do about it.

Further - any evidence seized during an unwarranted search will be thrown out in court as inadmissible.




And no need for me to come back to EE the day I am caught with 'drugs' in the car - I don't do drugs and I don't drive with cannabis. However, this wasn't always the case.

Two years ago I was indeed pulled over. He smelled the goods, screamed at me to get out of my car, and when I refused, threatened to drag me out of the car. I calmly explained that without a warrant he'd have to speak to my family's legal counsel. He huffed and puffed then his superior came and they both apologized to me for any rude words or demands, told me to watch the road, and be on my way.

Wasn't so much as given a warning.

snawdog, Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review...

Yes, he knows the federal law...

Isn't the law probable cause? If an officer deems there is 'probabable cause' to suspect you've got illegal drugs, he can search wihtout a warrant. At least, that's what I always thought, but that could be what the cops tell you to scare you.

Yes it is Klown but it completely depends on what the cop is trying to do. Some may just ask you if they can search the car or not if it's really late at night and they do not have another call. In which case a police officer can completely design the question to get people like Vic. If you don't allow them and they don't have probable cause then they are allowed to have you pulled over for a certain amount of time to wait for a K-9 unit.

In what I talked about when the officers asked me if they can search my car, all the cases were late at night. They made contact for what I can assume was to see if I had been drinking or under the influence. Because I wasn't and I cooperated with them, they didn't even bother to search my car even though I told them it was ok. And of course I am talking about actually being in my car, all cops will snoop around when they are at the window. This is why I believe the best approach to talking with officers is situational though. It is good to know your rights but playing the punk kid that doesn't want to cooperate all of the time can land you in trouble also.

Vic I do not have a issue with weed. I smoke it once and a while. I was just saying the federal govt can and will bust you for it. I can see DEA having a field day dec 6th I do believe when stores are able to sell it to people over the age of 21. I do think it should be legal to people of age, but all I was doing was stating a point. Once the federal govt removes the law on it then it will be safe to smoke it openly. Just because state law says its ok, its not. Fed law trumps state law. Like I said thats what the civil war was about. Back in the day States did not have to adhear to fed laws but they do now. If the govt wanted to they could waste our tax money and send DEA in to bust all the shops selling it. How many of them do you think would really risk that? It will eventually become legal but like I said the fed govt will eventually have to be the ones to make it legal.

" In which case a police officer can completely design the question to get people like Vic. If you don't allow them and they don't have probable cause then they are allowed to have you pulled over for a certain amount of time to wait for a K-9 unit. "


I LIVE IN BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS. not malaysia.

marijuana is decriminalized here. therefore a cop can not call in drug sniffing dogs to inspect for a tolerated substance.

further to this - even in a state where marijuana is NOT tolerated - if you are pulled over, and as you said, 'they don't have probable cause', then you are unequivocally wrong to say they can just have you wait while a k-9 unit comes.
OF COURSE THEY CAN'T! they don't have any cause. (even if they did, it would be iffy evidence without a warrant) and you don't want to stay.
that is being held against our will.



don't try to divert from the original matter. if a cop tries to trick you into searching your car, simply don't let him. it is your right.

red x, fortunately the 'government' in this case isn't a voodoo death squad, but rather a large bureaucracy consisting of a house, congress, senate, judiciary committee, etc.

so as i've stated, sure maybe once in a while the feds will raid a med shop, or two. but you will never. and i mean NEVER, see a federali hassling a civilian in compliance with his or her state law.
you are cool in my book.


ColoOutlaw - this matter is a lost cause on you, so let me try to enlighten you elsewhere:

in express, when you spy me, and i am a fully built CI, with good tech levels, full turns, and full turns stored ... that means i can retal you. i am playing turns heavily delayed, on purpose. this is precisely why i've owned you in land, and beaten you by about 50 places, each reset.

so get behind that wheel, light up a j, and be sure to only hit rainbows or n00bs who don't play turns delayed.

More specifically....

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, **shall not be violated**, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized"

It's not about pot.. it's about resisting the erosion of your constitutional protections. Never let anyone take these protections from you without resistance, even if you know that what they're looking for isn't there.

exactly.

and that is why todd is super.

If you get pulled over, you dont have to talk to the cop at all, or answer any of their questions, limiting resources to use their use of probable cause, though if you physically look or smell etc, then you cant help that and shouldnt be driving like an idiot anyway :P Just ask for there name and badge number over their questions to show you are functioning, and be on your way.

Ha well now it definitely is a lost cause to me. I would have never thought that in anyway could someone intertwine subjects such as a game to state/fed laws. Had I known that me goofing around in express would equate to my point not being valid, I certainly would have tried harder lol.

You have your say in the matter why can't I inform someone that it's not good to go get stoned, drive around and piss off police officers?? The mere fact that you are trying to get people to go commit potential felonies says enough. I mean you keep insisting that I said or don't believe that you can't tell an officer no. To a person with any experience in law they can tell you that often times it's actually beneficial to cooperate with the police. But go ahead, obviously I need more enlightenment. What's next? Team? Primary? FFA?

Information to me is an important piece for players to have before engaging any game. In this case we are talking the game in which officers interact with civilians. You play only one strategy VIC, which is why you often loose many different games of life. Of course you would never admit that but I don't need you to in order for me to know that. If players know how to play several strategies based on a wealth of information they will always be better off. Being the first aggressor in the game between officers and civilians usually doesn't end up benefiting the civilian player. You don't have to like what I say, heck you don't even have to understand it. But for those that asked serious questions I tried to answer in a serious manner. Or at least tried to give a different perspective to look thru.

marijuana > alcohol

... and SOL is ranked too high.

is it probable cause simply because the driver is being anti-social towards an police officer? they already did something to get pulled over? well, unless they were being profiled... just get on the cell phone and call in more police. bound to find one that isn't corrupt.

they usually had their guns out and were pointing them at me when they approached my car. think it's better to cooperate with them for a bit. at least until the gun is pointing in another direction.

KAZAKHSTAN GREATEST COUNTRY IN WHOLE WORLD

No, it is not being held against your will. If an officer has any inkling you have done something, you can be detained for no more than 24 hours as that is being investigated. Take that to your lawyer friends. I for one, can't wait until the day you piss off the wrong cop, and pay the hilarious prices that can be incurred by it. Maybe you'll get lucky, and they will put your car back together when done, but, they don't HAVE to do that either.

you're a moron if you think the police need a warrant to search your car after smelling weed

vic's a moron anyway

maybe there's some weird massachussetts exception, but no one else should heed his advice of telling the police to "fluff off or you'll call j henry featherbottom iii, your family's legal counsel"

I think you guys are generally missing the point of what Vic is trying to say.

Basically, you can smoke a spliff in the park in front of a cop now and you will never need to be afraid of getting arrested - the Federal government isn't going to waste time rounding up the smokers themselves.

As has been pointed out, it's the raids against the growers that need to be of concern - those can and will get busted by the Feds.

[In Colorado and Washington state]

I have nothing to hide and have told an office he did not have permission to search my car. He asked me if that's because I was hiding something illegal. I told him his question wasn't germane to the pullover and I resented his implication that I had committed a crime. And, I had really did have nothing to hide. I just am tired of the mistaken belief that my rights cease to exist when they're questioning me. Then again, I also decline Best Buy or similar type store's request to see my receipt because they conducted a legal transaction with me and have no rights to attempt to detain me following the transaction (except membership stores like Costco). It's the libertarian side of me in these scenarios and I have two family LEO members.

wat? u hai bro?

ITS IN CAPS GUYS

+1

In Canada, being high (or under the influence of other drugs) is not a crime in and of itself. If you are acting in a way that is a danger to yourself or others you can be detained "for your own protection" overnight I think, but it's not a criminal charge.

There are two federal chargers associated with "impaired driving" here. One is drunk driving, the other is "impaired driving". Impaired driving is basically driving erratically regardless of cause (ie, high, tired, drunk) and can be paired with other charges... These chargers are similar for other motor vehicles like boats and certain kinds of construction equipment including cherry pickers and cranes:P

OHHHHH MARTIAN SAVE OUR GRACIOUS QUEEN

I like Cake

First before the search there needs to be probable cause to do the search, since when does the possible misdemeanor allow for a property search?, and until the cop tells you what he is arresting you for you don't have to get out of the vehicle. But of course you are getting arrested for being under the influence anyway as your being an A.S for the speeding ticket he pulled you over for, though maybe not I'm an ass plenty of times to them when they pull me over for stupid fluff... just be sober doing it

I love these legal threads. :)

A misdemeanor is still a crime, and they can and will use it to search if they feel like it. And if you refuse to exit your car when a cop pulls you over, that can be obstruction. He DOES have the right to ask you to get out of your car.

wow look who's showing up around here again.

He might have a right to ask you to get out of your car but you also have a right to know what their reasoning is.

so, um, since the primary use for medical marijuana in Colorado is for the relief of pain, and the average patient age is 41. does that mean that they are just going to get the poor old people to smoke pot until they die instead of treating the underlying condition?

Oh how I really really really hate jailhouse lawyers. This thread is littered with garbage law advise and your all full of fluff!

* you're
* advice

:)

You still have your fourth amendment right to protection from illegal search and seizure.

If a cop asks you to get out of your car, comply, but close and lock your door when you do.

If they want to search you can force them to get a warrant, just tell them you've got all day to wait for them to roust a judge off the lawn at the country club to sign their warrant.

bonus!