Neither measuring standard is "way off" because the 150 ng/ml is for an assay of urine while the 5 ng/ml is active ∆9-THC in the blood.
That's utter hogwash Jeff. I've never understood why some people think it's OK to be dishonest when discussing this issue.
It's laughably absurd to assert that the "gateway" "theory" or the old wives tales about cannabis caused amotivational syndrome has been proven.
Here's the web address of California Pediatrician magazine:
On page 11 Dr. Seth Ammerman has an article titled Medical Marijuana: Update for the Pediatrician in which he examines and documents that there hasn't been a single State with a medicinal cannabis patient protection law that has suffered a statistically significant increase in the rate of youth use of cannabis.
In 2011 when the clowns in the Montana Legislature were so hell bent on repealing the State's medicinal cannabis patient protection law, the prohibitionist parasites and their sycophant used that same bogus assertion that youth use had skyrocketed. They even trotted out a teenage trollop who claimed that she had sold her body to get money to get cannabis. About a month after the Legislature sentenced sick people to suffer more than needed the Montana Youth Risk Survey was published and that proved that Montana Youth Use FELL during the time that the law implemented by referendum on Election Day 2004.
I guess that you can't be a Christian since you've shown utter disregard for the 9th Commandment. If you're Catholic you need to get to Confession pronto because breaking a commandment is a mortal sin.
Absolutely nothing but hysterical rhetoric from Mr. Sarich. The fact of the matter is that he's trying to protect his personal fiefdom and understands that re-legalization will take a large piece of his income.
All patients need do to see that the wailing and gnashing of teeth about the per se limit is to ask themselves when the last time that they were detained for suspicion of impaired driving. I've been driving for 34 1/2 years and have never had a cop interested in having me tested. I suspect most of us have similar histories.
Another thing to consider is even in the unlikely event that you're pulled over and tested, just how effective would a defense be today if your test came back in excess of the 5 ng/ml limit? There would be a cop and a prosecutor spewing hysterical rhetoric and there certainly doesn't seem there's much chance that your defense would be successful. But how about if we talk about those who test out less than 5 ng/ml? I'd think their affirmative defense would be enhanced.
Don't let Mr. Sarich fool you. If you don't drive around smoking pot the odds of getting pulled and tested are minuscule. You should know this simply from your own personal experience. In that very unlikely event the affirmative defense Mr. Sarich ballyhoos is unlikely to be of any value. What's really important to Mr. Sarich is his own pocketbook, not the well being of the patients.
Missoula News/Independent Publishing |
Powered by Foundation