I can't agree with Senator Steve King in his Feb. 26 Daily Sentinel commentary: "Legislation is needed for driving while under the influence of pot." Protection is needed for everyone involved, particularly patients legally using medical marijuana for treating "approved diseases." As a person afflicted with an "approved disease," I certainly can't agree with King's overzealous misleading statements.
King spins cases to reinforce his beliefs, not facts. Why not finance studies to solve, rather than create more problems with a 1% surcharge on MMJ sales? One penny per dollar! Afraid of facts? He cites cases and implies drivers are impaired, but HIS bill doesn't support HIS presumptions. Example: Two drivers with 4 nanograms, one with five, involved in vehicular homicide or assault. King mentions one was found innocent of similar charges in 2009, apparently to prove how laws don't work, when under HIS new bill, two of HIS three examples wouldn't be guilty of DUI. He contradicts himself, 5 nanograms and above is under the influence in the bill King's pushing now. That lack of facts, knowledge, and consistency shows precisely why we need an honest scientific study to provide facts and evidence so a fair law can be written.
You don't have to be DUI to commit vehicular homicide or assault and King's examples prove only that the drivers had residual THC and broke that law. It doesn't prove any drivers were impaired, only they had certain THC levels in their systems. THC stays in the system after impairment but two drivers, in King's example, wouldn't be charged with DUI. The only cases he found are from 2006, 2009 and 2010. Doesn't seem as though there is such a pressing issue to hurry and pass laws based on suppositions and no facts.