this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
477 points (99.6% liked)
weedtime
136 readers
725 users here now
time to smoke weed
A place to post weed related memes, music, etc. Keep it chill.
Rules:
- Don't be a buzzkill.
- Get high and post cool stuff!
There is a weedtime SimpleX chat group:
Lemmy messes up this URL so you have to manually copy and paste this or use the QR code:
https://simplex.chat/contact#%2F%3Fv=2-7&smp=smp%3A%2F%2Fhejn2gVIqNU6xjtGM3OwQeuk8ZEbDXVJXAlnSBJBWUA%3D%40smp16.simplex.im%2F1vgQw-edEWUfw7tWZIzwuD4COcUIZcag%23%2F%3Fv%3D1-3%26dh%3DMCowBQYDK2VuAyEA0kTibj1G6pMzBBacHpShs8IGRf3nO4TtoSYpU0-tric%253D%26srv%3Dp3ktngodzi6qrf7w64mmde3syuzrv57y55hxabqcq3l5p6oi7yzze6qd.onion&data=%7B%22groupLinkId%22%3A%22SHWyYC1aski22E26CU2rEg%3D%3D%22%7D
founded 3 weeks ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I got curious. Here's the actual story:
Marijuana is a short-cut that police have been abusing for years to justify illegal searches of cars. That is what they're really up in arms about.
Unlike many drugs, marijuana has a very pungent and distinctive odor to it. An officer can't justify a search by lying and claiming to smell cocaine. Where marijuana is illegal, police can search any vehicle or person they want simply by lying and saying they smell marijuana. Even if the search turns up nothing, that does not make the search invalid. The officer can simply claim they were mistaken. The barrier to justifying a search is rather low. It's impossible to prove the officer is lying. You can't prove they didn't smell marijuana. Marijuana is a tool that cops can use to flagrantly violate the 4th Amendment.
This is the real reason police oppose marijuana legalization.
Link to the article: https://www.abc57.com/news/michigan-police-claim-marijuana-legalization-has-made-work-difficult
That half page of text is literally the whole article, quoting a single police referencing traffic stops like they imply legalized weed is causing more dangerous driving and traffic stops where they can't seize property anymore without linking the possession of medicine to an effect on their driving. There's no study that shows a link between legalizing cannabis and increased vehicle accidents or fatalities. The article reads like it was written as cop public relations with an alcohol trade group lobbyist looking over their shoulder.
They ignore the position that drug abuse is a medical issue not a legal issue, and all drugs should be legalized for both the safety of the users and the community because it reduces violent crime and dangerous, unregulated black markets.
That's because it probably was just a press release that was made into an article, which is frustratingly common.
What's difficult about how to handle the situation of, "it's not illegal, do nothing"?
Maybe they're saying that they're unsure how to handle potential DUI? Honestly, this article is so poorly written that we can't tell whether they're being whiny or making a legitimate point.
In the UK it's illegal to have more than 2 micrograms of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol per liter of blood whilst driving. They test at the road side and then do a blood test if that's positive just like they would for alcohol.
I do think that driving while smoking (or being under the influence of weed) is kind of a difficult one. Is there a law similar to alcohol that says you can smoke a certain amount? Or is one joint already too much? I can imagine that this would lead to some difficulties.
https://marijuanaandthelaw.com/resources/marijuana-dui-laws/
They need a device like a blood glucose tester. Thc only stays in your blood for a few hours.
Yeah no shit, if it's legal for someone to have it why would the police be able to do anything?
Aside from their general usual disregard for the rule of law.
Can I start calling police whenever I'm in Michigan to report someone eating pineapple pizza? It's not illegal and it's not like I hate them for eating it, I just personally don't like the taste and therefore they shouldn't be allowed to eat it.
That's how it goes now, right?
Well Nixon launched the war on drugs because, genius that he was, he noticed that a lot of people who used it were either from ethnic minorities or were left wing in their politics so by passing anti-drug legislation and enforcing it selectively he could effectively criminalise his political enemies, which included black people because he was one of those 'my skin is my uniform' kind of guys.
I feel like I’m missing something here. How is this not just handled the same as alcohol? If underage then handle if not then move on to where a crime is actually happening.
You're not missing anything.. There's a cognitive disconnect between "weed is legal now" and their brains.
They do the thing they want, which is prioritize stopping minorities and anyone they feel is a target, and then if they smell weed.... Well* now they aren't allowed to legally brutalize someone. They have to actually find a real probable cause.
That's what the "work is much harder now" means. Whether they say it out loud or not.
Exactly. Cops love marijuana criminalization because it provides them a lazy shortcut around the 4th Amendment. A cop can always justify a search by claiming they smelled pot. And there's no way to later prove they were lying. You can't prove someone didn't smell something. If no pot is found, they can just say, "well I guess I was mistaken," and the search is still valid.
There is no actual story. Fuck the police.