But in this case, the guy passed the sobriety test, was driving well, didn’t have marijuana on him, only admitted to smoking at a party beforehand, and Idaho declared that to mean he was DUII. Since DUII requires alcohol or a narcotic, and Idaho (correctly, I might add) doesn’t consider marijuana a narcotic, there’s no DUII.

If the AP article is true, it’s amazing, considering Idaho’s dismal record with medical marijuana initiatives.

I’ve only ever felt “impaired” by the strongest weed, and then only for about an hour. Some national standards like we have for alcohol would be nice, if we could get approval to study it. For example, eating versus smoking cannabis. Even vaporization has slightly different physical effects than smoking.

We need massive studies here in the U.S., though they’ve already been done elsewhere, to dispel the myths of “cannabis impaired driver dangers”.

Some studies in “Free” countries have shown that marijuana users are far safer drivers than alcohol consumers, even when “high” or “stoned” as opposed to “drunk” or “under the influence” of alcohol. Cannabis makes you more careful, and perception of dangers is somewhat enhanced.

Of course, I understand the caveat against driving impaired, but we need to nail down: What is impaired? I drive better high, since my pain is compartmentalized. Pain is a much greater impairment/distraction while driving than euphoric clear thinking and increased care-taking with regard to traffic situations.