Police across the country continue to pull drivers over for one reason, then choose to search their vehicle for an entirely different reason—if it smells like pot. But it isn’t holding up in court as justification for probable cause. A Minnesota Supreme Court ruling, one of several ruling affirming the decision, suggests police in the state will be barred from citing cannabis odor alone as reason to search a vehicle. 

The 5-2 decision in State v. Torgerson rules that cannabis odor is insufficient to constitute probable cause for police officers to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle. The 26-page opinion was written by Justice Anne McKeig and explained the reasons why odor cannot constitute probable cause.

In Litchfield, Minnesota in July, 2021, Adam Lloyd Torgerson was driving a car that had a light bar on its grill with more lights than are permitted under state law. A cop saw his car and determined that Torgerson might have an equipment violation. Police say the vehicle’s grill had more auxiliary driving lights than are permitted under Minnesota law under an obscure rule.

The officer pulled him over and said he smelled pot, asking Torgerson if there was any reason for the odor. Torgerson said there was not. A second officer arrived and was alerted about the smell. He agreed.

A subsequent search found meth and drug paraphernalia, and Torgerson was arrested and charged. While Torgerson happened to be in possession of meth and a pipe. The first officer searched the vehicle and found a film canister, three pipes, and a small plastic bag in the center console. The plastic bag contained a white powder and the film canister contained meth, which was confirmed in a field test. But the officers failed to gather enough probable cause in order to legally search the vehicle, a court ruled. 

Torgerson was with his wife and a child, so he was charged with possession of a meth pipe in the presence of a minor and fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance after the unwarranted search of Torgerson’s vehicle. High Times covered the case in September 2023.

Minnesota Supreme Court Ruling

McKeig ruled that police lacked sufficient probable cause.

“The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the court of appeals affirming the judgment of the district court granting Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence found during a search of his vehicle, holding that the odor of marijuana emanating from a vehicle, alone, is insufficient to create the requisite probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement,” McKeig’s opinion summary reads.

“After a traffic stop and subsequent search of his vehicle Defendant was convicted of possession of methamphetamine paraphernalia in the presence of a minor and fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance,” the opinion continues. “Defendant moved to suppress the evidence, arguing that the odor of marijuana, alone, is insufficient to create the requisite probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. The district court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint. The court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that evidence of medium-strength odor of marijuana, on its own, is insufficient to establish a fair probability that the search would yield evidence of criminally-illegal conduct or drug-related contraband.”

In an earlier ruling filed in the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals on Sept. 13, 2023, the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed that cannabis odor does not constitute probable cause to search a vehicle.

MinnPost reports that  authorities are questioning whether odor can be used by police as justification to search vehicles and detain drivers.

Tom Gallagher is a cannabis advocate and a practicing defense attorney for 35 years. “It’s a recognition of a big change in marijuana law,” Gallagher told MinnPost. “In law school they talk about line-drawing, where do you draw the line type of problem? Now we know. We’ve drawn the line, finally.”

Similar cases impacted people in other states. An Illinois judge, for instance, ruled in 2021 that the odor of cannabis is not sufficient grounds for police to search a vehicle without a warrant during a traffic stop.

Daniel J. Dalton, Associate Judge of the 14th Judicial Circuit, issued a ruling in response to a motion to suppress evidence in the case of Vincent Molina, a medical cannabis patient arrested for cannabis possession last year.

In that case, Molina was arrested despite the decriminalization of small amounts of cannabis in Illinois in 2019 with the passage of the Illinois Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act. 

Torgenson’s case highlights the legal grounds in which police can search a vehicle simply based on if it smells like pot. The rulings represent the rights of citizens when they are pulled over by police, even if there are hard drugs involved.

The post Odor Alone No Grounds for Warrantless Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Rules first appeared on High Times.

The post Odor Alone No Grounds for Warrantless Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Rules appeared first on Paradise Found.

An Australian trial that will investigate the impact of medical cannabis on driving ability won’t be finished until late 2025. The Guardian reports that Australian cannabis advocates are disappointed that the Victorian government appears to be delaying the study despite the issue being called a priority.

In February 2023, then-state premier Daniel Andrews pushed to determine how cannabis impacts driving ability and said that the issue is a priority for the Victornian government. He estimated as many as 200,000 medicinal cannabis patients in Victoria are essentially restricted from driving. 

That’s because THC can be detected in the body for weeks, if not months after consumption, meaning medicinal cannabis patients can essentially never drive without worry of driving while what authorities consider to be impaired.

Victorian premier Jacinta Allan announced May 14 that Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia has been selected to run the trial. The $4.9 million dollar trial ($3.26 million USD), to be completed over 18 months , will review about 70 medicinal cannabis patients’ ability to manage distractions and assess their performance behind the wheel, including steering, braking, and speed control on a dedicated track.

“Just as we were the first state in the nation to introduce medicinal cannabis to support people with their medical illnesses, we are now moving to have this world-first trial to support and examine how it affects people as they’re out on this closed circuit driving track,” Allan said.

Victoria became the first Australian state to legalize medical cannabis in 2016, but it remains illegal for individuals to drive with any trace of THC in their bloodstream.

Legalise Cannabis MPs David Ettershank and Rachel Payne said they were disappointed in the timeline. “Jacinta Allan may be on a driving track today but I know she is intentionally ‘stalling’ on this decision,” Payne said. “In 2023, Dan Andrews promised an answer ‘in coming months’ followed by a guarantee to have it fixed by 2024. Now, with a new premier, it’s mid-2026 at best.” Ettershank suggested was “discriminating” against medicinal cannabis patients and the motives were political.

What could change? Already in Tasmania, leaders established a medical defense if drivers are caught behind the wheel with THC in their system, as it can linger there for weeks or months. But roads minister, Melissa Horne said Tasmania had far fewer medicinal cannabis patients than Victoria. “At the heart of it, it is a basic human rights issue where we’ve got people out there who are taking a legally prescribed substance who cannot drive at the moment,” she said.

While cannabis breathalyzers have emerged, made by several companies, there is currently very few, if any places in the world that has developed standardized cannabis impairment testing; All that exists are tests that can detect THC in the bloodstream, but that has little to do with current impairment. That could change quickly, however.

How Long Cannabis Impacts Driving Performance

Researchers in Australia have been determining the window that cannabis can impair driving performance. In one case, Thomas R Arkell, Danielle McCartney , Iain S McGregor, who are associated with The Lambert Initiative at the University of Sydney, studied the impact of cannabis on driving ability.

They determined that cannabis can impair driving ability in the hours immediately after smoking, but the impairment ends well before THC metabolites are flushed from the bloodstream.

“Patients using THC-containing products should avoid driving and other safety-sensitive tasks (e.g. operating machinery), particularly during initiation of treatment and in the hours immediately following each dose,” the authors wrote. “Patients may test positive for THC even if they do not feel impaired, and medical cannabis use does not currently exempt patients from mobile (roadside) drug testing and associated legal sanctions.”

Hound Labs, based in Oakland, California, said in 2021 that market release is imminent for its Hound Marijuana Breathalyzer, which can detect the presence of THC molecules in the breath.

“The first commercial units of the Hound Marijuana Breathalyzer will be in the hands of customers this spring,” Dr. Mike Lynn, an emergency room physician who is CEO and co-founder of Hound Labs, told High Times. “Production will ramp up throughout the rest of 2021.”

The introduction of the Hound Breathalyzer could really shake things up for law enforcement, motorists, employees, employers, and medical cannabis patients. It’s different from other drug tests because Hound Labs reps say it can test whether the person is currently high, as measured by the presence of THC molecules in the breath. The developers of the Hound believe that THC molecules linger in the breath for up to four hours after smoking. 

In the U.S., 12 states—Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah and Wisconsin—have zero-tolerance laws for certain drugs including THC.

The post Study To Determine Impact of Cannabis on Driving Ability Delayed first appeared on High Times.

The post Study To Determine Impact of Cannabis on Driving Ability Delayed appeared first on Paradise Found.

Newly published research indicates that recreational cannabis legalization in Washington did not result in a spike in impaired driving among younger demographics.

The research, published last month in the journal Prevention Science, was based on data collected in the five years following legalization.

“Motor vehicle crashes are a leading cause of death for young adults (YA) in the USA, and driving under the influence of alcohol (DUIA), cannabis (DUIC), and simultaneous use of both substances (DUIAC) are prominent risk factors,” the authors explained in the study’s abstract. 

“Trends in YA impaired driving behaviors after opening of cannabis retail stores have been understudied. We examined YA trends in DUIA, DUIC, and DUIAC from immediately prior through 5 years following the opening of cannabis retail outlets in Washington State (2014–2019).”

They noted that differences “in trends were assessed across age, sex, and urbanicity,” and that “weighted logistic regressions assessed yearly change in prevalence of DUIA, DUIC, and DUIAC from 2014 to 2019, using annual statewide data from the Washington Young Adult Health Survey (n = 12,963; ages 18–25).” 

“Moderation of trends by age, sex, and urbanicity was assessed. Prevalence of DUIA decreased overall (AOR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.90, 0.97) and among drinkers (AOR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.91, 0.99) but remained at concerning levels in 2019 (10% overall; 16% among drinkers),” they said.

Ultimately, the researchers found that driving under the influence of cannabis “did not change significantly…but decreased among those who used cannabis.” 

Driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis simultaneously “decreased but not significantly,” according to the researchers, who said that the “prevalence of [young adult] DUI remained concerning.”

As NORML pointed out, the findings have echoes of a 2022 study that found that the “risk of self-reported [driving under the influence of cannabis] was lower in recreational and medical cannabis states compared to states without legal cannabis.”

The authors of that study, published in Preventive Medicine Reports, said they were motivated to research the matter because the “relationship between cannabis legalization and traffic safety remains unclear.”

“Physiological measures of cannabis impairment remain imperfect. This analysis used self-report data to examine the relationship between cannabis legalization and driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC),” they said.

Those researchers said they used “a cross-sectional national sample (2016–2017) of 1,249 past–30-day cannabis users,” and then “regressed self-reported DUIC (driving within three hours of ‘getting high’) on cannabis legalization (recreational and medical (recreational), medical only (medical), or no legal cannabis), adjusting for demographics, days of use (past 30 days), days of use, legal status, calibration weights, and geographic clustering.”

“The risk of DUIC in recreational (risk ratio [RR] = 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI):0.23–0.72) and medical (RR = 0.39, 95% CI:0.20–0.79) states was lower than in states without legal cannabis, with one exception. Among frequent cannabis users (≥20 days per month), there was a significantly lower risk of DUIC for those living in recreational states (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.49–0.99), but not for those living in medical states (RR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.60–1.24), compared to users living in states without legal cannabis,” the authors explained.

They said that while “all states should educate its citizens about the potential dangers of using cannabis and driving, this analysis suggests that states without legal cannabis are particularly in need of DUIC prevention efforts.” 

“States should consider mass media campaigns as a method of reaching all cannabis users, including more frequent users, with information about the dangers of DUIC. Medical states may consider targeting frequent users by disseminating information about DUIC through medical dispensaries. Further research is warranted, particularly given the constantly evolving nature of cannabis legalization and the noted limitations of this analysis,” the authors said, as quoted by NORML.

The findings are encouraging because, generally, toking and driving should be avoided.

A study released earlier this year using cannabis could be particularly detrimental to older drivers.

“Epidemiological studies have established that cannabis increases the risk of a motor vehicle collision,” the study’s authors wrote. “Laboratory studies have demonstrated that this impairment results in increased weaving, slowed reaction time, and compensatory changes in speed and following distance.”

“Older adults may be particularly affected by cannabis, given age-related changes in cognition, metabolic changes that may prolong or enhance the effects of cannabis, and the concomitant use of medications,” they added. “Conversely, older users of cannabis may have been using cannabis for many years and cannabis may have a diminished impact in this population due to development of tolerance.”

The study was conducted by researchers in Canada, where marijuana is legal for adults.

The post No Increase in DUI Among Young Adults After Pot Legalization in Washington first appeared on High Times.

The post No Increase in DUI Among Young Adults After Pot Legalization in Washington appeared first on Paradise Found.

A reel posted April 10 on Instagram went viral, warning Tesla drivers that security camera video footage—even when the car is off—can be used against you in the court of law as proof of wrongdoing, with or without a subpoena. 

The reel was posted by attorney Nicky Blu from The Ramcharitar Law Firm, who has successfully represented over 500 clients across different areas of law including criminal law, family law, immigration law, and personal injury cases.

Blu’s video claims that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) is working with Tesla, based on a specific case he’s involved with, and details such as names and dates can’t be disclosed. “Tesla is working in cooperation with NYPD, giving them full recordings from all cameras of alleged crimes.” The purpose of the video is to warn Tesla drivers about the privacy risks that are associated with the self-driving electric vehicle.

“Tesla is spying on you and getting you arrested…” the IG reel reads. “And guess who they are allowing to obtain all footage from all of their cars for any suspicion of a crime […] ?!? .. NYPD and all other law enforcement. All this without even a subpoena!!”

“Tesla camera’s record even when the car is off” This is a problem folks! This means any crime committed around a Tesla, the video footage will be given by Tesla to be used against you as proof of a crime!”

Generally speaking, a judicial order or subpoena would be required to turn over data in criminal cases, and companies like Apple and Google put up a hard fight, prioritizing user privacy. But this attorney says Tesla is not putting up a fight with law enforcement and the company is fully compliant, handing over data freely.

Others Warn About Tesla Camera Privacy Concerns

In February 2023, The Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA) carried out an investigation over concerns that Tesla vehicles could be violating privacy laws with its security camera feature. “Many Teslas parked on the street were often filming everyone who came near the vehicle,” the DPA wrote, but Tesla updated its onboard camera capabilities and the DPA didn’t end up fining the electric car maker.

A main focus of privacy concerns surround Tesla’s own “Sentry Mode” feature—a perk that allows drivers to view cam footage from their cars even when they’re not in use. “To protect your privacy, Sentry Mode recordings are not transmitted to us. For 2018 and newer model year vehicles (with software version 2020.48.5 or newer), recordings are saved to onboard memory and can be viewed directly from the vehicle’s touchscreen,” Tesla states. “Sentry Mode can also operate in a similar manner without a USB drive installed, with the ability to send an alert to your phone if a threat is detected—however, recordings of the event will not be available.”

In April 2023, Reuters reported that between 2019 and 2022, groups of Tesla employees privately shared via an internal messaging system, sometimes highly invasive videos and images recorded by customers’ car cameras.

“We could see inside people’s garages and their private properties,” a former employee told Reuters. “Let’s say that a Tesla customer had something in their garage that was distinctive, you know, people would post those kinds of things.”

Should You Be Worried About Privacy from Tesla Cams?

Merely connecting the car to a cell tower provides loads of location history via cell tower pings which are routinely subpoenaed from the wireless carrier in any criminal investigation. And while Tesla does provide a provision to opt out of such data collections, drivers will also lose functionality, the company notes.

“Tesla vehicles make use of a camera suite that provides advanced features such as Autopilot, Smart Summon, and Autopark,” Tesla’s data and privacy policy reads. “This camera functionality has been designed from the ground up to protect your privacy. Tesla does not continuously collect personally identifiable camera recordings and in fact, most processing takes place without ever leaving the vehicle. In order for camera recordings to be shared with Tesla, your consent is required and can be controlled through the vehicle’s touchscreen at any time (Software > Data Sharing). Even if you choose to opt-in, camera recordings remain anonymous and are not linked to you or your car, unless we receive the recording as a result of a safety event (such as a vehicle collision or airbag deployment). In such an event, the applicable recordings may be provided as part of your data request. You may also refer to the Owner’s Manual for your vehicle for more information on how you can record or retrieve recordings from your car.’

Last year in April 2023, The NYPD launched a test flight of nearly 200 electric cars in an effort to reduce the city’s carbon footprint. The department hopes to go electric in all of its 30,000 vehicles by 2035.

If you live in New York City, you’re probably already being watched on the street. The NYPD has the ability to track people in Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx by running images from 15,280 surveillance cameras into invasive and discriminatory facial recognition software, Amnesty International claims in their report.

The post Is Your Tesla Self-Driving Car Narcing You Out? appeared first on High Times.

The post Is Your Tesla Self-Driving Car Narcing You Out? appeared first on Paradise Found.

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) recently released a report sharing new data on U.S. truck drivers. The report consists of a year-end compilation of data from 2023, as well as data specifically from December 2023, published by the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse. This includes other data regarding “queries conducted, violations reported, and drivers in the return-to-duty (RTD) process.”

The report shows that there has been an increased number of truck drivers with positive drug tests in 2023, as well as a high number of drivers who refused to be screened. The number of registered truck drivers has dropped every year since 2020, landing at the current number of 858,000 in 2023. Trucker drug violations rose between 2022 and 2023, with 67,775 recorded in 2022, followed by 68,229 in 2023. However, the number of trucker drug tests decreased, with 57,597 in 2022 and 54,464 in 2023. 

The FMCSA wrote that there were fewer trucker screenings overall because they refused to be tested. “We’ve observed that even though the number of positive drug tests dropped for the first time in relation to the previous calendar year, the number of overall drug violations reported to the Clearinghouse continued to increase.”

“The overall rise in drug violations in 2023, even though there are fewer positive tests, is attributed to a nearly 40% increase in reported drug test refusals—9,214 in 2022 versus 12,804 in 2023,” the report stated. “Drug test refusals include employer reported refusals like failing to show up for a random test, or leaving a test collection facility after a test has begun but before it’s complete.”

A more complete breakdown shows that in 2020, there were 44,243 positive drug tests (with 7,092 refusals). This was followed by 48,407 positive drug tests in 2021 (with 7,941 refusals), 57,597 positive drug tests in 2022 (with 9,214 refusals), and finally 54,464 positive drug tests in 2023 (with 12,804 refusals).

Alcohol drug tests are also conducted for truck drivers, although the rate of positive alcohol tests pales in comparison to positive drug tests. In 2020, 697 truck drivers tested positive for alcohol (with 257 refusals), followed by 859 positive tests in 2021 (with 305 refusals), 904 positive alcohol tests in 2022 (with 330 refusals), and finally 1,036 positive alcohol tests in 2023 (with 315 refusals).

Overall, drug tests had decreased over time for all major substances. This includes cannabis (40,916 positive tests in 2022 versus 37,657 in 2023), cocaine (10,953 in 2022 versus 10,326 in 2023), methamphetamine (5,569 in 2022 versus 4,515 in 2023), and amphetamine (5,349 in 2022 versus 4,222 in 2023).

The news outlet Transport Topics discussed the newest data from the report. The article points out that the one thing that hasn’t changed is that drivers who previously tested positive for one of the aforementioned drugs, a majority of them did not return to driving. “Of the 226,598 CDL/CLP [commercial driver’s license/commercial learner’s permit] drivers who tested positive for at least one drug since the Clearinghouse opened in January 2020, 158,330 remain in ‘prohibited driving status,’” Transport Topics wrote. “A total of 68,268 drivers with at least one violation are currently in ‘not-prohibited status,’ and 15,699 drivers have successfully completed follow-up testing.”

American Trucking Associations (ATA) senior vice president of regulatory affairs and safety policy, Dan Horvath, explained that the Clearinghouse system is the leading cause of a decrease in positive drug tests for truckers. “While there could be a few unknown variables that are impacting the decline, I’m cautiously optimistic that the decline in the number of positives is simply because the Clearinghouse is working,” Horvath told Transport Topics. “We are now more than four years into having an active Clearinghouse system, and I’m hopeful that the message is out there that illegal drug use will be detected.”

Horvath also added that this data shows the increase in education for truckers, and knowledge about the consequences of receiving a positive drug test. “Motor carriers have increased the education they provide to drivers to ensure they are aware of the consequences of testing positive. Now, we must ensure that oral fluid testing labs are approved so that carriers can begin using that testing method if they choose,” Horvath said. “ATA has also reiterated the need to correct and finalize the long-overdue hair testing guidelines that have been in Office of Management and Budget review for over a year now.”

American Transportation Research Institute senior vice president, Dan Murray, also provided a comment about the drug test changes seen in 2023 data. “2023 was a really bad year for the trucking industry.” We were technically in a recession,” said Murray. “So I think the number of people entering the industry was considerably smaller than the previous years.”

Murray believes that truckers are leaving the industry before they get drug tested, knowing what will happen. “So I think some people are proactively thinking ‘Well, before I get caught, I’m outta here,’” Murray explained. Additionally, he thinks that another portion of drivers don’t want to risk their jobs. “They say, ‘It’s not worth it to push my luck. If I use, I’m going to get tested. If I get tested I’m going to lose my job. So it’s time to clean up my act.’”

The post New Report Shows Data on Positive Truck Driver Drug Tests appeared first on High Times.

The post New Report Shows Data on Positive Truck Driver Drug Tests appeared first on Paradise Found.

An Uber driver in Florida faces felony drug charges after he allegedly tried to sell psilocybin mushrooms and LSD to his passengers. A series of transactions climbed up to 200 hits of LSD on gel tabs and a quarter-pound of shrooms in one transaction.

If you’re going to offer shrooms and LSD to Uber passengers, you’d better make sure your passengers aren’t narcotics cops—this Uber driver learned that the hard way. 

Some of his “passengers” ended up being narcotics investigators visiting Miramar Beach, Florida for the Florida Narcotics Officers’ Association Annual Conference last August in 2023, according to authorities. How’s that for bad luck? According to the Walton County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO), the investigators who rode the Uber are from the Citrus County Sheriff’s Office (CCSO).

John Alcott, 52, of Crestview, Florida, arrived to pick up his riders, and when the CCSO investigators entered the vehicle, they said it reeked of pot smoke. Alcott whipped open his glove box to show them all the shrooms he had in his inventory. (Uber drivers are not employees of Uber; they are independent contractors as Uber’s key to success.)

The off-duty investigators decided to play along, posing as psychedelic customers.

WCSO reports that Alcott sold the CCSO investigators 134 grams of psilocybin mushrooms, 10 psilocybin mushroom microdose capsules, and 12 doses of LSD on blue gel tabs for $1,000. During the purchase, Alcott told detectives he would be willing to run a mail-order supply as well. WCSO also posted Alcott’s mugshot and several photos of the LSD and psilocybin mushrooms.

They’ve been processing the investigation ever since, and upped the ante with larger quantities to pin down the Uber driver for bigger charges. The sting operation eventually involved WCSO Narcotics Investigators, the Crestview Police Department, and the Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Officers, who set up surveillance on Alcott’s residence in Crestview, Florida.

On Feb. 21, WCSO narcotics investigators sent the undercover CCSO detective, who was a passenger-turned-drug buyer, to reach out to Alcott to tell him they were in the area and wanted to buy over a quarter-pound of shrooms and 200 doses of blue gel tab LSD hits in exchange for $5,000.

“While these types of cases aren’t the primary focus of our VICE/Narcotics investigations, this one kind of came to us,” said Sheriff Michael Adkinson. “He obviously makes it a habit to sell while driving an Uber and that’s pretty alarming considering how teenagers and young adults frequently use driving services in the area.”

The investigators are taking it seriously and Alcott faces numerous felony charges. Alcott was arrested and booked into the Walton County Jail on two counts of selling a hallucinogen, trafficking in LSD, possession of a hallucinogen with intent to distribute, possession of drug paraphernalia, and two counts of using a two-way communication device in the commission of a felony. He was issued a $15,000 bond, posted it, and walked free the following day.

Uber and DoorDash Drivers Caught With Weed

One DoorDash customer received more than he bargained for when he placed an order of food—finding an unwanted bag of weed in his order, and decided to complain about it. The actions of the driver led to his termination as a Dasher with the company.

A Columbus, Ohio man, who wishes to remain anonymous, said he ordered food through DoorDash on Aug. 9, 2023, and complained that the bag of weed made him feel “scared.”

“I was scared at first but then again, I wasn’t very surprised,” the man who ordered food from DoorDash told ABC 6.

He provided a photo of his bag of food where he found a fork and a bag filled with cannabis. The photo shows a baggie adorned with alien heads holding what appears to be about a gram of weed. “Did this start with the driver?” he said. “Or did this start in the restaurant that I ordered this from?”

Others choose not to snitch on their DoorDash or Uber drivers. In 2016, comedian and talk show host Arsenio Hall was in Washington, D.C. to host the 2016 BET Honors, but soon after the star arrived into town, the show was canceled due to a blizzard. While in Washington D.C., Hall tweeted about the “overpowering” smell of cannabis in his Uber car. It didn’t bother him as much as other riders, however.

Hall was in Washington, D.C. to host the 2016 BET Honors, but soon after the star arrived into town, the show was canceled due to Saturday’s blizzard. While in our nation’s pot-legal capital, Hall tweeted about the “overpowering” smell of cannabis in his Uber car. 

His tweet was immediately responded to by Uber’s customer support account, calling the situation “completely unacceptable” and asking Hall to snitch on his driver. But Hall refused to narc, tweeting back at Uber that it was “all good y’all.” 

The post Uber Driver Allegedly Doubled as Shroom, LSD Dealer appeared first on High Times.

The post Uber Driver Allegedly Doubled as Shroom, LSD Dealer appeared first on Paradise Found.

In a new report by Quartz Advisor, data shows that since 2016, traffic fatalities fell in four states that legalized adult-use cannabis, with a slight increase of fatalities in five states that have not legalized cannabis. The report showed some anomalies, however, and there was a slight increase of traffic fatalities across the board during 2020 and 2021, the pandemic years.

Quartz Advisor’s report, “Legalizing Marijuana Hasn’t Made Roads Less Safe,” was published on Oct. 24.

Out of the report, three highlights were presented.

• In California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada—four states that fully legalized marijuana in 2016—traffic fatalities declined or remained the same in the three years that followed, compared to a slight increase in states where it remained illegal.
• A comprehensive study of traffic data in the U.S. and Canada failed to find a statistically significant change in accidents and fatalities after legalization.
• Alcohol, which remains fully legal in all 50 states and D.C., is a factor in nearly a third of all automotive fatalities.

For better data, Quartz utilized traffic fatality results from the National Safety Council (NSC), which they believe provided more accurate results.

“For clarity and consistency, we chose four states—California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada—that fully legalized marijuana in 2016 to study vehicle death rate trends,” Senior Automotive Journalist David Straughan wrote in the report summary. “We used deaths per 100,000,000 vehicle miles as our primary metric, sourced from the National Safety Council (NSC). Our team examined individual vehicle death rates and aggregated fatality rates in these four states during the years following 2016 and compared them to the U.S. national average. We also compared these numbers with those of Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, and Wyoming—five states that have not legalized marijuana.”

While the vehicle death rate increased across the board when you include the pandemic years, the rate of fatalities was “slightly increased” in states that didn’t legalize adult-use cannabis.

“Among the states that legalized marijuana in 2016, the vehicle death rate increased by 6.0% between 2016 and 2021. While this is an increase, it is slightly less of an increase than the national average, which saw a 6.2% increase in the traffic fatality rate over the same period. The vehicle death rate dropped by an average of 0.7% in the five states that have not legalized cannabis during this period.

With a more complex and nuanced picture, Quartz Advisor researchers removed 2020 and 2021 traffic fatality data changes to see what would happen.

“In many ways, 2020 and 2021 were anomalies, and this remains true in the case of vehicular accident trends. After decades of declining accident rates in the U.S., traffic fatalities picked up in 2020 and stayed high through 2021. The U.S. as a whole saw traffic fatality rates spike 18.9% from 2019 to 2021. States that legalized marijuana in 2016 saw a similar increase of 19.9%. States that have not legalized—and are notably more rural than ones that did—saw the vehicular death rate fall 2.3% over that period.”

A study published in The American Journal of Addictions (AJA) found that cannabis impacts our ability to drive, and advised against it, yet it showed some interesting details. 

“Surprisingly, given the alarming results of cognitive studies, most marijuana-intoxicated drivers show only modest impairments on actual road tests,” it reads. The report adds, “Experienced smokers who drive on a set course show almost no functional impairment under the influence of marijuana.”

Americans Are Driving Stoned

Millions of Americans are getting high, and then getting behind the wheel, High Times reported in December 2019.

In a report of findings detailed in 2019 by researchers associated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, which showed that 12 million American adults said that they had driven under the influence of marijuana in 2018. 

The report, “Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana and Illicit Drugs Among Persons Aged ≥16 Years — United States, 2018” was published on Dec. 20, 2019.

The CDC said that an estimated 10,511 alcohol-impaired driving deaths occurred in 2018. 

The findings on driving under the influence of pot dovetail with a report released by American Auto Association (AAA)  a few years ago. 

The AAA report found that almost 70% of Americans believe it is unlikely for a driver to get busted by the cops while high on marijuana. AAA also offered up what it called another “alarming finding” in its research: roughly 14.8 million drivers have gotten behind the wheel within an hour of using pot in the last 30 days.

In the next two years following that report, traffic fatalities surged everywhere thanks to the effects of COVID-19 and the subsequent lockdown.

The post Traffic Fatalities Dropped in States With Legal Weed, Report Shows appeared first on High Times.

The post Traffic Fatalities Dropped in States With Legal Weed, Report Shows appeared first on Paradise Found.

The Victorian parliament has passed new laws that will allow medical cannabis users to get behind the wheel on a closed road. These new laws are part of a trial that will look into the impact marijuana has on a person’s driving ability.

In 2016, Victoria was the first Australian state to legalize medical cannabis. However, individuals part of this program can still face legal consequences if they’re found to have tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in their system while driving.

The difficulty with this is THC can remain in a person’s system long after the “high” has worn out. That said, you can find yourself with an offense even if you haven’t consumed it for a few days. As of this time, Tasmania is the only state that allows for a medical defense if THC is found in a driver’s body fluids.

This is the primary importance of Victoria’s trial – to determine what’s a safe level of THC to be driving with. Many Victorian medical marijuana users have raised concerns about the risk of losing their license or being fined. The Victoria parliament had initially addressed these concerns in 2021, but efforts were delayed due to COVID-19. 

The government plans to commission an independent research organization (currently undetermined) which will be supported by the Department of Transport and Planning. And they’ve made sure to note that this research will take place in a controlled-driving environment that’s separated from public roads.

Such efforts couldn’t come at a better time. According to road safety minister, Melissa Horne, the number of medical marijuana patients in Victoria has increased more than 700% over the last 2 years.

The Importance of Understanding Cannabis’s Effects on Drivers

While Victoria can recognize the many benefits medical cannabis provides to residents, there remain “significant gaps” in their understanding of THC. More specifically, how it affects drivers and what the risk is for road safety.

“This bill will allow us to deliver a world-leading research trial into medical cannabis and driving, enhancing our understanding of how cannabis affects driving behaviour and informing future reform,” Horne said.

There have been other efforts for reforms to road laws and medical marijuana. For example, upper house MPs Rachel Payne and David Ettershank, of the Legalise Cannabis party, have been championing for it to no longer be an offense if a driver who has detectable levels of THC in bodily fluid is unimpaired. Both Payne and Ettershank support the current trial but are concerned it will take too long.

“The reality is patients continue to wait,” Payne said. “Medicinal cannabis has been prescribed since 2016, that’s a long time for patients to have to wait for a resolution.”

She continued: “A medicinal cannabis patient should be treated like any other patient who is prescribed medicine by a doctor who also provides appropriate advice about when that patient is safe to drive.”

Beyond this information, it would also help to have a way of testing impairment. Since law enforcement can’t resort to surefire results as seen with a blood-alcohol test, it would also benefit Victoria to determine a proper physical test to decide on a driver’s state of intoxication.

The post Victorian Parliament Okays Medicinal Cannabis Driving Trial appeared first on High Times.

The post Victorian Parliament Okays Medicinal Cannabis Driving Trial appeared first on Paradise Found.

If Minnesota police search a vehicle solely based upon the smell of pot, they can’t justify searching a vehicle, even if there is evidence found of other alleged crimes. Even after appealing a lower court decision to suppress the evidence—twice—the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed, and the dismissal of his charges stands.

In a ruling filed regarding a case the State of Minnesota Court of Appeals on Sept. 13, the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed that cannabis odor does not constitute probable cause to search a vehicle.

The case has been ongoing for two years. On July 5, 2021, just before 10 p.m., a Litchfield police officer stopped a car for an obscure local law: the light bar mounted on the vehicle’s grill had more auxiliary driving lights than are permitted under Minnesota law. The officer asked the driver, Adam Lloyd Torgerson, for his license and registration. Torgerson, his wife, and his child were present in the vehicle. The officer stated that he smelled pot and asked Torgerson if there was any reason for the odor, which he initially denied. But cops found a lot more than just pot.

A backup officer was called in. The couple denied possessing any pot, but Torgerson admitted to smoking weed in the past. The second officer stated that the weed odor gave them probable cause to search the vehicle and ordered them to exit the vehicle. The first officer searched the vehicle and found a film canister, three pipes, and a small plastic bag in the center console. The plastic bag contained a white powder and the film canister contained meth, which was confirmed in a field test.

Torgenson was charged with possession of meth pipe in the presence of a minor and fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance after the unwarranted search of Torgerson’s vehicle. 

Police Aren’t Allowed to Do That, Multiple Courts Rule

But the search had one major problem—cops weren’t searching for a meth pipe. They only searched his car because they could smell pot, and the meth and paraphernalia were a surprise for everyone. Still, they had no grounds to search the vehicle. The man’s charges were later dismissed after the district court determined the odor of cannabis alone was insufficient basis for probable cause to search the vehicle, regardless of whatever other drug paraphernalia they found. 

The state appealed the case, but the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision. The case was appealed a second time, this time to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which agreed with the lower court’s ruling. 

 “This search was justified only by the odor of marijuana emanating from the vehicle,” the Minnesota Supreme Court decision reads. “Torgerson moved to suppress the evidence found during the search, arguing that the odor of marijuana, alone, is insufficient to create the requisite probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. The district court granted Torgerson’s motion, suppressed the evidence, and dismissed the complaint. The State appealed. The court of appeals affirmed the district court’s suppression order. Because we conclude that the odor of marijuana emanating from a vehicle, alone, is insufficient to create the requisite probable cause to search a vehicle under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement, we affirm.”

It amounts to basic human rights that apply—regardless of whether or not a person is addicted to drugs.

Other States do Precisely the Same Regarding Pot Odor as Probably Cause

An Illinois judge ruled in 2021 that the odor of cannabis is not sufficient grounds for police to search a vehicle without a warrant during a traffic stop.

Daniel J. Dalton, Associate Judge of the 14th Judicial Circuit, issued a ruling in response to a motion to suppress evidence in the case of Vincent Molina, a medical cannabis patient arrested for cannabis possession last year.

In that case, Molina was arrested despite the decriminalization of small amounts of cannabis in Illinois in 2019 with the passage of the Illinois Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act. 

In some states, the issue of probable cause and cannabis was defined through bills.

Last April, the Maryland House of Delegates approved a bill that reduces the penalties for public cannabis consumption and bars police from using the odor of cannabis as the basis for the search of an individual or auto. Under Maryland’s House Bill 1071, law enforcement officers would be prohibited from using the odor of raw or burnt cannabis as probable cause to search a person or vehicle. 

The rulings represent the rights of citizens when they are pulled over by police, even if there are hard drugs involved.

The post Pot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms appeared first on High Times.

The post Pot Odor Does Not Justify Probable Cause for Vehicle Searches, Minnesota Court Affirms appeared first on Paradise Found.

The results of a recent study published in JAMA Network Open claim to have found an association between cannabis legalization and an increase in traffic accidents.

The study was conducted by researchers at the University of Ottawa and looked at emergency room visits in Ontario, Canada over a 13-year period (Jan 2010-Dec 2021 which is actually 12 years but they say 13 in the study so what do I know), at the end of which they denoted a 475.3% increase in traffic accidents that resulted in an emergency room visit in which the driver had cannabis in their system at the time of the accident.

“This cross-sectional study found large increases in cannabis involvement in ED visits for traffic injury over time, which may have accelerated following nonmedical cannabis commercialization,” the conclusion of the study said. “Although the frequency of visits was rare, they may reflect broader changes in cannabis-impaired driving. Greater prevention efforts, including targeted education and policy measures, in regions with legal cannabis are indicated.”

At first glance, 475.3% sounds like a big number and suffice it to say many of the anti-cannabis media outlets who repackaged that number for a scary-sounding headline are counting on their readership to look no further and take their word for it that cannabis legalization and car crashes must be associated. I’m a journalist, not a scientist, but I am able to point out some facts about the study that might make that big number seem a bit less scary.

For one thing the study was only conducted in Ontario, Canada. In terms of sample size, that is one city in a country with very specific cannabis laws so to lay the blanket term “legalization” over one very specific set of laws isn’t totally accurate. The study even says so in the introduction:

“Another study also found no increase in total traffic injury hospitalizations in Canada over 2.5 years following legalization. Critically, the slow rollout of the cannabis retail market in Canada and the overlap of the legalization period with the COVID-19 pandemic greatly reduces the ability of these studies to evaluate the impacts of legalization,” the study said.

It’s also important to understand that the total number of injury-causing traffic accidents involving cannabis in the 13-year period came to a grand total of 426 out of 947,604. That number as a percentage is .04%, which is even smaller when compared to the total number of traffic accidents without taking emergency room visits into account. It’s hardly insignificant, but it is, arguably, a much less daunting number at first glance than 475.3%.

One key piece of data the study highlighted was that men appear to be more at risk than women of being involved in such accidents where cannabis intoxication was considered a factor. This stands to reason as a 2016 study by the National Institute of Health found men to use cannabis far more often than women and in greater amounts per use.

“Of the 418 individuals with documented cannabis involvement, 330 (78.9%) were male, 109 (25.6%) were aged 16 to 21 years (mean [SD] age at visit, 30.6 [12.0] years), and 113 (27.0%) had an ED visit or hospitalization for substance use in the 2 years before their traffic injury ED visit,” the study said.

The last and arguably most important question one must ask when dissecting the results of a study is “who paid for this?” Studies cost money, and it goes without saying that people who have money often try to use that money to influence the results of otherwise scientifically sound methods of observation. This is America after all (Or Canada, in this case). However, this study was funded in its entirety by grants from the Canadian Institute of Health and the University of Ottawa, meaning there does not appear to be any private money attempting to sway these results.

Regardless of my nitpicking, this study did point out something important: there is a small but statistically significant chance that a link between cannabis legalization and severe traffic accidents exists, but more context and study is needed to be sure.

“The findings of this repeated cross-sectional study suggest that cannabis-involved severe traffic injuries have increased over time. Legalization of nonmedical cannabis with widespread retail access and increased cannabis product variety may have further increased these visits despite laws specifically aimed at deterring cannabis-impaired driving,” the study said. “Younger adults and males appear to be at particularly increased risk of cannabis-involved traffic injuries. There is a potential need for greater interventions, including education on cannabis-impaired driving, enforcement activities, and policies to regulate access to commercial retail markets.”

The post Canadian Study Links Cannabis Legalization to an Increase in Car Accidents appeared first on High Times.

The post Canadian Study Links Cannabis Legalization to an Increase in Car Accidents appeared first on Paradise Found.