The Recorder should be commended for its excellent editorial regarding the difficulty of determining whether or not drivers with marijuana in their system are actually impaired (“‘Driving while high’ hard to define,” Aug. 22).
With more and more states legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana, and many more allowing legal sales of medical marijuana, the issue of distinguishing presence from impairment is receiving justifiable attention. Although operating-under-the-influence marijuana arrests decreased in Colorado in 2015 compared to 2014 and have shown no increases in other legal states, the issue is still one that must be addressed.
Unfortunately, the Massachusetts Legislature has been silent on the subject. This is difficult to understand, since during the decriminalization debate in 2008 and the medical marijuana debate in 2012, most legislators agreed with the police, sheriffs and district attorneys that car accidents would increase dramatically if the measures passed. They were wrong — both measures passed overwhelmingly, and there have been no increases in vehicle accidents involving marijuana-intoxicated drivers.
But the Legislature should have recognized the direction in which society was moving and given the matter the attention it deserves.
The Recorder is right to call for a science-based approach to the impairment/presence issue. Whether a national standard can be implemented is up for debate, but there is no debating the fact that a science-based approach would bring clarity to an issue that is too often clouded with reefer-madness rhetoric.
Jim Borghesani
Director of Communications
Yes on 4 Campaign
Boston