- The Weed Blog https://www.theweedblog.com

THC/DUI Bill Hearing Today In Denver


marijuana duii drugged driving per se zero toleranceI received the following e-mail from the Cannabis Policy Project:


Spend your Valentine’s Day protesting FORCED BLOOD DRAWS of COLORADO

House Judiciary Committee Hearing on HB 1114

DATE: Thurs., Feb. 14, 2013
TIME: 1:30pm
LOCATION: Room 0112, state Capitol Building, 200 E. Colfax, Denver, CO
(Note, this room only seats about 40 people so arrive early. There are 3
other bills on the agenda before the DUI bill.)

Capitol Bill Room (for last minute time and place changes): (303) 866-3055

Attire: Dress to Impress
Provisions: Bring food and water, as the hearing may last a while.

Read HB-1114 and committee reports here:

You listen online to the House Judiciary committee hearing:

HB1114 would declare that the presence of 5 nanogram/milliliters or more of
THC in the bloodstream of a driver would create a “permissible inference”
that the person is guilty of DUI. Under this proposed law, the mere
presence of 5 nanograms/mL of THC is enough to prove guilt, regardless of
any evidence that the person was not actually impaired.

HB1114 will require a “forced blood draw”, forcing anyone suspected of
driving under the influence of THC to submit to a blood draw forced by the
state. Currently, alcohol levels can be tested through urine, breath or
blood. But under the THC/DUI bill, the nanogram count can only come from a
forced blood draw.

***This bill is required by A64, which states “Driving under the influence
of marijuana shall remain illegal.” The groups that promoted A64 are also
-in favor- of the 5 ng limit. They spent over $2 million promoting A64, but
haven’t spent a dime to prevent this THC/DUI bill. IF YOU VOTED FOR A64,
SEND PROTEST LETTERS, TOO! This bill is a direct consequence of your vote
for A64, and shows clearly why many long-time activists were against the
language of A64 from the beginning.


Sample letter to House Judiciary Committee

Please vote no on HB1114 and do more research on the bill to set a nanogram
limit on cannabis. There is NO evidence showing a link between THC blood
concentration and impairment. Other drugs that impair people, like
oxycontin, do not have nanogram limits.

This bill is unfair to medical marijuana patients, who will almost always
be above 5 ng due to constant use, yet suffer no impairment in driving

Medical cannabis patients in Colorado are SICK of being treated like second
class citizens! If you want to give them forced blood draws, you will have
to show some evidence that there is actually a problem. Please at least
include an exemption for medical marijuana patients in this bill.

repkagan@gmail.com, pete.lee.house@state.co.us,
john.buckner.house@state.co.us, lois.court.house@state.co.us,
bob.gardner.house@state.co.us, polly.lawrence.house@state.co.us,
mike.mclachlan.house@state.co.us, murrayhouse45@gmail.com,
joseph.salazar.house@state.co.us, jared.wright.house@state.co.us


Representative Daniel Kagan (D)
District: 3
Occupation: Legislator
Counties: Arapahoe
Phone: 303-866-2921
E-mail: repkagan@gmail.com

Rep. Sanford E “Pete” Lee (D)
District: 18
Counties: El Paso
Occupation: Attorney/Businessman
Phone: 303-866-2932
E-mail: pete.lee.house@state.co.us

John W. Buckner (D)
District: 40
Counties: Arapahoe
Occupation: Retired Educator
Phone: 303-866-2944
E-mail: john.buckner.house@state.co.us

Lois Court (D)
District: 6
Counties: Denver
Occupation: Community College Instructor/Legislator
Phone: 303-866-2967
E-mail: lois.court.house@state.co.us

Bob Gardner (R)
District: 21
Counties: El Paso, Fremont
Occupation: Attorney
Phone: 303-866-2191
E-mail: bob.gardner.house@state.co.us

Polly Lawrence (R)
District: 39
Counties: Douglas, Teller
Occupation: Construction Contracts Manager
Phone: 303-866-2935
E-mail: polly.lawrence.house@state.co.us

Mike McLachlan (D)
District: 59
Counties: Archuleta, Gunnison, Hinsdale, La Plata, Ouray, San Juan
Occupation: Lawyer
Phone: 303-866-2914
E-mail: mike.mclachlan.house@state.co.us

Carole Murray (R)
District: 45
Counties: Douglas
Occupation: Retired
Phone: 303-866-2948
E-mail: murrayhouse45@gmail.com

Brittany Pettersen (D)
District: 28
Counties: Jefferson
Occupation: Legislator
Phone: 303-866-2939
E-mail: brittany.pettersen.house@state.co.us

Joseph A. Salazar (D)
District: 31
Counties: Adams
Occupation: Civil Rights Attorney / Professor
Phone: 303-866-2918
E-mail: joseph.salazar.house@state.co.us

Jared Wright (R)
District: 54
Counties: Delta, Mesa
Occupation: Self Employed/Consultant
Phone: 303-866-2583
E-mail: jared.wright.house@state.co.us


About Author

Johnny Green


  1. Forced blood draw? I do not know what that means.

    Under no circumstances is it constitutional for the state to take a blood sample from a person without their consent. The consequences of refusing to provide blood may be the loss of driving privileges, but they cannot restrain you and take a blood sample.

    If an infraction occurs and the officer asks for a blood sample, refuse and take the matter to court to force the state to provide the scientific evidence that 5 nanograms causes impairment.

    This is an obvious act of desperation by those that oppose legalization, this too will be defeated when scientific research (insurance companies) flesh out the impairment level of cannabis users.

    A pattern is developing, mostly from the republican arena, of using scripted talking points. Why 5 nanograms? It probably comes from some sort of think tank (probably the Coalition to Retain The Power of The Elite Class or something equally absurd) that someone paid a good deal of money to come up with. The figure is then spread around so that it eventually becomes popular in the political/legislative culture – a political meme.

    Activists need to take blood tests proving a 5 nanogram THC blood level then take a series of standard physical and mental impairment tests to show that the 5 ng level is far too low. Make a video and post it on the internet and ridicule those that support the 5 ng level.

  2. caught not necessarily being guilty but caught up in somebodies idea of lets see if you are. (Profiling)

  3. Could be a step in the right direction; a foot in the door to the committee meeting with regards to regulation. Perhaps if yes, then some details could be tweaked later.
    I know somethings about those changes could end up taking years..dragged out …again I think the ng amt is not correct. No proof of intoxication/impairment in a number. (Maybe they’ve done some analysis?)
    Everybody knows, you get in the car go to the liquor store get a bottle of whiskey. Take it home have a drink or two..maybe three or four. The point is, you leave in your car after drinking, get caught and it’s nearly certain the driver will be in a lot of trouble. Nobody should think it will be any different with legalized marijuana. There is a number with the alcohol, it didn’t matter if you were a small gal or a large guy…whether you’d eaten or not. The fact remains, alcohol has certain properties , they had to draw a line somewhere. They have to draw a line with this too in order to satisfy the legislators? The courts? The people!
    Perhaps a skills test or memory test if caught to determine mental status; the fingers to the nose or walking the line test?

  4. I agree that this is wrong, but at least you have to get it from blood levels.
    Here in AZ, legal or illegal Cannabis users/drivers can be considered DUI for any level of any Cannabis metabolyte in any body fluid. Ya’ll know what that means……even up to a month after use, so it has absolutely not a thing to do with whether an individual is, in fact, under the influence of an intoxicant while operating a motor vehicle or not. It has everything to do with continuing the devastation of individuals and their families lives by means of this ridiculous and out-lived prohibition against Cannabis.
    Cannabis should be legalized, taxed, and regulated at both the state and federal levels.

Leave A Reply