Homeless in Arizona

Todd A. Griffith is a cop with the DPS who works as was a forensic scientist at the Arizona Department of Public Safety crime lab. And of course he has a financial interest in keeping marijuana illegal.

Now I'm for legalizing ALL drugs, not just marijuana. But I'm against Prop 205 because it's 99% about creating a monopoly for the existing 85 or so medical marijuana dispensaries by giving them a second monopoly on growing and selling recreational marijuana. Under Prop 205 there will be numerous felony charges for victimless marijuana crimes. Over 2.5 ounces of marijuana will be a felony. Over 5 grans of concentrated marijuana will be a felony. Over 6 plants for a single person will be a felony, and over 12 plants for a household of 2 or more people will be a felony.

Source

My Turn: Don’t be fooled by Prop. 205's deceptive language

Todd Griffith, AZ I See It 10:15 p.m. MST October 23, 2016

Prop. 205 claims under its “findings” that marijuana should be regulated similar to alcohol and that driving while impaired remains illegal.

However, Prop. 205 actually protects drivers stoned on marijuana. This is because, buried on page 13, Prop. 205 expressly prohibits the state from prosecuting impaired drivers based on a marijuana impairment level such as Arizona’s 0.08 percent blood-alcohol content limit.

Other states, such as Colorado and Washington, have enacted marijuana levels, yet Prop. 205 prohibits a marijuana impairment level in Arizona. This is a major public-safety risk resulting in more marijuana impaired drivers and rising vehicular deaths. [That's rubbish. While a blood alcohol test is reasonable indication of alcohol intoxication, the currently state of marijuana testing does not give any meaningful results on if a person is intoxicated by marijuana. All the tests can do is tell if the person has used marijuana in the last month or so.]

When marijuana became readily available in Colorado, marijuana-related traffic deaths rose an unprecedented 92 percent from 2010 to 2014.

Marijuana edibles (cookies, brownies, etc.) have become big business constituting 45 percent of all marijuana sales in Colorado, and accidental ingestion by youths in marijuana friendly states has increased 600 percent.

The 'industrial hemp' problem

Prop. 205 declares that marijuana, including edibles, should be controlled and taxed.

However, Prop. 205 actually includes a loophole that would allow edibles with megadoses of THC (including those regulated in Colorado) to be sold legally in Arizona, as “Industrial Hemp” — readily available to children with no age limits, no amount limits and no marijuana taxes collected on nearly 50 percent of anticipated marijuana sales.

This occurs because Prop. 205 defines “Industrial Hemp” as not marijuana — thus totally legal — if it contains 0.3 percent or less THC, the active ingredient of marijuana. The measure adds “marijuana products” (edibles) in this definition, which is a provision different than Colorado.

Therefore, one “Boulder Bar” regulated in Colorado as marijuana (a 45-gram chocolate bar infused with 100 milligrams of THC, or 10 doses) calculates to only 0.2 percent THC, well within the legal “Hemp” as defined by Prop. 205.

This megadose bar — think 10 drinks of alcohol — could be possessed and sold in Arizona with no age limit, or any limit on number of bars possessed. These uncontrolled, totally legal under Prop. 205, edibles are a major hazard to our kids when it comes to accidental ingestions, overdoses and permanent damage to developing brains.

What extraction labs really mean

Prop. 205 implies that it will not allow dangerous marijuana chemical-extraction labs to occur in Arizona. However, it actually gives a person the right to operate a marijuana chemical extraction lab with hazardous, toxic chemicals, as long as the chemicals are not flammable.

Chloroform, a known carcinogen, and one of many nonflammable solvents, has been a preferred chemical for extracting marijuana, and chloroform extraction methods are readily available at marijuana sites on the Internet.

With legalization, marijuana extraction labs in Colorado sprang up across the state. Now, Prop. 205 would make it legal for individuals to operate toxic, marijuana extraction labs exposing neighbors, owners of condos, etc. (much as meth labs created exposure), and no criminal laws can be enacted to stop this practice.

It is not possible to detail all of the misleading aspects of Prop. 205. However:

No one should want drivers who are stoned on marijuana to be protected from prosecution. No one should want marijuana edibles to be legal and readily available in megadoses to kids. No one should want exposure to toxic marijuana extraction labs.

Proposition 205 is deceptive with many buried negative outcomes. I encourage all voters to soundly defeat Prop. 205. This measure will have terrible impacts for years to come if it becomes law.

Todd A. Griffith was a forensic scientist for more than 45 years, including 20 years as director of the Arizona Department of Public Safety crime lab. He was heavily involved in drafting many of Arizona’s drug statutes, including the Driving Under the Influence of Drugs laws. Email him at tagriffith7@gmail.com​.