One of the consequences of decriminalization is that people who would have had to make a hard choice of rehab or jail, and would have a chance to get out of that cycle, don't have to make that that hard choice. I've heard this from the old Sac Co Sheriff and numerous officers. They were not talking about increasing prison numbers but rather getting someone to change the poor direction of their life. I suppose this "gigging" to turn a junkie's life around is a bad thing?The issue is a lot of times cops would get people on minor drug possession charges because they couldn't get them on the charges that they were pretty sure they were guilty of, or in some cases just PLANT drugs on people they "knew" were committing crimes. Heck, I'd bet probably the majority of people who have had crap planted on them are criminals. But that isn't how our justice system should work. People should get charged with the crimes they do commit.
One of the consequences of decriminalizing possession is that people committing or accused of committing other crimes can't be gigged on minor possession crimes and taken off the streets for that.
Of course, on the other hand, plenty of other people who are just recreational users and not otherwise criminals are also arrested, charged, and convicted.
It is part of the reason a lot of police organizations and departments don't want constitutional carry. Because handgun possession charges is a good way to get bad people off the streets who are committing other crimes they can't catch them on.
Beyond that, that doesn't address the fact that in CA, it is still a crime to operate a motor vehicle under the influence of THC. Which is what I was addressing, was the claim that legalizing weed means people can drive stoned with no consequences. Which is false, all states if you cause an accident while stoned, you can be held accountable. And some states have zero tolerance laws where ANY amount of THC in your system is an automatic DUI, whether you appear impaired or not. Or caused an accident or not.
Non-zero tolerance states, pretty much the only way someone is getting off driving while under the influence of THC or other drugs is if the defense can show that the defendant did not cause the accident (and would likely not be a defense in any state with a zero-tolerance law).
So now CA has likely 100K plus feral junkies running free range, stealing, robbing, etc., without consequence making life shitty for the rest.
That said, CA voted for this stupidity and that says something about democracy vs republic.
A LEO can pull you over while driving down the road and, if you are drunk, has the tools to gather the evidence to show you F'd up. Those tools are not in place yet for weed. Accordingly, with today's everyone is racist climate, I understand why CA cops are hesitant on stops without the tools. That said I'll wager more than 50% of this board has been behind some jackass or jackasses driving like GTA with a trail of weed smoke behind. Anyone who thinks that this is good is nuts.