Idaho Cop Profiles Washington Drivers as Potential Potheads
Uh oh, keep an eye out for those middle class white folks.


Matt Ironside, who works as a senior producer for operations for the Seattle Times, found himself writing a guest piece for his paper's opinion section following a visit to Idaho next door. It seems that at least one police officer suspects everybody crossing the border may be driving baked.
Ironside writes:
When I saw the cruiser's rollers light up behind me, I ran through the mental checklist: Speeding? Not even close. Taillight out? I checked them the night before. The tabs were up to date, so I was puzzled as to what it could be about. I had hesitated a bit on the lane change I'd just made, but it was so slight — a brief moment of indecision that caused my tire to cross the lane line. As it turns out, that's all a curious trooper needs.
The officer's first question was if I were driving impaired. The remainder of the conversation had to do with one thing and one thing only: marijuana.
I was asked questions such as: Was I in possession of a Washington state medical-marijuana card? Was I aware of Washington state marijuana laws? I was even asked, "Have you ever used marijuana?" (Because what I did on weekends when I was 22 would have a great deal of impact on my driving decades later.)
He was not asked about alcohol or any other drugs – just the Mary Jane.
Reason's Jacob Sullum has written about driving under the influence of marijuana here and in a sidebar in his extensive cover story about Colorado's marijuana legalization processes in our November 2013 issue of Reason hitting the stands now. It should not come as a surprise that the officer would have to find some minor issue to pull Ironside over, as studies show many people are capable of driving just fine with modest amounts of marijuana in their system.
(Hat tip to former Reason editor Mike Riggs, now writing over at Atlantic Cities)
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
No shit.
Bullshit pretense for a shot at a jackpot.
Wait, that sounds legitimate to me.
Hey, man! Nice car!
Yeah, man! It's got the rock-a-rolla camchaft, the dinglebeeries hanging from the ceiling....it's a pretty nice car.
a brief moment of indecision that caused my tire to cross the lane line. As it turns out, that's all a curious trooper needs.
So wait, is the suggestion here that minor traffic offenses can be a precursor to 'probable cause' for an inquest about drug use?
I haz a skeptical.
Yes. Not only will state troopers do this, but town 'peace officers' will as well. The first thing they will say when they walk up is 'I smell pot' or ;just checking for drunk driving'. I wish it wasn't, but it is a thing.
"I smell marijuana" is all they need and it's Inquest Time!
I'd be very temped to make a snarky comment at that about either the officer's uncertified olfactory credentials, or the fact that it was probably what he'd been smoking in his cruiser before the stop - both would end very badly. I wonder if I could keep it to just offering him doritos.
What we need then, it seems, is some kind of limit to government-- some sort of description of enumerated powers with like a motorists bill of rights... with stuff that keeps you secure in your stuff, your effects and your iPhones and stuff.
What you're describing is called a suicide pact. The innocent have nothing to hide. If only one child's life is saved ....
Learned something new the other day. Even if you live in a state without bullshit perverse incentives for law enforcement to steal your shit, the feds can still fuck things up. Where I'm at all ticket revenue and forfeitures go the the state. Municipalities don't get shit. Turns out that if the federal DEA is assisted by local cops in a bust, they can give a share of the plunder to the good old boys for helping them out. I foresee many joint investigations with the federal DEA in the future in my state. Fuckers.
Whoops. It was ICE.
http://www.sunjournal.com/news.....se/1431215
the cruiser's rollers
Elwood: Shit.
Jake: What?
Elwood: Rollers.
Jake: No.
Elwood: Yeah.
Jake: Shit.
"I can follow a car however long I needed to, and eventually they are gonna do something illegal."
Amusingly enough, it turns out that guy is a prosecutor now.
Yeah, the reason he was picked to give that talk is that he was a law student at that school.
Why is that odd? The guy came off as a total dick who gets off on fucking people over.
It's not odd, it's amusing.
The way one former police officer explained it to me, people who are tailed by cop cars get so nervous that they eventually goof. Even worse, if they don't, they must be using extreme caution, and the only possible reason is that they must have something to hide.
tl;dr: You can't win, but you still have to play.
I look forward to the hilarity that will ensue on the short highway between Pullman, WA and Moscow, ID if they start pulling over every tom, dick and harry looking for pot. Two college towns about 8 miles apart, and people there aren't going to put up with not being able to get back and forth easily.
I'd imagine they'd deal with it the same way Washington dealt with Washingtonians coming back across the idaho border with illegal Dishwasher Detergent.
Oh how I miss Riggs' unsubstantiated anecdotes extrapolated into Rage Bait.
Riggs did tend to wave the bloody shirt from time to time.
To answer a question from a previous thread, this is why it's hard to convince software engineers to move to places like Montana.
Kind of the techies' version of "this is why we can't have nice things"?
I'm now making "This is why we can't have software engineers" my new meme.
Tiresome, boring, and stupid. It's perfect.
People who ask the Cleveland Browns to do things for them shouldn't throw stones.
I live in Washington and have to say that most of the people here drive like they are stoned. I think it is just their slow, liberal minds being unable to handle multitasking. You know driving while breathing.
Getting someone to even to the speed limit here in Washington is like... like something that's very frustrating and hard to do.
Tip: Avoid driving behind a Subaru or a Prius.
"Mary Jane"? Isn't that about heroin? I heard "Mary Jane" referred to heroin in a Lou Reed or Bob Dylan song. Someone please correct or confirm that.
Thanks
derp
What do you mean by that Almanian?
It meens yer doopid.
Not sure if serious.
Mari-Juana. Mary Jane.
All right, I was WRONG. A friend lied to me.
I see heroin was never referred to as "Mary Jane".
Live and learn.
Yeah, there are a lot of slang terms for Heroin, but Mary Jane ain't one of 'em. But of course, I suppose the young people can start to call it whatever they want.
Oh those young people and their crazy 60s slang.
Cool daddy-o, cool.
Right, I thought about that, but who sang about pot, except Blue Oyster Cult?
Especially in the 60's when pot was a lot weaker.
A few bands.
And one more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAqYMhXuydU
To the tune of At The Hop, the Dead Milkmen sing "Let's go smoke some pot!"
I think a better question would be who didn't sing about Pot- especially any time before 1983.
If you listen to hip-hop, which I suspect you don't, who didn't rap about weed after 1985?