Will Pot-Friendly States Be Liable for “DUI” Driving Deaths?

A recent Associated Press article begins with a dire warning: “As states liberalize their marijuana laws, public officials and safety advocates worry that more drivers high on pot will lead to a big increase in traffic deaths.”  It’s one thing having a few people knowingly breaking the law.  They’ll most likely be experienced and extra cautious: “Inexperienced pot smokers are likely to be more impaired than habitual smokers, who develop a tolerance.”

     Yes, legalizing the drug for the whole population in a state is different.  “Teenage boys and young men are the most likely drivers to smoke pot and the most likely drivers to have an accident regardless of whether they’re high,” a Yale University medical researcher said in the article, with the mixing of pot and alcohol especially ominous:  “Being a teenager, a male teenager, and being involved in reckless behavior could explain both at the same time – not necessarily marijuana causing getting into accidents, but a general reckless behavior leading to both conditions at the same time.”

      The downside of marijuana smoking has been well-documented since the 1960s, as the AP article summarizes:  “Studies of marijuana’s effects show that the drug can slow decision-making, decrease peripheral vision and impede multitasking, all of which are critical driving skills. But unlike with alcohol, drivers high on pot tend to be aware that they are impaired and try to compensate by driving slowly, avoiding risky actions such as passing other cars, and allowing extra room between vehicles.”

      Knowing this in advance, will states like Colorado and Washington be liable for allowing public access to a known killer, despite disclaimers and warnings?  Libertarians tend to be utopian, sweeping difficulties under the rug.  “We’ll deal with problems once we get there” they seem to say.  Tell that to the traffic dead and maimed beyond the impaired drivers.

       Didn’t the AP article cite a Columbia University study that “found that marijuana alone increased the likelihood of being involved in a fatal crash by 80 percent”?

      Hasn’t it been public policy in the US to be exceedingly conservative about testing new drugs? Isn’t the whole drug prescription industry based on regulation to protect users who can’t foresee complications on their own?  Haven’t we disallowed some things if even the smallest likelihood of someone being injured is a risk?