Basically, the answer is no, it hasn’t been figured out. Different states have different ways of dealing with it, but the reality is more research needs to be done to figure out how to distinguish impairment from relatively recent use. There’s a difference when it comes to cannabis, but most tests are basically pass fail, and you can fail even if you haven’t consumed in days. So rather than it being too easy for people to get off, I would say it’s too easy to falsely incriminate someone. This shouldn’t be a barrier to legalization though. I think most proponents of legalization would say it’s better to stop waisting time and money, and stop putting people in jail (in places where that still happens) for it while we figure that out.

If we had decades of data and clear examples of cannabis impairment directly resulting in accidents like we do with alcohol, there might be an argument for waiting. But really we have the opposite of that. There are parts of the country where this has been legal medically for 25 years, and it’s been legal for adult use for nearly a decade in others now and there’s no statistically significant correlation to an increase in accidents.

> All I hear is “it needs to be legalized, and legalized NOW!”. OK - fine. But what then? How to regulate? How to tax? How to enforce law infractions? There’s a lot of work ahead, and all of that is going to take time.

Sure, but it’s 2022 and there has been plenty of time to sort that out. At this point the foot dragging is intentional. As recently as the last few years Jean Shaheen has said she needs to see more research as she fears it could be a gateway drug. That’s just fear mongering using the same exact, long debunked misinformation they used in the 80s. That’s in insult to our collective intelligence.