To: claudiustg
So, you can be busted for being high when you're not high?
If the chemical is found in your blood then you are guilty of breaking the law.
7 posted on
06/22/2006 10:05:28 PM PDT by
garylmoore
(Faith is the assurance of things unseen.)
To: garylmoore
They're being busted for driving while intoxicated not for being drug users. You're in favor of arresting and convicting people for things they didn't do?
10 posted on
06/22/2006 10:14:03 PM PDT by
claudiustg
(¡En español, por favor!)
To: garylmoore
"If the chemical is found in your blood then you are guilty of breaking the law."
Not if the law is "driving under the influence". Having a metabolite in your system that is not psychoactive is not influencing anything.
19 posted on
06/22/2006 10:51:53 PM PDT by
ndt
To: garylmoore
If the chemical is found in your blood then you are guilty of breaking the law. Positively Orwellian.
29 posted on
06/23/2006 3:10:42 AM PDT by
Wolfie
To: garylmoore
So, you can be busted for being high when you're not high?
If the chemical is found in your blood then you are guilty of breaking the law.
THC is in your blood for over 30 days at least. So that is a stretch. I don't take drug or even tried them, but I don't condone this action by the court.
To: garylmoore
"If the chemical is found in your blood then you are guilty of breaking the law."I hope you don't hold any elected office position. If you were ruler of the county, would you have us all submit a drug screening every week or so?
124 posted on
06/24/2006 9:26:16 PM PDT by
KoRn
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson