Replies

but the broad interpretation of any trace of cannabis found in the body of a person deeming that person liable of guilt of DUI is preposterous - IMHO.

There was no broad interpretation. The judges decided very narrowly - no pot in the system means no pot in the system. That was the law, the law was upheld.

114 posted on 07/09/2006 9:20:36 AM PDT by OmahaFields ("What have been its fruits? ... superstition, bigotry and persecution.")

but the broad interpretation of any trace of cannabis found in the body of a person deeming that person liable of guilt of DUI is preposterous - IMHO.(winston2)

There was no broad interpretation. The judges decided very narrowly - no pot in the system means no pot in the system. That was the law, the law was upheld.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

s/ In that event - let us begin a program of drug testing every 6 months for every driver in the nation - that way we could get every person who ever used a non-government approved substance off the road. That would only leave those who fall asleep at the wheel, are distracted by a myriad of "legal" act ivies and the drinkers of alcohol for you to be worried about./s

115 posted on 07/09/2006 9:30:22 AM PDT by winston2 (In matters of necessity let there be unity, in matters of doubt liberty, and in all things charity:-)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794