You may have to cut and paste
http://www.progressiveu.org/222420-smoke-pot-a-month-ago-thats-good-enough-for-a-dui-in-michigan
That is ridiculous. It certainly robs ‘Driving Under the INFLUENCE’ of all meaning.
This country is going down into a shithole.
Im so sick of this conservative crap.
Ive had enough of the “Im gonna tell your mommy” party of conservatives.
I smell a republican behind this one.
Fucking retarded. I don’t advocate smoking and driving, but this is just taking shit way too far. By the way they’re mesuring THC levels, anyone who has been in a room with second hand pot smoke would fail the tests. How about arresting people for driving the next day after drinking alcohol because they’re blood levels are over the limit? Stupid assholes, whatever man, that’s why it’s great to live in Montreal, they don’t care about that shit like that.
Stop signs are more of a suggestion here! What kind of dumbass would have something like that pass as a law? More money being wasted down the drain on a war they will never win. Ah fuck it dosen’t matter…
The writing is to small to read on that page (my computers in bad shape). What is it about? I got a DUI for having weed on me while driving about 4 years ago. Does it pertain to anything like that? They made me take a blood test even though I was perfectly sober and hadn’t blown any reefer since the night before.
I was pissed, simple possesion turned into neg driving.
[quote]Nicholas F wrote:
This country is going down into a shithole.
Im so sick of this conservative crap.
Ive had enough of the “Im gonna tell your mommy” party of conservatives.
I smell a republican behind this one.[/quote]
Your probably right. This is why I stopped calling myself a republican. Conservative law is SUPPOSED to deal with a problem that it claims to deal with. This is calling something, something that it is not. I used to think that only the dems did that, but in the last 4-5 years I’ve seen more and more republicans introduce laws with a hidden purpose.
Anyway, I am against this law, however, at least for those under 21 in my state, you can lose your license for possessing drugs, carrying a false ID, attempting to purchase alcohol, being publically intoxicated. I think a 17 year old can lose their driver’s license for buying cigarettes.
Don’t call it a DUI. If you want to take away someones drivers license for drug possession, thats not unacceptable to me, but call it what it is-a punishment for a proven crime.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Nicholas F wrote:
This country is going down into a shithole.
Im so sick of this conservative crap.
Ive had enough of the “Im gonna tell your mommy” party of conservatives.
I smell a republican behind this one.
Your probably right. This is why I stopped calling myself a republican. Conservative law is SUPPOSED to deal with a problem that it claims to deal with. This is calling something, something that it is not. I used to think that only the dems did that, but in the last 4-5 years I’ve seen more and more republicans introduce laws with a hidden purpose.
Anyway, I am against this law, however, at least for those under 21 in my state, you can lose your license for possessing drugs, carrying a false ID, attempting to purchase alcohol, being publically intoxicated. I think a 17 year old can lose their driver’s license for buying cigarettes.
Don’t call it a DUI. If you want to take away someones drivers license for drug possession, thats not unacceptable to me, but call it what it is-a punishment for a proven crime.
[/quote]
Yeah, the Republican party is extremely removed from anything resembling a traditional Republican or conservative. They’ve maintained all of the worst parts and loss all of the best. They and their decisions are truly atrocious.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Don’t call it a DUI. If you want to take away someones drivers license for drug possession, thats not unacceptable to me, but call it what it is-a punishment for a proven crime.
[/quote]
Yup.
Seems a little illegal amd highly intrusive.
Ok, so DUI for alcohol, means you’re not supposed to drive after drinking.
So if I come back from Amsterdamn, I’m supposed to stop driving for a month because of risk of being “impaired”?
The American System is innocent until proved guilty. How do they have the right to test you for marijuana or even suspect it in a traffic stop unless you have given them probable cause to suspect it.
If I get pulled over for speeding, and they have no reason to suspect that I am impaired, they may not force me to take tests or do anything to show them that I am impaired. This goes against the founding principles of America and our justice system.
In a couple states, they were trying to pass legislation that would make you guilty of possession of you tested positive for drugs. The logic is that you’re “possessing” it in your blood stream.
Re-goddamn-diculous.
[quote]Tin Can wrote:
How about arresting people for driving the next day after drinking alcohol because they’re blood levels are over the limit?[/quote]
This sounds good to me, because even if it is the next morning, if your BAC is over the legal limit you are still impaired, whereas with THC, you can have it in your system weeks after any impariment has ceased.
[quote]Tron4000 wrote:
Tin Can wrote:
How about arresting people for driving the next day after drinking alcohol because they’re blood levels are over the limit?
This sounds good to me, because even if it is the next morning, if your BAC is over the legal limit you are still impaired, whereas with THC, you can have it in your system weeks after any impariment has ceased.
[/quote]
I think what he was getting at was arresting them if there is any trace of alcohol at all in their system. That makes about as much sense as what they are doing here. It shouldn’t even be legal to tag someone as DUI if they aren’t under the influence simply because it is in their system.
What another poster wrote about Amsterdam was a good example. Basically someone could leave the country, spend a week in Amsterdam, come back to the US and get tagged as DUI for no reason.
I dont think that you people see the point. Hey i smoke all the time, love it.
But I want it legalized as much as anybody and the best way to get it legitimized would be to treat it like alchohol. IF you are too messed up to drive you get a similar citation.
[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
In a couple states, they were trying to pass legislation that would make you guilty of possession of you tested positive for drugs. The logic is that you’re “possessing” it in your blood stream.
Re-goddamn-diculous.[/quote]
This actually makes sense. More sense than this current ridiculous Detroit law. If you are intoxicated you DID possess the drug. Possession means that you have control over the drug. If you put it in your own body you had control over the drug. Still, it’s an underhanded way to sneak in an additional charge.
They should still use field sobriety tests as a basis for drug testing. If you pass the field sobriety test, then you can just get charged for speeding, reckless driving, etc. But failing that test, then they’ll look further into what drug impairment there might be present.
If you do test positive for a certain level of THC in the bloodstream (as with a certain level of alcohol), then tack on the DUI and any associated penalties.
[quote]lumbernac wrote:
I dont think that you people see the point. Hey i smoke all the time, love it.
But I want it legalized as much as anybody and the best way to get it legitimized would be to treat it like alchohol. IF you are too messed up to drive you get a similar citation.[/quote]
You are the one that’s missing the point. This is not treating it anything like alcohol. THC can remain in your body for up to a month but the active effects are long gone [probably by the next morning after smoking] and you are no longer physically or mentally impaired WHATSOEVER. Yet, you can be considered so under this law.
Power to the people, down with NWO and the police-state that America has become. FUCK old republicans who have cheated, swindled, lied, extorted, blackmailed, and backstabbed the general public, all the while they spread their infectious greed disease to other “career-minded” individuals to get where they are today, to tell us “normal folk” we cannot enjoy smoking a hooter after a 9 hour day of manual labor.
" Behing every great fortune, there lies a greater crime."
[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
The American System is innocent until proved guilty. How do they have the right to test you for marijuana or even suspect it in a traffic stop unless you have given them probable cause to suspect it.
If I get pulled over for speeding, and they have no reason to suspect that I am impaired, they may not force me to take tests or do anything to show them that I am impaired. This goes against the founding principles of America and our justice system. [/quote]
Yes, but my understanding is that the driving “privilage” can be revoked by your act of refusal. It has been fought. It has been claimed that driving is a right and not a privilage, and in some cases this has worked.