Court's marijuana ruling a victory for authorities(zero tolerance in the real world)

http://www.mlive.com/news/ ^ | 6 22 06 | Steven Hepker

[freepatriot32]

Marijuana users can be arrested for drugged driving weeks after they toast a joint, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in a Jackson County appeal.

A veteran prosecutor hailed the ruling as a correct interpretation of the zero-tolerance law that will make enforcement easier. A longtime defense attorney said the high court has opened the floodgates on overreaching government.

"This goes to show the Supreme Court does not seem to care about individual rights," Jackson attorney Jerry Engle said.

At issue were cases from Jackson and Grand Traverse counties. The local case involved the prosecution of Dennis Kurts for driving under the influence of marijuana.

Blackman Township police in February 2004 cited Kurts, 44, of Michigan Center, after he was stopped for driving erratically. He admitted smoking marijuana, police said. The time frame in which he smoked is unclear.

A blood test did not detect the narcotic THC, or tetrahydrrocannabinol, which is in marijuana. Instead, the test showed the presence of carboxy THC, a benign product of metabolism that can remain in the blood for a month after marijuana use.

Jackson County Circuit Judge Chad Schmucker dismissed the case in 2004 on the basis that the THC remnant was not an illegal controlled substance. Wednesday's ruling sends the case back to Schmucker's court.

"The Supreme Court makes it clear carboxy THC is a controlled substance, and the Michigan Legislature says it is against the law to drive with any controlled substance in the body," said Jerrold Schrotenboer, appellate attorney for Prosecutor Hank Zavislak.

Had the ruling gone the other way, prosecutors and defense attorneys would have to offer dueling expert witnesses to argue the issue, Schrotenboer said. The high court's ruling considers the THC derivative and the actual narcotic one in the same, rather than circumstantial evidence that a driver might have been high.

"This makes it vastly easier for prosecutors to convict on drugged-driving charges," Schrotenboer said.

That alarms Engle, who argued against Schrotenboer before the Supreme Court in January. Not all police and prosecutors use discretion, and some might see the same dollar signs that drive drunken-driving convictions, Engle said. The Legislature in recent years passed fees of up to $3,500 against drunken drivers, and those same fees apply to drugged driving, he said.

"Suppose someone runs a red light into your car. The cop asks if you have smoked marijuana in the last several weeks," Engle said. "A blood test shows carboxy THC. The other guy gets a traffic ticket, and you go to jail."

[WLR]

I am sorry I did not explain further.

Folks who had flood insurance were told their homes were damaged by wind: Therefore they were not covered.

Folks that had Hurricane insurance were told their homes were damaged by flood: Therefore they were not covered.

So the Con being played is in the middle of the hurricane at some point they were briefly covered just after their roofs blew off and just before the rains or flooding hit.. Or those who were first subject to the flooding had insurance for that brief moment between the time the floods came and the hurricane blew their roofs off.


How disgustingly Clintonesqe

"These people were told that there home wasn't damaged by the hurricane - it was "wind damage" - so they weren't covered! OR it was "water damage", not FLOOD ..."


Many say they were told by their insurance agent that they did not need flood ... Some with repairable houses (damaged by wind alone) have had to leave the ...

risingfromruin.msnbc.com/2005/11/bay_st_louis_mi_1.html




http://searchwarp.com/swa23988.htm
Many of the homes destroyed by Hurricanes Rita and Katrina were ruined by deep water flooding which caused irreversible structural damage. Many people would assume that flooding caused by hurricanes would be something that insurance would cover, however many insurance companies have been rejecting these claims insisting that flood damage isn’t covered in regular policies.
In addition, there have also been many emerging stories that are claiming that carriers have been lying and attempting to bribe their customers into signing waivers that would admit their homes were destroyed by flooding and not the hurricane. In other cases the insurance carriers were trying to claim the homes were destroyed by wind and not the water.
W

[WLR]

Apologies wrong forum.

W

[Mojave]

lack of understanding

What's to understand? Dopers invent facts and whine when asked for a source.

[Mojave]

Soouds like Michigan has criminalized the posession and consumption of cellulose and chlorophyl.

Don't listen to the voices in your head.

[Mojave]

Your bluff was called, you folded. Pretend all you want.

[tacticalogic]

Don't listen to the voices in your head.

So far, they're smarter than you.

[Mojave]

The voices in your head are telling you that you're smart?

Trippy.

[tacticalogic]

Right now, they're telling me you're a bored little troll looking for someone to piss off.

[Mojave]

Chill, dude. Having your butt handed to you in debate isn't the end of the world.

[tacticalogic]

Not to worry. I'll let you know if it ever happens.

[Mojave]

That would be new.

[tacticalogic]

Not new, just not what you're used to.

[stands2reason]

ROFLMBO... who says pot doesn't cause paranoia... this thread is proof it does...

What are you talking about?

[LibertarianInExile]

"Can we start by shooting drunk drivers?"

Sure! As soon as we do, expect a substantial discussion of the efficacy of DUI laws, one that should have come years ago.

[TKDietz]

"The irony of your screed is that Amsterdam, where marijuana law enforcement is so lax it's considered legal, is now majority Muslim."

Is 4.4% of the population a majority? Sounds like a tiny minority to me.

http://www.amsterdam.info/netherlands/population/

[Moonman62]

That's the population figures for the entire Netherlands, and I believe the figure is closer to 10%.

In Amsterdam and Rotterdam the Muslim concentration is much higher. Sharia isn't too far off in the future. Ask the Dutch who are emigrating rather than staying to enjoy the legal dope.

[TKDietz]

Okay Moonman, let's see some figures. Show us proof that the Muslim population in the Netherlands is really 10%. After doing some more searching I saw various figures on different websites, all lower than 6%. I didn't look long, but I couldn't find a percentage for Amsterdam in particular, but I doubt it's even 10%, let alone a majority. You claim that a majority of those living in Amsterdam are Muslims. Show some proof to back this claim up. That would be big news if it were really true, there'd have all sorts of stories on it published on the web from reliable sources.

[TKDietz]

Since their information comes from readers who pots their content, Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source, but there they say that 11% of those in Amsterdam identify themselves as Muslim. That's a long way from being a majority of the population of that city.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam_(municipality)

[jmc813]

Amway is captitalism at its finest. In fact, the only country where it was restricted was China. Most critics like this bozo Hassan are those who quit and couldn't do anything or want to sell a book... I prefer to learn from winners not losers.

Are you involved with Amway? You use several catch phrases that the cult brainwashes with including "capitalism at its finest" and "losers".

[jmc813]

"Do you agree with Rudy's way of dealing with guns too?"

No, but does that one mistaken impression invalidate his approach to crime overall?

Yes. Anyone too dense to realize the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment is not someone who should be trusted with enforcing laws.