Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mojave

The "residue" was up to a month old. It indicated that he had smoked marijuana at some time in the past month, and the lack of THC itself indicated that he was not currently under the influence.

This is not much different than the police arresting you (or me) for having a beer after we get home from work - after all, we were drinking and had been driving, right? Since the two no longer have to be simultaneous, why would the order matter?


35 posted on 06/23/2006 5:39:32 AM PDT by MortMan (There are 10 kinds of people in the world... Those that understand binary and those that don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: MortMan
he was not currently under the influence.

So what? The voters through their representatives have decided to keep potheads and other illegal drug users off of the public streets while they still have dope residue in their systems.

Their roads, their rules.

41 posted on 06/23/2006 7:08:36 AM PDT by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

To: MortMan
This is not much different than the police arresting you (or me) for having a beer after we get home from work - after all, we were drinking and had been driving, right? Since the two no longer have to be simultaneous, why would the order matter?

More like arresting you for driving on the 27th of the month because of the beer you drank on the 1st.

113 posted on 06/23/2006 6:57:55 PM PDT by Squeako (ACLU: "Only Christians, Boy Scouts and War Memorials are too vile to defend.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson