
“An Arizona appeals court has ruled that marijuana users don’t need to be actually impaired to be successfully prosecuted for driving under the influence. The ruling came Tuesday in the case of a man who tested positive for an inactive marijuana metabolite that remains in the body for weeks after the high from smoking marijuana has worn off. The ruling in Arizona v. Shilgevorkyan overturned a decision by a superior court judge who said that it didn’t make sense to prosecute people for driving under the influence if they’re not actually under the influence.”
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2013/feb/14/az_court_says_you_dont_have_be_h
Related posts:
'I Am a Watertown Resident...'
Records show FBI monitored ‘Anarchist’ Occupy Wall Street protests
Thieves drain 2FA-protected bank accounts by abusing mobile networks
The Ongoing Implosion of Venezuelan Statism
Ron Paul: The Real Status of Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq
The Line In The Sand Has Been Drawn
Cop Gets Six Months For Killing Mackala Ross and Delores Epps
California: Laws That Are 'Impossible' to Follow Can Still Be Constitutional
What It Means to Be An NSA "Target": We Need Immediate FISA Amendments Act Reform
Sell in May and Go Away… Then Buy Bombay?
General Rebellion and Media Choices
The U.S. Keeping the Eurozone in Line
Ron Paul: Progress Toward Peace in 2013, But Dark Clouds Remain
Apple Is Still Afraid of Bitcoin: Coinbase Bitcoin Wallet App Gets Axed
David Lewis attorney says gun confiscation no “error”