
“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:
Should You Be Able to Buy Food Directly From Farmers? Regulators Don't Think So
Moody's, Goldman, feds fight the last war on financial excess
What does Peace in Europe mean to EU? Farage-Nobel Prize Remix
1974 PSA Warned of High Tech Surveillance State for Behavior Control
Sen. Rand Paul Questions DHS Nominee Jeh Johnson On Financial Privacy
United States Drops to 7th in WEF’s Global Competitiveness Index
Don’t Let the Fed Pick Your Pocket
The NSA: And Who Will Watch the Watchmen?
Audited Virginia farmer faces more thuggery
Apple 1 sells for a whopping $387,750 in online auction
The Role Disability Insurance is Playing in Discouraging Young Adults from Working
Send Micro-Transactions With Zero Fees via Coinbase
Bloomberg Article Describes the Death of Digital Privacy: Snowden’s Revenge
Appeals Court Ruling Throws Wrench in Maritime Drug Prosecutions
Humiliating Viral YouTube Interview To Cost Job Of Argentina's Economy Minister?