Impaired driving changes could unfairly punish medical cannabis users, lawyers say

n3fta

n3fta

Well-Known Member
VIANARCHRIS said:
Sorry, I forgot about your limited internet skills. I haven't bothered to research actual court cases and convictions - you'll have to get your mom to help you with that. If you had bothered to read the article before posting your childish comments, you might have found your answer. I've taken a paragraph from the cbc article I posted for you a few minutes ago that shows 1,159 drug-impaired driving charges in 2013.
You stated "NO DUI FOR MEDICAL. NO DUI FOR PHARMA" and "Prove me wrong and I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong."....
I'm waiting.
Figures from Statistics Canada show that the number of people charged by Canadian police forces with drug-impaired driving offences, including impaired operation causing death or bodily harm, along with impaired operation of a vehicle, vessel or aircraft, rose from 183 in 2008 to 1,159 in 2013. (Over the same period, the number of people charged with impaired driving fell from 65,822 to 53,944.)
Click to expand...
I see now it's SC not HC.

Now we believe HC? This makes me believe your correct and I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong. Link to a case with conviction? I've honestly looked briefly myself and can't find one.
 
VIANARCHRIS

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
Hmmm...you started off by claiming there was an exemption from the DUI laws for medical users of cannabis. Now that I've shown that to be an inaccurate statement, you switch to demanding proof of a conviction? Weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top