On 25/10/2018 09:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/10/18 00:37, JNugent wrote:
On 25/10/2018 00:01, TMS320 wrote:
On 23/10/18 18:27, JNugent wrote:
On 23/10/2018 17:24, Simon Jester wrote:
On Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 11:27:59 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 22/10/2018 21:34, Simon Jester wrote:

Why not UK

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45806255

Legal weed in Leftpondia has been proven to reduce drink and
drug driving.

Is stoned driving better than drink-driving? They're equally
risky and
both illegal (in the UK and USA, and almost certainly also in
Canada).

Ah, of course - if our lords and masters have decided to make
something illegal it must be wrong.

Define "wrong".

No

In that case, your "point" is non-existent.

And your point?

It's obviously too complicated for you, but for a normal person
ought to be more obvious: there is no gain in swapping drunk drivers for
drugged drivers.

Even you ought to be able to work out why.

I have never knowingly taken cannabis products (does this mean I
don't qualify as a normal person?). No doubt you can explain why there
is no gain in swapping drunk drivers for drugged drivers.

Neither category is in full control of the vehicle, of course.

"Full control" is too vague for something inherently non-binary.

The provisions of the Construction and Use Regulations are not vague.
Full control (or the lack thereof, as the case may be) presents no
definition difficulties for the police or the courts.

Thene there is: https://www.gov.uk/drug-driving-law

And perhaps more to the p[oint:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...ted?view=plain

But of course, you know better than the law, don't you?

Are you feeling alright?

I suspect I have better health than you, thank you for asking.