Come to New Zealand and die

[Katman]

In commission of a crime causing death, 2nd degree murder, or did you miss something in Law School (maybe a braincell?) go back to sleep

You really have no clues, do you?

[Drew]

You really have no clues, do you?

Strong argument.

[Katman]

Strong argument.

Thank you Drew.

I pride myself on ensuring my opinion outweighs that of any fucking idiot.

[oneblackflag]

Only if the 'past' is recent enough to be current.........and yes I am more than happy to crucify someone who I believe causes death while committing a crime.

You have no idea if the past was recent enough to cause impairment.

On a side note; if he was blazed it would become apparent to the passengers as he got set up... They decided to get in with him.

[MVnut]

You really have no clues, do you?

I find it very strange that you defend this drug using pilot whose .... let's say inadequacy..... killed a lot of innocents when you continually persecute people breaking the odd speed law ....whether you actually have correct information or not

[MVnut]

You have no idea if the past was recent enough to cause impairment.

On a side note; if he was blazed it would become apparent to the passengers as he got set up... They decided to get in with him.

...........and you know this how?

[Katman]

I find it very strange that you defend this drug using pilot whose .... let's say inadequacy..... killed a lot of innocents when you continually persecute people breaking the odd speed law ....whether you actually have correct information or not

You should probably learn to read then.

[oneblackflag]

...........and you know this how?

I don't I'm following your lead and making wild assumptions.

[SMOKEU]

Oh yeah, how is that gonna stand up as a defence do ya think?

Look, this is all very interesting. It's moot though.

It won't come to that.

You change these discussions into alcohol vs drugs every time. It's not about that. You loose all credibility by doing it. Just argue your corner if you believe you're right.

People don't seem to have a problem with alcohol abuse or prescription drug use that may well impair people who are directly responsible for the lives of others, because it's too hard to enforce.

These same people are then all too happy to demonize illicit drug users, even when there's no evidence to show current impairment. It's akin to being sacked because the boss got wind that you had a few alcoholic beverages on your day off work.

[skippa1]

It won't come to that.



People don't seem to have a problem with alcohol abuse or prescription drug use that may well impair people who are directly responsible for the lives of others, because it's too hard to enforce.

These same people are then all too happy to demonize illicit drug users, even when there's no evidence to show current impairment. It's akin to being sacked because the boss got wind that you had a few alcoholic beverages on your day off work.

Ahh well, you carry on down your historic track, you brought alcohol into it and you can't see past your own logic....... A bit like some stoners I know.

[MVnut]

I don't I'm following your lead and making wild assumptions.

That is actually funny........but I am not making wild assumptions. You are welcome to continue the argument without me

[skippa1]

You have no idea if the past was recent enough to cause impairment.

On a side note; if he was blazed it would become apparent to the passengers as he got set up... They decided to get in with him.

Shall we ask them why..............?

[Katman]

That is actually funny........but I am not making wild assumptions.

You are assuming that the accident was caused by drug impairment.

You have no proof of that so it sounds like a fairly wild assumption to me.

[oneblackflag]

Shall we ask them why..............?

Got a wigi (sp) board handy?

[skippa1]

Got a wigi (sp) board handy?

Hardly a valid statement then aye.....