Come to New Zealand and die

[skippa1]

Likewise what?

I'm not aware of any known impairment levels.

I thought you were the one in the know.

You must be, or your defence of his actions is based on..........assumption?

[skippa1]

If that didn't do it alone I think the "strongly suggests" in the next paragraph sealed the fail.

Semantics.......gets me every time

[oneblackflag]

You must be, or your defence of his actions is based on..........assumption?

Put up or shut up

[Katman]

You must be, or your defence of his actions is based on..........assumption?

I'm not defending his actions. I'm simply pointing out that you have no proof that the THC in his system was the cause of (or even contributed to) the accident.

[skippa1]

Put up or shut up

At the moment I have a corners findings. What facts do you have big talker......you're full of shit.

[Kickaha]

when you continually persecute people breaking the odd speed law ....

He does nothing of the sort, your comprehension and reading skills need work if you think that

[skippa1]

I'm not defending his actions. I'm simply pointing out that you have no proof that the THC in his system was the cause of (or even contributed to) the accident.

And you have no proof it didn't. Therefore your argument is no more or less valid

[Madness]

Semantics.......gets me every time

Trust me on this. Stick with the fish.

[Katman]

And you have no proof it didn't. Therefore your argument is no more or less valid

Yes, but I'm not the one jumping to conclusions.

[skippa1]

Trust me on this. Stick with the fish.

I love seafood

[skippa1]

Yes, but I'm not the one jumping to conclusions.

Ahhh yes you are, just the opposite end of the scale.


Anyway way im done. Bed time, ipad going flat. Work tomorrow. C u

[oneblackflag]

At the moment I have a corners findings. What facts do you have big talker......you're full of shit.

impairment levels... Put up your impairment levels table/calcs.... You seem to be avoiding that.

Facts I have?.. corners findings like you.... Big talker...

[Katman]

Ahhh yes you are, just the opposite end of the scale.

No I'm not. I have said a number of times that if he was impaired then he deserves condemnation. However, if he wasn't impaired then the THC in his system is irrelevant.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

[avgas]

Are you wasted or something bro ???

[Grubber]

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

Agreed. He seems happy to give it out to a barely slow speeder but defend a dope head. No sense at all!



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.[/QUOTE]

Since when don't we have an issue with alcohol abuse??? Try and stick to the drug bit aye. If you use on the job then don't expect sympathy for your employer if you get caught, but hey, as a dope head you will always argue the point to defend your pathetic need for dope.