Come to New Zealand and die

[Grubber]

How does it make any difference if a drug affected person is "selling commercial transport" or not? They could still be operating a private vehicle, and the laws of physics don't care if it's a commercial operation or not.



Exactly.



Why? The person could come to work hungover with no detectable alcohol levels in their breath and still be significantly impaired.



That was 5 days ago. You're the only "bloody retard" here if you think someone is still going to be high 5 days after the last dose. I'm starting to think that you're the one affected by drugs here since you can't even put a rational argument together. Alcohol impairment the night before, a lack of sleep, and prescription drugs all affect someone much, much more than some weed up to a few days previously.

I'm a retard. You been smokin just recently have you. What don't you get here??? I siad he was operating one of our vehicles 5 days ago, which is when he would have been high as a kite. And you reckon i'm a retard. Lsiten carefully in future.

Where's the evidence?



"Test for everything?" You're far more naive than I ever thought possible. Drug tests for recreational drugs only test a tiny minority of known psychoactive substances, probably less than 1% of known drugs.

The person could have been hungover as fuck, but how would you prove that with no detectable alcohol in their breath? Alcohol, caffeine and tobacco are all psychoactive drugs that very few people get "medical clearance" to consume. So are you saying that people shouldn't be allowed coffee or cigarettes on the job, or alcohol in their spare time after work?


Here we go again, WE TEST FOR EVERYTHING! Check with the NZ Drug testing and see what you can find these days. Pay to get your facts right big fella.
Find this all very typical from dope users. Switch arguments onto alcohol or prescription drugs to further their efforts to justify their use of dope.


Then what are you doing on KB if that's your view? You shouldn't drive a cage, ride a motorbike or pushbike, or even be a pedestrian then because there could be some drug crazed muppet ready to run you over. Stay home, it will be safer.

Maybe if you would stay home the roads might become less of a danger to be on.

[Grubber]

Because they are not only taking the risk for themselves and those that my or may not be collateral damage of their choice, they are advertising, enticing and charging money for them to take part in their magical adventure. It's not physics, it's moral responsibility

You may have to say that a little louder. Don't think he gets much of the moral thing or the commercial to be fair.

[Katman]

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

That's been covered at post #156.

Do try to keep up.

[Katman]

Quite frankly, there would be a far greater level of impairment caused by a hangover from someone having a drinking session, coupled with very little sleep, than there would be from someone having a cone the night before.

[Banditbandit]

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

I'm sorry - but there is no such crime as 2nd degree murder in Godzone - you've been watching too much television ..

Thank you Drew.

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

And most of the time you do manage to scrape passed that mark ...

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.

What do you mean by "proof"?

I have experience (quite a lot and over a long time) of the effects of both alcohol and cannabis ... My experience tells me that if he smoked within five hours of flying then he was impaired ... he might not have been completely wasted if he smoked five hours earlier (but the report says within five hours - so it could have even been half an hour earlier0 But if he had smoked five hours earlier, then he was still coming down .. possibly a worse state for flying a balloon than if he was recently stoned.

Quite frankly, there would be a far greater level of impairment caused by a hangover from someone having a drinking session, coupled with very little sleep, than there would be from someone having a cone the night before.

Are you speaking here from experience???

And "having a cone the night before"? The report says he smoked within five hours of the 6.30 flight - that at least puts the ingestion of THC o the same day .. you are trying to create wriggle room for your arguments .. not a valid step ..

I

[Madness]

Sleep deprivation could also lead to a greater level of impairment than any negligible residual effects from using Cannabis in my opinion. There was some talk on the web several months ago that suggested Lance Hopping may have had only a couple of hours sleep in the 24 hours preceding the accident and if I recall correctly, those close to Hopping believe that this was way more likely to have been a contributing factor than his Cannabis use.

A lack of sleep is so much less dramatic though, huh?

To those who are so quick to throw shit at the dead based on the Coroners mention of trace levels of THC should take a good look at themselves. It would pretty gutting to read some of the shit posted in this thread if you were a friend or relative of Hopping in light of the lack of facts available to prove that Hoppings' previous Cannabis use was indeed the cause or at least a contributing factor to the accident. Heartless cunts.

[Katman]

What do you mean by "proof"?

I have experience (quite a lot and over a long time) of the effects of both alcohol and cannabis ... My experience tells me that if he smoked within five hours of flying then he was impaired ... he might not have been completely wasted if he smoked five hours earlier (but the report says within five hours - so it could have even been half an hour earlier0 But if he had smoked five hours earlier, then he was still coming down .. possibly a worse state for flying a balloon than if he was recently stoned.

And "having a cone the night before"? The report says he smoked within five hours of the 6.30 flight - that at least puts the ingestion of THC o the same day .. you are trying to create wriggle room for your arguments .. not a valid step ..

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-...ectid=11254571

Forensic pathologist Fintan Garavan and ESR scientist Helen Poulsen said samples taken from Mr Hopping more than three days after the crash found 2 micrograms per litre of blood of the active ingredient in cannabis, THC, in his system.

Dr Poulsen said under normal conditions, that could indicate a cannabis cigarette was smoked up to five hours before death. But if smoked regularly, cannabis could accumulate in the body tissue.

In Mr Hopping's case, some decomposition of the sample and mixing of other bodily fluids could have increased or decreased the level of THC found.

"If he was a frequent user, then there would be a possibility that THC stored in the body could have increased the level found," she said. Dr Garavan said once-a-week use was sufficient to build up THC levels in the body. Once a user stopped smoking, the amount of THC could build up in the blood system as the drug, which had accumulated in the body tissue over a long period, was released into the body.

The evidence supported that Mr Hopping was a chronic user, not that he had smoked that morning, Dr Garavan said.

There was also no evidence of cannabis smoke in his lungs, which there would have been if he had smoked that day.

"It's highly unlikely that he smoked that morning."




At the risk of sounding like Ed, you really should do some research before before opening your mouth.

[ellipsis]

...someone will be along to tell us the coroner is a cunt and must have been stoned, soon...

[Bassmatt]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-...ectid=11254571

[B
The evidence supported that Mr Hopping was a chronic user, not that he had smoked that morning, Dr Garavan said.

There was also no evidence of cannabis smoke in his lungs, which there would have been if he had smoked that day.

"It's highly unlikely that he smoked that morning."
[/B]



At the risk of sounding like Ed, you really should do some research before before opening your mouth.

[oneblackflag]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-...ectid=11254571

Forensic pathologist Fintan Garavan and ESR scientist Helen Poulsen said samples taken from Mr Hopping more than three days after the crash found 2 micrograms per litre of blood of the active ingredient in cannabis, THC, in his system.

Dr Poulsen said under normal conditions, that could indicate a cannabis cigarette was smoked up to five hours before death. But if smoked regularly, cannabis could accumulate in the body tissue.

In Mr Hopping's case, some decomposition of the sample and mixing of other bodily fluids could have increased or decreased the level of THC found.

"If he was a frequent user, then there would be a possibility that THC stored in the body could have increased the level found," she said. Dr Garavan said once-a-week use was sufficient to build up THC levels in the body. Once a user stopped smoking, the amount of THC could build up in the blood system as the drug, which had accumulated in the body tissue over a long period, was released into the body.

The evidence supported that Mr Hopping was a chronic user, not that he had smoked that morning, Dr Garavan said.

There was also no evidence of cannabis smoke in his lungs, which there would have been if he had smoked that day.

"It's highly unlikely that he smoked that morning."




At the risk of sounding like Ed, you really should do some research before before opening your mouth.

But but but, skippa1's known impairment levels (tables /calcs/whatever) prove the pilot was under the influence... How can this be?

[Katman]

But but but, skipa1's known impairment levels (tables /calcs/whatever) prove the pilot was under the influence... How can this be?

He probably got his degree in forensic pathology at a different university.

[oneblackflag]

He probably got his degree in forensic pathology at a different university.

Ah an online jobbie... That explains it, thanks.

[Katman]

I suspect Banditbandit must be off searching for some 'wriggle room'.

[pritch]

So now I have a new question; why wait three days before deciding to do a drug test? If they'd waited much longer they'd have had to dig the poor bugger up to test him.

On another unrelated note, I'm concerned that young people watch so much US sourced TV that they don't even know what bloody country they live in.
If they aren't all that young that's even more of a worry. The stuff we see on KB that refers to, "Protect and Serve", cops and donuts, and now "murder in the second degree". WTF?
/Rant

[Grubber]

That's been covered at post #156.

Do try to keep up.

Adding my 5c worth so you can actually get fucked!