Pubdate: Fri, 28 Feb 2003
Source: Ottawa Sun (CN ON)
Copyright: 2003, Canoe Limited Partnership
Contact:  http://www.fyiottawa.com/ottsun.shtml
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/329
Author: Paul Hansen
Note: Parenthetical remark by the Sun editor, headline by newshawk
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v03/n309/a05.html

NO CONCLUSIVE DATA

Regarding the Feb. 26 letter from Mr. Marc-Boris St-Maurice, wherein he 
states that there is no real evidence that marijuana impairs driving: As 
usual, your flippant answer at the end of his letter misleads unaware readers.

Your comment, "You want conclusive data? How about five dead Kanata kids 
outside Perth in a crash caused by a stoned driver?" assumes that the 
driver in question was "stoned."

That was not, and could not, be proven under current testing methods. In 
rules of logical argument, this is called "begging the question," because 
you assume something as yet unproven to be true. We have thus far failed to 
legally equate being high on pot with being impaired. Although the driver 
confessed to having smoked that evening, the only thing proven is that he 
had marijuana in his system. This is not the same as being stoned or 
impaired. Marijuana is detectable in the system for up to 10 days after 
consumption, while its effects last only a couple of hours.

Your idea of what constitutes "conclusive data" is one of the several 
faulty cornerstones regarding our outdated marijuana laws.

Paul Hansen

Ottawa

(Driving stoned is an invitation to disaster. Can't you get that through 
your head?)
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D