Quote:
Originally Posted by Matata
My point is that there are great number of things that impair to an equal or more severe degree than driving stoned and as such, the current laws are sufficient, we don't need anything new. People who are afraid that a smokey wave of death will soon be flooding the highways are jumping at shadows.
|
That's what Undercover is arguing, not to create some separate system of laws for it, but to be able to effectively test and handle it in the same way as impaired driving. You can have similar laws and consequences but a big part of this is that they have to define what Impaired is (if it matches the liquor laws in Alberta) then its pretty much a two tier system.
So like I said at the start, if the Liberal's are going to legalize this by August 20th of next year then they will have to define what impaired is, then they can match the punishments in a similar way.
I mean pretty much as it stands in Alberta, if a cop pulls you over and suspects that you're high, they can probably tow your car and write you a summons if they mirror the current impaired driving laws.