Enuratique
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,743
The best kind of correct is to be technically as well as philosophically correct.
As an example I cite the former and current drugs in the bloodstream laws of Georgia as related to DUI. In the old law, having any amount of THC in your system would result in a DUI conviction based on a technically correct interpretation that any amount of THC in your bloodstream shows the presence of a drug in your bloodstream and therefor you are 'under the influence'. Forget the fact that THC stays in your blood and fatty tissue for about 2-3 weeks or longer, and obviously someone could be not really under the influence and still get a DUI. Now, the law has been changed to allow for expert testimony as to the relevance of the amount of THC in your bloodstream and how that relates to intoxication, in other words a philosophically correct interpretation of the DUI laws which assume that your driving is actually affected, not just your chemical system.
there, i corrected you
Sorry bud, but I think that was a Futurama reference.