Meth. What comes to your mind when you hear that word? Many think Breaking Bad. But what is the reality of this ever-popularized drug? Two weeks before Christmas, Daniel Rushing was arrested for possession of meth, then released soon after, under the impression the field drug test on the floorboard of the car was incorrect. Today, he is suing for damages. But, we ought to rule that Rushing is, in fact, guilty of possession and consumption of meth, and his arrest was justifiable. A few weeks ago, the police uncovered a video from the Krispy Kreme location nearest the 7-Eleven on Colonial Drive. It so happens that this area that is monitored for its drug activity. This video revealed a baker in the store making a separate batch of donuts, and at one point we observe him pour an unusual white powder into the glaze. Later examination and testing of this exact working station showed traces of methamphetamine. And the kicker? Later video traces to Rushing receiving these meth-laced donuts in a back alley. How can this man be morally allowed to escape charges when hard evidence shows drug possession and may suggest further integration into a drug ring? And further, would you feel safe knowing your neighborhood Krispy Kreme was baking up meth donuts? With distinct video evidence, it is …show more content…
This is true, but recent evidence shows traces of drugs in other places of his car. Subsequent testing on Rushing’s car seats and roof have shown positive for methamphetamines 4 times. This is pertinent evidence of possession of meth, and it is a logical consequence of receiving meth-laced donuts. A car displaying traces of drugs heavily suggests its owner’s actions. It is in the police officer’s best interest to keep a druggie off the streets, wouldn’t you agree? As a result of his crimes, Rushing should receive criminal sanction. This arrest was on fair