Marijuana.com

Randøm_

...and as someone else pointed out, DO NOT SHIP UPS, those bastards have opened every package I've received in the last 2 years. They do not need a warrant because it is THEIR property while they are in possession of it. I actually got into an argumnet with them. The bottom line is that they said they have the right to search packages while they are in transit to protect the safety of their workers. My last response was "fine, and I reserve the right to use other freight shippers that do not violate my privacy". Note that I have never been involved in the shipment of illicit substances!

...but great post that I'm piggy-backing off of.

 

Niteshift

Not for nothing..............but isn't that an awful lot more complicated than just going down the street and buying a little?

TXM

ok, i know that sounds a little much but there are a few good(depending on who you are) reasons to do this.

1) you just moved to a small town with bud dealers who overcharge you 200% or more (YIKES!! welcome to my existence)

2) Your sick of seeing everyone making 200% rip-offs, you rent 10 postal boxes (large size) at MD's (not US Postal) using fake ID's and use this method to get sent 5 pounds of premium grade MaryJ (chronic, hash, or the like) you shutdown the MD's (after waiting 3 mounths and sending much junk mail there)and voila you have 5 pounds of PREMO shi* and u paid an extra 150-200 bucks + Time and now smoke without paying the extra 2000+ bux it woulda cost you to buy 5 lbs. here, plus your buying from some1 you trust and any cops in the new area can't bust ya for pickin the wrong dealer.

3) you're in the same situation as #2 but this time you sell it AND smoke it you sell it for 110-125% rip-offs, you make back your cash, give the potheads some more cash in thier pocket, and you got money for some new Kicks.

BOOM an thaz why it's done, Money isn't the root of all evil, Love of money is. If you just have a coupla one nights stands with money and her friends it'll all be good

SonOfAGlitch

My brother used to work for the post office around here. I can tell you completely honestly that (a) postal workers most certainly do open plenty of packages for trifling reasons, generally because they think there's cash in there. some go to the trouble of obscuring the return address as an excuse.

(b) if a postal worker found herb chances are he'd keep it. i'd say it's a 70% chance...

(c) not postal worker related but i think it was niteshift who said that K9s alert on microscopic particles... that's BS. there's so much weed around the dog would be CONSTANTLY allerting. especially if they were also trained to alert on coke.. one dot study (at dea request) showed that more than 80% of all bills in circulation at any given time have been in contact with cocaine and have enough residue on them to be testable by machines which can NOT test microscopic debris.

if you're intelligent about it you probably won't get busted for it, but if you do then you're screwed... i mean, traffiking, possesion, intent to distribute (federally..). noone wants to stare that in the face.

Niteshift

"one dot study (at dea request) showed that more than 80% of all bills in circulation at any given time have been in contact with cocaine and have enough residue on them to be testable by machines which can NOT test microscopic debris."

Totally incorrect. The "study" was done by a network for their show. It is totally unreliable and has never been successfully used in court because it does not pass the Frye test (the standard for scientific evidence to be admitted).

On the contrary to what you said, the Dept. of Justice (the parent agency of the DEA) has successfully introduced into court a Univ. of FL study showing that there the 80% number is bogus.

"i think it was niteshift who said that K9s alert on microscopic particles... that's BS. there's so much weed around the dog would be CONSTANTLY allerting. especially if they were also trained to alert on coke.. "

Yeah, I probably haven't learned anything working with k-9's for 11 years. Perhaps you'd like to tell us what you base your assessment of my "BS" on, especially since your DOT(?) study was just debunked above.

 

SonOfAGlitch

I have no desire to argue with you since you base all your arguments on rhetoric. I don't care if anyone believes you over me or if you do not believe me either and I do not need to get into a flame war: I have nothing to prove.

here's my reply, and let's not let this degrade, hmm?

The treasury department conducted the test. whether it's "Dept Of Treasury" (DOT) or not, I don't care. You can argue the point with them, not me.

It was 80% or GREATER had a cocaine concentration detectable by machine. Again, you can argue this with my socio text book. Published by Kehoe, if you're interested

And it takes more than your word against mine to debunk a treasury department study.

as far as what you've learned working with K9s for 11 years, I don't know, but I do know that I trust any text book more than I trust any cop.

finally, consult the merke text book on advanced biology which states quite plainly that it takes a fraction of a gram of any drug for any kind of dog to smell something, that is why plastic wrap (which only lets microscopic particles through) throws off dogs who look for meat.

it's simple biology... your dog's membranes are too dense to allow microscopic particles to penetrate.

debunked, huh? right.

Niteshift

"I have no desire to argue with you since you base all your arguments on rhetoric. I don't care if anyone believes you over me or if you do not believe me either and I do not need to get into a flame war: I have nothing to prove."

I have even less to prove. I'm not the one trying to get something changed.

I will, however, address your incorrect statement that my arguement is based on rhetoric.

Apparently, you don't understand what I'm saying to you. Dog detect odor, not particles. There may or may not be microscopic particles on currency, but it does not alert the dog.

Here is an excerpt of the study I spoke of:

Conducted by: Prof. Kenneth G. Furton, Ph.D.
Chair, Department of Chemistry and Director, IFRI
Florida International University
Miami, Florida

(not a cop in case you didn't notice)

"Affidavit of Prof. Furton:

1. I am an expert in the field of Analytical Chemistry and Forensic Science. My education, training, experience and publications are outlined in my Curriculum Vitae as provided to the Assistant United States Attorney.

2. It is my expert opinion that a positive alert to U.S. currency by a properly trained narcotics detection canine indicates that the currency had recently, or just prior to packaging, been in close or actual proximity to a significant amount of narcotics, and is not the result of any alleged innocent environmental contamination of circulated U.S. currency by microscopic traces of cocaine.

3. My expert opinion is not affected by the alleged theory that the majority of circulated U.S. currency is innocently contaminated with microscopic amounts of cocaine, as my research has shown to a reasonable scientific certainty that a narcotics detection dog alerts to the odor of methyl benzoate as the dominant odor of illicit cocaine, and not to pure cocaine itself.

4. The dominant cocaine odor chemical, methyl benzoate, is a highly volatile substance associated with the manufacture of illicit cocaine and evaporates quickly when handled and/or exposed to air, while pure cocaine hydrochloride has almost no gaseous odor and is transferred rather easily by physical contact. The very processes, which result in the contamination of currency by cocaine (including the handling and mechanical counting of currency), tend to dissipate the cocaine odor chemical, methyl benzoate.


5. Additionally, cocaine is a local anesthetic and as such blocks the transmission of nerve impulses. Therefore cocaine should block the transmission of olfactory (smell) nerve fibers resulting in non-detection.

6. It is also my expert opinion that the methyl benzoate found in some perfumes is so minute as compared to the many other gaseous substances contained in perfume that a narcotics detection dog trained to alert to cocaine would not alert to perfume.

7. My research has included studies with over 29 different narcotics detection canines in over 120 individual tests and their abilities to detect the odor of cocaine. Much of these studies are detailed in the three published papers listed below, etc.

8. I am also aware of numerous non-alerts by trained narcotics canines to large amounts of circulated U.S. currency, a fact which supports my theories and is inconsistent with the theory that all U.S. currency is contaminated with so much cocaine that narcotics detection canines will always alert to money.


9. Based on my training and experience in the field of analytical chemistry and forensic science; the research I have conducted with narcotic detection canine teams; my review of the literature and the facts of this case, it is my opinion that the narcotics detection dog in this case, ____, handled by Officer ______, acted consistently with his training and that the positive alert indicates that the defendant currency in this case had recently, or just before packaging been in close or actual proximity to a significant amount of narcotics."

This research has been admitted to numerous trials because it meets Frye test standards. Standards accepted nationally by courts for the acceptance of scientific evidence.

Still want to call it rhetoric?

"And it takes more than your word against mine to debunk a treasury department study."

That's what I just did friend. I gave you much more than my word. Do you have anything that has met Frye standards and been accepted in court to prove your point?

"I do know that I trust any text book more than I trust any cop. "

I'm sorry about your personal prejudices.

"it's simple biology... your dog's membranes are too dense to allow microscopic particles to penetrate."

The dogs don't detect particles, they detect odor which does penetrate the membrane. It's simply a matter of knowing what the dog does before you go too far off course.

" debunked, huh? right."

It just was friend, it just was.

Randøm_

Randøm_ is minding his own business .. la-la-la.
Talking about the self as 3rd person ... is that a side effect of MJ? ...nah, cuz I haven't had any in a while )

I heard that the average dollar bill has an average of 3% cocaine on it. #% of what> ... I don't know. I heard in the opening argument of a defense attorney (not on tv) but didn't stick around long enough to hear the rebuttal (wasn't my trial ... and I hate trials).

Let's play nice and not get too distempered (I know, that's a canine term) ...k?

Niteshift

Hey, I have a direct excerpt from a scientific study that meets all the criteria for evidence.

I'm being opposed by a posters interpretation of a study mentioned in an unnamed sociology textbook.

I'm not worried. The judges read science, not sociology textbooks.

goodgirl

Let's try to keep in mind that we are here to learn and discuss, not test out our sarcasm skills. (Although mine could always use some fine tuning as well )

Keep it civil and I will be able to stay out of it. Remain on the track this is headed, and I will have no choice but to intervene. Sorry folks...just doing my job

Peace
~GG

__________________
"Sometimes being a bitch is all you have to hold onto." ~Dolores Claiborne