.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
jump pages:[
all
|
1
|
2
]
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to ouchdrummer.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="ouchdrummer:924056"]"not covered by the analog drug act" well.... that's kinda grey area. The analog drug act was created because the DEA couldn't keep up with all the new drugs labs were making. In other words, the analog drug act COULD cover almost any drug. Taken from Wiki: "The Federal Analog Act, 21 U.S.C. § 813, is a controversial section of the United States Controlled Substances Act, allowing any chemical "substantially similar" to an illegal drug (in Schedule I or II) to be treated as if it were also in Schedule I, but only if it is intended for human consumption. The banned substances are often called designer drugs." Which means that they could classify MOST Of the currently available psychedelics as illegal if they wanted to, but probably wouldn't. This is for many reasons, the main reason being that once you have a criminal case for a drug that no one in the past has gotten in legal trouble for, people will find out about it, they will get curious, and suddenly this drug that hasn't, and wouldn't have been a problem otherwise, suddenly is popular, and available. Salvia has been available for a real long time, but has only started becoming a problem since the fucking media started reporting on how this new "trippy" drug is available in convenience stores.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.014 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][