What is a valid 'research project'?

[Outta Pocket]

You cannot be tried for possessing a LICIT substance (directed toward JWH etc.). I don't like where this thread is going...

Yeah but most of the RC's he mentioned could probably be easily prosecuted under the FAA, there are many ways to build a case. In this case it's a total grey area, prosecuting individuals for something like that is time, money, and effort better spent elsewhere.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Yeah but most of the RC's he mentioned could probably be easily prosecuted under the FAA, there are many ways to build a case. In this case it's a total grey area, prosecuting individuals for something like that is time, money, and effort better spent elsewhere.

No, we are not talking about controlled substances or analogues. Just research chems that are legal to own and sell, but sold for research purposes only and not for human consumption.

And what?! Monies better spent elsewhere? Don't tell me the government knows how to properly spend its monies lol .

 

[Outta Pocket]

And what?! Monies better spent elsewhere? Don't tell me the government knows how to properly spend its monies lol .

"Better" from their perspective of course... Spent busting hard drugs, not some 18 year-old buying a "research chemical" on the internet. No glory in that.

Many companies sell chemicals for "research" while also mentioning the consumption caveat... I know what you're saying but I don't think it would save anyone's ass.

 

[Sentience]

"Better" from their perspective of course... Spent busting hard drugs, not some 18 year-old buying a marijuana from a medical marijuana club for his insomnia. No glory in that.

Fixed.

Many companies sell chemicals for "research" while also mentioning the consumption caveat... I know what you're saying but I don't think it would save anyone's ass.

While it may not protect you, it does produce a 'reasonable doubt', or could if you actually attempted to do such an experiment even if you happened to snort some along the way.

I dont think it has to be for research, as long as you have some kind of valid reason for having it.....I think that testing to see if it will make plants grow faster is semi-believable. Its suspicious as hell, but its hard to prove that it wasnt your intent.

Our system of law is in theory based on proof, not on what is suspicious as hell.

 

[Outta Pocket]

Our system of law is in theory based on proof, not on what is suspicious as hell.

In theory but as dokomo said, "trial by jury" can be scary as hell. Better get a damn good lawyer!

Interesting topic regardless.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

I dont think it has to be for research, as long as you have some kind of valid reason for having it.....I think that testing to see if it will make plants grow faster is semi-believable. Its suspicious as hell, but its hard to prove that it wasnt your intent.

And this is why this thread is getting closed. Bluelight is not here to help you circumnavigate the grey areas of legislation.