JiDoKwan said:
Uh, dude, the guy pulled out. Didn't you see the cum on her tits?
Who suggested getting ripped and fucking a total stranger? It could be an activity to spice up a regular couples sex life, besides when I get ripped I don't black out and forget what I did- certainly not who I did.
Crazy Nutz said:
That's the thing. Some people have this misconception that marijuana is this out of control drug that possesses you to do things you otherwise would never do, with no cognizant recollection of any of your actions. I guess they just need to know the it is much milder than that.
The misconceptions are bad enough, we don't need it any worse.:dunno:
Babes smoking mother nature and crack, then getting down:
http://www.free-porn-vid.com/drug_users.html
http://www.free-porn-vid.com/drug_users.html
youwanttoshagme
Closed Account
Dragging up a 2yr old post???? IS there something in the wires at the moment for old posts, weed and stupidity?
Stupid question: how do they get away with that? Using illegal substances for public viewing (porn movies)?
Not and anti-weed post, just a curious question.
Not and anti-weed post, just a curious question.
This thread would not be complete without someone saying "heh heh heh heh heh!" 
because you cannot PROVE what's going on in the pictures or videos. And if they were to be arrested they would be arrested for something that happened in the past, that nobody witnessed. Thank god our country has not become that fascist. Yet.
intensifying sex is a great idea..............that should most likely go without saying...................hello
jedi007gotham
Closed Account
I agree with the can't prove it part but i am not sure about the "in the past with no witnesses" part... I mean granted, I dont know drug laws but many murders and arsons for instance happen in the past compared to when the criminal is aprehended. It is just a basic fact that some things happen in the past. An ex post facto law is only invalid when it convicts for criminal acts done before the passage of the law which were legal. That is not what we are dealing with here. I am pretty sure the police could get them if they could prove that there was marijuana in it. The problem is that they couldn't.... also would bring up too many 1st amendment expressive conduct issues....
god i hate being in law school lol
S
sputnikgirl
Guest
come over to my house....i have a hookah
A good portion of the laws less serious than murder tend to have a statue of limitations on when you can prosecute people for violating them. Being in law school, you should know that. Not only that but the time and resources needed wouldn't be worth going after cases where the proof is weak.
jedi007gotham
Closed Account
No I know, but my point is that the "fact it happened in the past" by itself is insufficient to say you can't be punished for it....and the time and resources problem is different than the fact that if a prosecutor really wanted to, they could probably bring charges... theres a difference between legally being able to bring charges and actually being able to bring charges.
as far as the statute of limitations more specifically, i think its usually about 7 years... I am sure that they can track wherever that picture came from and when they were taken, and bring charges well withinthe 7 year period from the time the pictures were taken. Again, its not so much whether they are legally able to but whether they actually want to. My guess is that although they could bring charges they don't give a shit about two people smoking pot especially when there is no actual proof that is what they are doing
Similar threads
