Ass Hat
Home
News
Events
Bands
Labels
Venues
Pics
MP3s
Radio Show
Reviews
Releases
Buy$tuff
Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls
  
  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food
  
  New Thread
  New Poll
Miscellaneous
Links
E-mail
Search
End Ass Hat
login

New site? Maybe some day.
Posting Anonymously login: [Forgotten Password]
returntothepit >> discuss >> The smell of pot no longer justifies unwarranted searches...in Mormon country by sacreligion on Mar 12,2007 12:58am
Add To All Your Pages!
toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Mar 12,2007 12:58am
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_5405257

"The odor of burning marijuana isn't enough to allow police to enter a residence without a warrant, the Utah Supreme Court ruled Friday.
In a 4-1 decision, the court said only a limited number of circumstances create an exception for getting a required warrant, such as preventing thedestruction of evidence. Smelling pot is not one of them, the ruling says."



toggletoggle post by sxealex   at Mar 12,2007 1:07am
now here is a fucked up religion we can all complain about



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Mar 12,2007 1:15am
i don't think the religion has anything to do with it...i just think it's funny that it's utah

i mean, seriously, what happens in utah?



toggletoggle post by FuckIsMySignature at Mar 12,2007 8:53am
i thought you needed signifigant evidence other than just a smell anyways.



toggletoggle post by SacreligionNLI at Mar 12,2007 2:44pm
a lot of cops use that as evidence and unfortunately will take advantage of people who are too afraid to speak up for themselves while in police presence

they gotta meet their quota, ya know



toggletoggle post by Yeti at Mar 12,2007 3:25pm
this is a small step in the right direction.



toggletoggle post by mcmahon  at Mar 12,2007 4:15pm
so, in order for cops to know what pot smells like, they would have to secondhand smoke/inhale it, right?

anyone have any insight on why it's illegal anyways? pathway for other drugs? draw from the tabacco industry? a security issue? them rowdy pot smokers.



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Mar 12,2007 9:22pm
hemp interfered with the cotton industry, so all cannabis-related plants were demonized in the early 1900s i.e. reefer madness

i believe mexican immigration was also a huge issue behind it, and it gained a negative connotation through the media

this is a quote from the first head of the national bureau of narcotics in the mid 1930s:

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others." - Harry Anslinger



toggletoggle post by cav at Mar 12,2007 9:26pm
good news



toggletoggle post by flyingpoopdestroyer NLI at Mar 12,2007 9:33pm
I happened to have moved to Salt Lake a few years ago. It's not too too bad. The mormons suck donkey balls though. The city's only about 40% mormon, but since they whine a whole bunch, and the chruch controls everything, EVERYONE has to do what makes them happy. They're trying to ban abortion out here, and they fail to see the irony in the fact that they largest dry cleaner in the state is called "The Red Hanger"



toggletoggle post by Ryan_M at Mar 12,2007 9:34pm
mcmahon said:
so, in order for cops to know what pot smells like, they would have to secondhand smoke/inhale it, right?


Of course they inhale it. They have to dispose of the shit they confiscate somehow, so there's no doubt in my mind they take it home and light up a fat fucking doobie filled with exhibit A.



Enter a Quick Response (advanced response>>)
Username: (enter in a fake name if you want, login, or new user)SPAM Filter: re-type this (values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
Message:  b i u  add: url  image  video(?)show icons
remember:Extremely Swollen Cadaveric Scenario
[default homepage] [print][8:54:57am Jun 01,2024
load time 0.01804 secs/15 queries]
[search][refresh page]