Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Libloather
Nope. Possession is different from use.

You're being more than a little bit disingenuous.

Obviously, use is possession by the letter and intent of the law, or is it your contention now that use is not illegal?

The only legal offences we have for this substance are possession, possession with intent to distribute, distribution, and manufacture.

Are you saying that your original question was really a trick question with no meaning? If so, why inject it into the debate? To quibble over semantics and amphiboly? If not, concede the point.

The crime committed by using marijuana is possession. You get charged with possession if you are in a room full of marijuana smoke, whether or not you have any on your person.

Jeffrey M. Whatshisname is doing four years for having less than an ounce, while elsewhere rapists and thieves get parole because the prisons are overcrowded. Welcome to Libloather's World of Justice.

342 posted on 09/15/2002 3:09:03 PM PDT by Yeti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies ]


To: Yeti
To quibble over semantics and amphiboly? If not, concede the point.
Yes, and no. I took the opportunity of looking up amphiboly. The definition came up - any of a group of complex silicate minerals with like crystal structures that contain calcium, sodium, magnesium, aluminum, and iron ions or a combination of them. Ya got me.

The crime committed by using marijuana is possession.
No, it isn't.

Welcome to Libloather's World of Justice.
Take some time to learn the law. Really cool stuff if you have the ability to comprehend...

349 posted on 09/15/2002 4:32:56 PM PDT by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson