 |
cloudy
Member
Reged: 11/07/03
Posts: 163
|
|
Scary stuff!
For those who did not read it. It wasnt your typical "poor,stay at home mother fed addiction through online op.. yada yada....." Of course it mentions some of that. What WAS VERY interesting was the DEA/ LE?? told the reporter that letters had been written to Fedex, ups, visa, mastercard and everyone along the lines who are contributing to this "illegal" activity. It mentioned ordering from Buymeds and two others. The other 2 I cant remember the names (sorry) but they were IOP's. At the time I did look up one of the sites that they said they ordered vicodin from and it was an IOP and it wasnt REALLY hydro. I think it was codeine. Another one sided article.
At the time, I thought I could just bring up the article when I needed to reference it for this post. WRONG! This was in last Sundays Boston Herald. It was printed before the news of Saddam had broke. During the day the E-edition switched to the Saddam headline and this article was missing. Now it is in the archives and if you want to view it you will need to purchase it for $2.95. Greedy Herald!!! I had already purchased the paper version for $2.
Do you think the "letter scare" will affect OP's in the immediate future? I cant imagine fedex, ups,etc... getting in trouble. They have sooooo many packages everyday all day. What do you all think?
Toodles 
|
Whatsnew
Enthusiast
Reged: 09/27/03
Posts: 205
Loc: S.E. USA
|
|
I am no expert on legal matters, but I have been thinking about this question for a good while. I honestly don't see how LE of any kind could expect parcel services to deny shipment of certain items, as there is no way to know what is in a package without opening it. I could understand them denying shipment by certain companies they deem to be engaging in illegal activity, but if that were the case then they should shut them down rather than limit them. IMO the same general rule would apply to credit card companies (with IOPs being the possible exception). Again, I am no expert, and this is only my take on it...but we DO have a few examples of exceptional legal knowledge and understanding on this board, and I would definitely look forward to reading their opinions. Thanks in advance.
D
--------------------
DBs member since Feb. '03
|
Dasani
Enthusiast
Reged: 10/29/03
Posts: 286
Loc: FL
|
|
I will relay this to everyone, yet once again. EVERYTHING IS ARRESTABLE, BUT NOT CONVICTABLE! That means I can come to your house and arrest you for just about anything, i.e. throwing a lit cigarette out the window of a car, using curse words in the presence of minors, anything. Believe it or not, stupid stuff like that IS arrestable. But no jury in the world would ever convict you on it. Now, if the Prosecutor had a real bad hard-on for you (or really disliked you for personal reasons)and wanted to get you convicted, he would utilize all the available resources to try to secure a conviction, after all, it's just the governments money he's wasting. But you on the other hand, even if you are not CONVICTED, you still must go through the arrest process, retain an attorney, pay a buttload of legal fees and court costs, and suffer great humiliation just to prove your innocence. Sometimes, the B.S. I mentioned above, is every bit as terrible as a convition itself, with the exception that it doesn't stay on your record. The bottom line is this: Unless you Best if kept off the board somebody off really bad, you are not going to be the one that they make an example out of. They will go for the ones that they already have a case against and seeking to add additional charges to, or someone who is a center of influence that will generate media attention, like a celebrity, athlete, etc... I don't know what the woman in the story did, but I can assure you she has had dealings with LE before, and wasn't just randomly picked from a hat and then arrested for using OP's. As we have seen, the government has declared war against the distribution of drugs through Online Pharmacies. They will start with the easy ones that are in obvious violation of the law, like the no record OP's, and once they've shut them down, they'll look to close down the rest of them. Of it doesn't happen, they will seek to secure a change in the law which will eliminate any grey area. It will then be written in black and white. The only downside to them seeking a change in the law, is that it may backfire on them, and the US will legalize all OP sales. The government risks shooting themselves in the foot, so they may just call it quits after all the no-record OP's are gone. We'll just have to wait and see. Sorry so long, but this is an area I am very familiar with.
|
thepatronizing1
Journeyman
Reged: 09/21/02
Posts: 82
Loc: new england
|
|
Cloudy, what is the date of the paper that had this article? And if its an older one, can i get access to it? Do you have a lick?
Pat.........
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
