Quote Originally Posted by simple man View Post
"Conspiracy laws in general are problematic when applied to the drug war. They give prosecutors extraordinary discretion to charge minor players, such as girlfriends or young siblings, with the crimes committed by major drug distributors. They're also easier convictions to win, and can allow prosecutors to navigate around restrictions like statutes of limitations, so long as the old offense can be loosely linked to a newer one. The Smith bill would expand those powers. Under the Amsterdam wedding scenario, anyone who participated in the planning of the wedding with knowledge of the planned pot purchase would be guilty of conspiracy, even if their particular role was limited to buying flowers or booking the hotel.'

So you still can't read, even after we pay for your college? Gee, I had hoped after all that taxpayer money you had something. I guess I see why this place has gone downhill.
What the hell? You quote some part of the article like you said anything that had to do with the piece, and say I can't read? Lol What part of that did I miss or deny? Please tell me. The only thing I can think of is it not being a crime, what they are talking about doing, STILL WOULDN'T BE A CRIME in the country they are going to...just talking about it here is. You're actually only backing up what I said earlier, since that particular part was what I mentioned... "It was also used to show that everyone involved in the wedding planning could be convicted, even if they had nothing to do with planning the fake crime."

And by the way, you haven't paid for anything, I've never been eligible for financial aid/grants for college and everything has come from out of pocket/scholarships. Another big whiff, at least get your personal attacks right.