Driving cars is legal?
Part of the problem w/that is that you can’t prove when the use occured which then means problem for jurisdiction.
They could charge him with mixing the schwag with the kind. A true crime if there ever was one.
They couldn’t even charge him for the bong. It’s not illegal to possess a bong unless they can prove it was weed he’s smoking out of it. They sell them in smoke shops around the country as ‘tobacco water pipes’. Any attorney worth his weight in shit will get the case thrown out. I’m guessing this is what the boys of the SCPD are debating at this very moment.
It’s magic. Actually, it’s just a little absurd, but our laws aren’t above absurdity.
“I made it from San Francisco to LA in six hours.”
Cop: “You must have been speeding, I’m giving you a ticket.”
“Yeah, right. You didn’t catch me.”
Marijuana laws are absurd. Here in Colorado, as I understand it, if a doctor recommends MJ for you and you are registered as an medical MJ patient, it’s legal to possess, use, and grow.
It is illegal however, to obtain it in the first place. How does that work?
Tommy Chong spent time in prison for selling them.
From what I understood, it was the fact that he told an undercover agent that the bongs he sold were good for pot that got him federally fucked. In smoke shops you can’t refer to them as bongs, as a bong by nature is a device used to smoke marijuana and is thereby illegal. Unless something has changed in the few years I stopped smoking pot, if you refer to it as a water pipe and make no mention of it’s true purpose it is perfectly legal to buy, sell, or possess.
Just goes to show it really is a performance-enhancing drug! 
But only if you put a big bowl of ice cream at the finish line.
It becomes no longer legal to possess them once they are tainted with marijuana residue.
If you can believe the Showtime special about this, he was busted for shipping th bongs into Pennsylvania, one of 2 states where bongs are illegal. He was entrapped, though perhaps not in the legal sense of the term.
A person called repeatedly and tried to order bongs and have them shipped to PA. The order was always refused. Then the narc went directly to the factory, and ordered and paid for many items, none of them in stock at the time - so he couldn’t take them away when he left. They called him when his order was ready, so he could pick them up. But he never could. Supposedly, they called him multiple times, and he was never willing to come get his stuff. So they finally shipped it to him, in PA. And then they raided the factory with 40 heavily armed Federal agents. Again, according to the people who worked there, one single cop could have walked in and seen everything, because they were operating a totally aboveboard operation.
I have a daughter, and if I completely freaked out over the fact that Phelps got busted snarking the bong, it would make her even more curious about it than if I just went “who cares”?
He’s an adult. My kid is not.
Like a previous poster said, he dedicated a great deal of his rather young life winning all those medals. I think he deserves a little party and also a little slack from squares.
If Obama was caught horking on a righteous doobie in the White House, I’d vote for him. Again. Twice in North Dakota.
Nope.
I’m not sure what point you intend to make with this, but let me explain myself further:
To me, the question is “Is illegally smoking weed immoral in itself, or is it just bad to let children be exposed to the fact that some adults they respect do it?”.
If you think smoking weed illegally is immoral in itself, then, fine, I disagree with you, but I’m not going to argue with you right now.
But if you think the only problem is that children might be exposed to adults doing so… well, why would that suddenly change things? It seems almost circular to me. You have no problem with the activity per se; you only have problems with children being exposed to images which might influence them to someday emulate… activity you have no problem with per se. Seems bizarre to get up in arms.
As a child, I’ve seen my parents speed, commit copyright infringement, and so on. All generally slap-on-the-wrist (or less) offences, right? Even ones some might consider of no moral significance whatsoever. Just like Phelps’ marijuana use. And yet, it does not seem to me as though my parents were bad people for allowing me to be exposed to this. If one thinks that copyright infringement is immoral in itself, then that’s one thing, but if one doesn’t think badly of it in itself, then it seems to me that allowing kids to find out shouldn’t suddenly change the situation into a censure-worthy one. It’s just exposing kids to what one already accepts as the acceptable, typical behavior of many adults. Why go through the charade of lying to them? It just perpetuates attitudes of self-flagellating prudery.
Put it another way: suppose kids in America find out that their favorite athlete happens to enjoy alcohol. No big deal; we accept that this is typical, morally acceptable adult behavior, and don’t make too much effort to shield our children from it.
Now suppose kids in some other country nominally under strict Muslim law find out that their favorite athlete happens to enjoy alcohol, despite its illegality, which is laxly enforced with a general turn-the-other-way attitude for small offences. Or perhaps children in such a country find out that some woman they look up to illegally drives cars on the weekends, or transgresses the national dress code, or what have you. Is this supposed to suddenly be a significantly morally blameworthy offense, simply because that country happens to have ridiculous, unjust laws criminalizing such activities? I have difficulty agreeing with this.
“But it’s illegal!” seems to me a lame excuse for moral outrage, when one doesn’t have external reason to actually support such criminalization. It rings rather hollow.
Well, since your kid is probably going to try drugs as well as drinking, smoking, and wild, monkey sex, I wouldn’t worry too much about it.
I don’t know the whole story, but I think it was a specific county where they’re illegal, not a state. Bongs (if you call them waterpipes) are not illegal in Pennsylvania. Hell, I’ve bought bongs in PA. There’s a head shop an hour away from me in York. There’s a good one in Philadelphia called Wonderland that’s been there at least since I was in high school in the '90s, and probably a lot longer. And I’m pretty sure there’s another one in Philly and one in State College, and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
I may be misremembering that detail. But the crime itself was Federal, not state, and involved shipping the goods into PA. Certainly, I suppose, it could have been some specific portion of PA.
Ah, wiki knows all.. There’s a summary here which confirms it was a Fed crime, but is a little murkier on which one. This summery says it was related to “internet distribution”, but it was in fact a shipment to PA that resulted in the prosecution.
I’ve never bought one but I think this is correct. Eventually I hope to see this in “Dumb Laws” books around the country, like “You can’t tie an alligator to a fire hydrant in Angel Piss, Fla.” Laws against pot are stupid in the first place, but laws that require obvious lies like this purely for their own sake, where the terminology alone makes for a criminal act, are a total waste of everybody’s time and mental energy.
Most of the ‘dumb laws’ are simply overly specific applications of actual, sensible laws; for example, you can’t tie anything to a fire hydrant in Angel Piss, alligator or not, because the fire department needs to be able to get to them quickly and easily.
Yea, well even that seems to have selective enforcement. There’s a neighborhood in my town that has houses close together, narrow one way streets and a fire hydrant at the end of a dead end. The house closest to it park(ed) several dead cars there all the time (as in, kept them there for months on end). In additiona to blocking the hydrant, there’s city ordinance that prohibits parking on the street past 2 am. Repeated (and I do mean repeated) calls, letters etc to : parking enforcement, the fire department, the fire cheif, city council, the police etc. had zero effect. NOt once were any of the cars even ticketed, let alone towed.
So, when you have stupid laws and add ineffective/inconsistent enforcement, you have idiotic situations like these.