PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, Let’s NOT turn this into a Great Debate about drug laws, and let’s NOT get this thread closed by disseminating information about how to break the law.
I’m always reading in our local “Police Beat” column in our daily newspaper about how Such-n-Such Person was charged with Crime A, Crime B, and “…posession of drug paraphernalia.”
Uhh, I can legally buy all the drug paraphernalia I want at at least two retail locations in the greater Springfield area. Bongs from the sublime to the ridiculous; pipes; pipes disguised as something else (such as tubes of lipstick) so The Man doesn’t get suspicious; little gift sets that include a mirror, a razor, and a small plastic tube; candles specifically designed to cover the scent of marijuana; and more bongs. They take cash, local checks, and all major credit cards.
So how is it that one can buy this stuff but not posess it? Is posession of drug paraphernalia a secondary offense; that it, you can only be charged with it if you’ve been charged with another, worse crime?
All bongs and pipes are really marketed as being for tobacco. If you use it for tobacco, or if you don’t use it at all then you have no problem. If the paper mentions drug paraphernalia, then that means that there is evidence of drug use (resin, white powder residue). IIRC, bongs are illegal, used or not, in Canada. As with most things regarding the law, YMMV.
What I got from my Criminal Law class freshman year, there has to be burnt marijuana residue on the pipe/bong/etc. Without any residue from pot, it’s legal to have paraphernalia
Presumably, then, you can sell a bong by having signs about your store saying that this product is intended for tobacco use. As adam yax points out, if you’re caught with a bong and it has marijuana residue on it – and it’s amazing how small an amount can be detected these days – then you have run afoul of the law.
This is not legal advice - for that, consult an attorney face to face.
Is there a distinction between having drugs for personal use and having drugs with the intent to sell them? Is the penalty for one harsher than the other?
On a Boston radio station that I can pick up in my car, there are constantly these ads for a “Smoke Shop” where one can buy “water pipes and related smoking accessories.” They have the required disclaimer that all pipes are for tobacco use only (which is, of course, ridiculous, but there you have it). It is perfectly legal to buy a pipe. This is similar, I would suppose, to the use of “cigarette rolling papers.” Of course some people do roll their own tobacco cigarettes, but obviously there are people buying these for, um, other purposes. But you can’t then say that having pipes or rolling papers is illegal, just because some (read: most) folks use them for illegal substances.
The aforementioned radio ads are funny because the poorly-imitated voices of Cheech and Chong are used to talk about the wide variety of water pipes (and apparently you can even make your own designs there), but then “Cheech” announces “all pipes are for tobacco use only, man.” “Chong” replies, “Whoa, bummer, man.” Cracks me up every time.
In Washington state, it illegal to use paraphernalia, but not to possess it. To make a good charge of use of paraphernalia, there has to be residue and some evidence that the person possessing the item used it in our jurisdiction.
However, if there is marijuana residue in the item, you can just be charged with possession of marijuana. Under state law, anything containing cannabinoids is considered to be marijuana.
As to the earlier hijack post; Yes, penalties for possession with intent to deliver are far more harsh than those for simple possession. Proving intent to deliver usually involves establishing that the person has more than a normal person possesses for personal use, they have scales, baggies, etc. for packaging; notes of drug transactions are especially useful.
I appologize for continuing to hijack, but the combination of the quoted post and this article on endogenous cannabinoids was too funny to pass up. In retrospect, I’m sure this joke has been made before but I’m still tickled by the image of WA state troopers confiscating someone’s brain.
Rasta:
This is not legal advice, do not take it as so:
Illinois Law regarding sale:
Illlinois Law regarding possession:
Drug Paraphernalia is defined as:
They go on to outline some specifics, including: water pipes, mini cocaine spoons, electric pipes, chillums, and bongs.
All this boils down to is that if they can prove the stuff is “peculiar to and marketed for” use by drugs, it is illegal to sell it. I’ve seen a few of these Head shops in smaller towns actually get a few police visits in regards to the stuff they sell, but generally police are reluctant to actually charge the crime.
As to actual possession of drug paraphenalia, they have to prove that you “intended to use it.” As others have pointed out, if there is residue, it’s usually pretty indicative of intent to use, but possession itself isn’t illegal unless you ahve the intent to use it.
All of this talk of specifically stating that bongs sold retail are for tobacco use only (yeah, right :rolleyes: ) begs the question: does anybody actually buy a bong at a head shop and use it for tobacco? Does the (tobacco) smoke from a bong posess a certain quality that one can’t get from a cigarette or pipe?
[sub]I’m ignorant on these matters, since I don’t smoke OR use drugs.[/sub]
Here in Chicago, the heat is apparently on: the local head shop has taken the bongs and pipes off the shelf (i.e., they are not for sale (unless, evidently, the girl working that day thinks you’re cute (or something))). Rolling trays, machines, and papers are still blatently for sale.
I wonder how the law/its enforcement can be so wishy-washy; shouldn’t they just be illegal or not (but purely for tobacco use, of course ;))?
rastahomie - I’ve smoked the contents of a clove cigarette through a water pipe, and boy did that suck.
If you’re in the US, definitely; most other countries, almost certainly. Being charged <blankety-blanky> WITH INTENT is far harsher than the mere posession charge; those in power care alot more about stopping those who make big bucks selling the stuff than those who use it.
As I understand “intent to sell/distribute” laws, you can be charged with it on the basis of how much of a drug you’re found with. If one has an eigth-ounce of smoke or cocaine it’s likely it’s for personal use, whereas a pound of one of the above substances probably means one intends to sell/distribute.
This ACLU press release tells of a victory over an attempt to radically expand the definition in that state of “drug paraphernalia.”
The list of potential drug paraphenalia goes beyond Just smoking accesories. They extend to hydroponic-home gardining tools, heat lamps, ect. I have heard of hydroponic gardening dealers being harassed by the man.
Using the “reasonably should know” clause from Virginia’s laws (as stated above) to judge, IMHO:
A waterpipe? Yes. A Hookah? No. Lots of Arab American and hip white boys use it for tobacco.
Rolling Papers? Americans over 80 and Europeans roll tobacco, but most likely.
Hydroponics? The odds are quite good that a typical dealer gets lots of business from “hydro”-growers. But also so with hobby horticulturist.
Crack Pipes? hell yeah.
Many bongs are a work of art in themselves.
These are all just my opinion. But there are enough excuses to use “paraphenalia”, and defense lawyers to back them up, without drugs to keep them on the market.