US custom tested each gear and included the results in the seizure letter

[Roco Bama]

I thought this would've been of interest to some of you and I just wanted to share it with u guys. I read some threads recently and there were guys receiving bunk gear or getting flu like simptoms from gear that came from good source. You don't have to believe the lab testing part and there is a good possibility that you can receive dirty, underdosed or bunk raws from China.

 

[bootdoc]

It would be great if you could post the letter since no one here on this forum has every seen one like you describe.

 

[fodsod]

It would be great if you could post the letter since no one here on this forum has every seen one like you describe.

You can't post what doesn't exist.

 

[mghoward74]

I know a guy, who knows a guy, who knows two others guys, that have received seizure letters. Their package arrived re-tapped with 2 letters in them.

The 1st letter is a basically a flyer that says don't buys drugs from overseas, they're not regulated and unsafe. Please don't buy again.

The 2nd letter tells you what was tested and how many grams there were. It also says if you think this is false, you can petition for the items and someone will get in touch with you.

No where on the letter tells you what percentage purity of any of those items are or were!

 

[Megadick3000]

I highly doubt it myself. At most they'd do something like a Labmax, then throw it on a digital scale with the bag and all and call it 100% of whatever that weighed. That's how they do every other drug.

In the law, if you had for example 1kg of powder that was 1g cocaine and 999g of lactose, it is considered 1kg of cocaine, that's what you'd be charged with. If you had 1kg of powder that had 1g lactose and 999g of cocaine, it is also considered 1kg of cocaine. Because of this being the law there's not much reason to test for purity, just so long as they can demonstrate that a prohibited compound is in it.

 

[Perrin Aybara]

In the law, if you had for example 1kg of powder that was 1g cocaine and 999g of lactose, it is considered 1kg of cocaine, that's what you'd be charged with. If you had 1kg of powder that had 1g lactose and 999g of cocaine, it is also considered 1kg of cocaine. Because of this being the law there's not much reason to test for purity, just so long as they can demonstrate that a prohibited compound is in it.

They see the intent being the same either way. I'd recommend anyone that's involved in this stuff to educate themselves on the laws. I've read quite a bit of my state and federal laws and the way federal law works is pretty scary. If they're actively building a case against you purity is the least of your concerns

 

[Roco Bama]

In the law, if you had for example 1kg of powder that was 1g cocaine and 999g of lactose, it is considered 1kg of cocaine, that's what you'd be charged with. If you had 1kg of powder that had 1g lactose and 999g of cocaine, it is also considered 1kg of cocaine. Because of this being the law there's not much reason to test for purity, just so long as they can demonstrate that a prohibited compound is in it.

holy shit. if thats the law, then I am definitely wrong. I didn't know about that part of the law. I don't think customs have created machines that detect steroids. their sniffer dogs arent trained to smell steroids also. I think they used their laboratory for testing and put the results of the amount he would be charged with.
so all you guys were right. no purity results.

 

[grey]

I don't think customs have created machines that detect steroids

X-rays detect vial bunches and ampoules fairly well. Known address of senders in Moldova etc get that extra bit of scrutiny which helps out too.

 

[Docd187123]

In the law, if you had for example 1kg of powder that was 1g cocaine and 999g of lactose, it is considered 1kg of cocaine, that's what you'd be charged with. If you had 1kg of powder that had 1g lactose and 999g of cocaine, it is also considered 1kg of cocaine. Because of this being the law there's not much reason to test for purity, just so long as they can demonstrate that a prohibited compound is in it.

This is incorrect. Many states have what is called "aggregate weight laws" where they do test for purity bc they can only barge you with the weight of actual coke and not whatever fillers or cutting agents are in it.

 

[grey]

Many states have what is called "aggregate weight laws" where they do test for purity bc they can only barge you with the weight of actual coke and not whatever fillers or cutting agents are in it.

True, but makes it critical to know the state laws. Texas for instance includes whatever was mixed as chargeable weight. The even specify that this includes adulterants:

"the amount of the controlled substance to which the offense applies is, by aggregate weight, including adulterants or dilutants, xxx grams or more."

(the xx is simply replaced in various penalty categories with different gram weights)

 

[Docd187123]

True, but makes it critical to know the state laws. Texas for instance includes whatever was mixed as chargeable weight. The even specify that this includes adulterants:

"the amount of the controlled substance to which the offense applies is, by aggregate weight, including adulterants or dilutants, xxx grams or more."

(the xx is simply replaced in various penalty categories with different gram weights)

For sure. That's why I know the law for the two states I'm in

 

[grey]

For sure. That's why I know the law for the two states I'm in

Just driving across state lines bugs me in terms of keeping track of the gun carry laws. Can't imagine carrying quantities of drugs to boot.

 

[Megadick3000]

Just driving across state lines bugs me in terms of keeping track of the gun carry laws. Can't imagine carrying quantities of drugs to boot.

In some states maybe all (keep in mind I'm canadian) it's an extra charge if you possess a gun while possessing drugs at the same time, even if possessing the gun is legal in whatever state. At least that's my understanding. Something along the lines of using a weapon to further a criminal action or some shit like that. But again I'm canadian so I only actually know about how to make igloos and skin a moose.

 

[grey]

how to make igloos and skin a moose.

Don't sell yourself short man... Canucks also make good hockey goons.

 

[Docd187123]

In some states maybe all (keep in mind I'm canadian) it's an extra charge if you possess a gun while possessing drugs at the same time, even if possessing the gun is legal in whatever state. At least that's my understanding. Something along the lines of using a weapon to further a criminal action or some shit like that. But again I'm canadian so I only actually know about how to make igloos and skin a moose.

You guys make some good maple syrup too

 

[CdnGuy]

You guys make some good maple syrup too

And good chronic

 

[XKawN]

But you don't know the first thing about bacon...

 

[Roco Bama]

X-rays detect vial bunches and ampoules fairly well. Known address of senders in Moldova etc get that extra bit of scrutiny which helps out too.

I meant machines that labmaxes steroids. they have machines that labmaxes narcotics on site.

 

[nophat]

Let's see the paper?!!
Other wise I call BS!!
It's not hard to show
The paper this should have already been posted.

 

[Perrin Aybara]

Just driving across state lines bugs me in terms of keeping track of the gun carry laws. Can't imagine carrying quantities of drugs to boot.

Crossing state lines with drugs makes it federal jurisdiction anyway if they choose to pursue it. It'd likely take more than personal amounts to entice them to do so though. Having a gun with the drugs would make things a lot worse.