OPP Posted October 21, 2011 Back in my younger days driving around in a car that was a cop magnet we were pulled over because "We could smell marijuana. It smells like wet carpet". Of course we denied everything but I consented to a car search. They found a gram in a mates bag in the boot and arrested him etc etc. Knowing what i know now I could have said NO to the search. As far as I am aware they have to ask for your consent to search the car unless you are under arrest. But they probably have ways around that if you say no. I was watching COPS a few weeks ago and they pulled over a car, the passenger (whos car it was) refused the car search. The police then arrested the driver for not having his license on him and then proceeded to search the car and find drugs. Regarding personal searches I would guess that you could refuse but then the cop would say that they "suspect you of carrying a knife/drugs" which therefore gives them the right to search you. I would be interested to know on what grounds they could "suspect" you of carrying contraband that would hold up in court. "Acting suspiciously" would probably be one of their favourites. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bread Filter Posted October 21, 2011 Back in my younger days driving around in a car that was a cop magnet we were pulled over because "We could smell marijuana. It smells like wet carpet". It's interesting that they think Cannabis smells like mould. Probably says something about the quality of the Cannabis they come across. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GoOnThen Posted October 22, 2011 My parents go off on trips to the east coast to tour around peoples gardens organized by different clubs that they are in. At the end of a trip last year my mum got stopped at the airport by a sniffer dog. My mum couldn’t believe this dog had sniffed around her and then sat at her feet. She was going into a panic as she thought it was a drug detector dog. Now my mum is 75ish and is a tiny little lady who would never even thought about breaking the law let alone do any thing wrong. The gentleman with the dog asked her if she had any fruit or food stuff in her bag. She said no she new the rules about what she could bring into the state. The gentleman insisted she check her bag to make sure. So she goes thought her bag to keep him happy and in one of the pockets of the bag she finds a couple of seed pods ( I don't remember what they were) It turns out she had picked them up when she was wandering around a garden a few days before to look at and then instead of just chucking them on the ground she stuck them in her bag to throw out later and obviously forgot about them. You just can’t trust little old ladies any more Cheers Got 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Francois le Danque Posted October 26, 2011 two stories. will try to minimise size. story the first concerning friend at parklife, melbourne. carrying 2 pills into festival. following the throngs along birrarung marr. several sniffer dogs sitting there at the side of the path, with police looking very intent not to actually search anyone. every keeping a wide berth around the dogs, lol. friend felt very awkward because he decided not to avoid the dogs because he thought this would be suss. turns out nobody even got searched, even though the dogs were looking excited. also the pills turned out to be duds and a shit time was had by all. story the second concerning teacher at my old school. she was telling us about the school trip to nepal. in nepal cannabis supposedly grows everywhere. she said she picked some "because she thought it was interesting" . sure. anyway, she stuck it in a book, like a dried flower. then she put her book in her carry on luggage to read on the plane. (mind, some students had GHURKA KNIVES in theirs and nobody noticed...cool security. this was 2002 as well..) anyway upon landing in melbourne, she gave the book bag to another teacher to hold while she went to the toilet. when coming out, she saw other teacher with dog smelling bag. the other teacher said it was her bag and there was nothing in there. the dog handler gave up. original teacher had forgotten all about the cannabis and was worried the other teacher would be interrogated or something. but yeah it all worked out. moral is: if you are an old lady they wont search you. i also constantly get bomb tested. i swear im not that scruffy lookin! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bread Filter Posted October 26, 2011 moral is: if you are an old lady they wont search you. i also constantly get bomb tested. i swear im not that scruffy lookin! That is not correct. Drug dogs bust dealer granny at centralAAP June 29, 2011 8:36PM AN ELDERLY woman was charged with drug dealing after being nabbed with more than 40 bags of cannabis in her handbag by drug dogs at Sydney's main rail station, police said. The 74-year-old was stopped and searched by officers after attracting the attention of sniffer dogs near Central Station on Tuesday, police said. "Police allegedly found more than 40 small resealable bags containing cannabis in the woman's handbag,'' they said in a statement. A search of her home in a neighbouring suburb uncovered more cannabis and plastic bags. She was charged with possessing and supplying a prohibited drug. "It certainly wasn't what they were expecting,'' said police inspector Mark Christie of the unusual bust. "That's the benefit we get from these drug dog operations. They pick up the scent not the individual.'' DailyTelegraph Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chnt Posted October 26, 2011 the benefits of catching old ladies Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Francois le Danque Posted October 27, 2011 That is not correct. DailyTelegraph i know, mr bread, i was definitely joking. i know the police have no qualms about arresting old ladies. im sure you will agree though, they are less likely to get caught due to their inherent (and obviously unfounded) lack of suspicion. cant wait till I'M an old lady...so many poppies Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heffa Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) I appreciate all the responses so far everyone, These topics are extremely interesting and personal accounts always make for interesting point of views. i just found this in the Australian Guidelines on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) June 2009: 184. People with ADHD should be strongly advised to take their stimulant medication if they are driving. Treatment with MPH improves driving performance for people with ADHD. The use of extended-release stimulants is preferable if the person drives at night. Interesting... 186. The use of a manual transmission over an automatic transmission should be considered for individuals with ADHD. and finally: 14.4 Legal issues regarding driving and medications In most States and Territories in Australia, roadside drug testing has been, or soon will be, introduced. These roadside screening tests are limited to detecting three substances in saliva: tetrahydrocannabinol (TCH), methamphetamine (speed) and MDMA (ecstasy). The potential problem of identifying psychoactive substances that have been prescribed for therapeutic use (including stimulants) has been recognised, and testing will not detect the presence of prescription medications for ADHD. Addit: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/ch54_draft_guidelines.pdf Edited January 4, 2012 by Heffa Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Francois le Danque Posted January 7, 2012 does this mean roadside tests cannot test for vanilla amphetamine (sulfate) because this can be prescribed for ADHD? are there different metabolites between meth/speed/MPH? im also very interested as to why a manual transmission would be indicated..maybe it's just that people with adhd aren't dodgem-car-driving soft cunts . manual is also slightly more fuel efficient. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chnt Posted January 7, 2012 does this mean roadside tests cannot test for vanilla amphetamine (sulfate) because this can be prescribed for ADHD? are there different metabolites between meth/speed/MPH? im also very interested as to why a manual transmission would be indicated..maybe it's just that people with adhd aren't dodgem-car-driving soft cunts . manual is also slightly more fuel efficient. coming from someone with adhd, we need things to be more complex rather than more simple, with auto, there is less to do, therefore we will lose concentration faster, with manual, there is more to do, therefore we will stay focussed for longer. we're also not soft cunts... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tipz Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) Being prescribed Dex for adhd, If i was to extract the dex into pure crystal form would that process be legal to perform and the pure form be legal for me to posess ? I believe it is very simple to do but have never tried it - just curious Edited January 7, 2012 by tipz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chnt Posted January 7, 2012 Being prescribed Dex for adhd, If i was to extract the dex into pure crystal form would that process be legal to perform and the pure form be legal for me to posess ? I believe it is very simple to do but have never tried it - just curious interesting idea Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThunderIdeal Posted January 8, 2012 (edited) that could be handy to snort it or blat it i suppose. it can't be smoked. i'd be willing to bet that purifying your prescription dex would be illegal as would carrying the purified product around. Edited January 8, 2012 by ThunderIdeal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Heffa Posted January 8, 2012 Frank: From what i have been able to decipher from forgotten sources, https://www.criminology.fsu.edu/journal/hold.html (saliva testing research), http://aunz.siemens.com.au/Healthcare-Detection_DX-Cozart-Drug-Detection-System (the drug testing device), http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/pdfs/legislation/faq_drug_driving.pdf (FAQs) and the one i attached in Post #5, basically the roadside drug tests will specifically pick up the substances THC and Methamphetamines. So MDMA, being a methamphetamine, is picked up, while pseudo, amphetamine and methylphenidate are not. The FAQs link (and in scientific terminology, the research link) above actually answers another commonly asked RDT question: How long after consumed does the drug remain detectable? It is actually a surprising time frame... Tipz: I ran out of time searching for references but i can tell you that chances are, the possession at least would be prohibited. This would be because ... - of the possibility of changing the chemical makeup of the drug when it is extracted (due to impure tech/equipment or unstable drug/additives) - the ph balancers in the pill would have been removed, so it would no longer be an approved medication for ORAL administration (which would directly contradict the prescription). Plus, as a prescription directs the dosage of medication in quantity of units (tablets/capsules), and methods of measurement for milligrams are rarely accurate, one would have a hard time justifying the risk/benefits of extraction to law enforcement. - the extracted drug is no longer visually identifiable as a prescription substance and would arouse major suspicion of intent to sell or misuse a schedule 8 drug (which would not be difficult to prove in court). - as a frequently criticised, heavily guarded schedule 8 drug, there are likely to be specific laws relating to it's preparation and manufacture. Let alone laws for all medications regarding drug alteration, reduction and compounding. If you can find any info or law relating, i would love to read it 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
indigo264nm Posted January 8, 2012 Just want to add that if you're prescribed dex it can be helpful to ask your pharmacist to print another label off and stick it on a bottle so you can carry dex around for day to day use and not need to have the whole bottle on you in case you get searched from sniffer dogs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Francois le Danque Posted January 8, 2012 heffa can you please clarify which of the links you posted contains the information regarding timeframes for after-use detection ? or you could be a sweetheart and just tell us.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tipz Posted January 8, 2012 heffa can you please clarify which of the links you posted contains the information regarding timeframes for after-use detection ? or you could be a sweetheart and just tell us.... This one here Frank : http://www.transport.sa.gov.au/pdfs/legislation/faq_drug_driving.pdf 21. How long after consuming THC or methamphetamines can they be detected? The consumption of THC will be detected for several hours after use. The exact time will vary depending on the amount and potency of the cannabis used and on the individual’s metabolism. Drivers who may have inactive THC residue in their bodies from use in previous days/weeks will not be detected. Methamphetamines may be detected for approximately 24 hours after use. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
