More than 7 pounds of pot found in car

umakebrains (anonymous) says...

Big Dummy!!!!!!! should have called Ravenel to ride with you ,might get 10 months, now you gonna get the whole enchalata, distribution in the proximity of a school,conspiracy with intent to distrIbute, and the biggest of all, being a jackass!!!!what! you thought you were mwexican, you going down, don't you read ? just busted another fool 2 days ago, sturpid and I MEAN STURPID!! NOT STUPID

March 28, 2008 at 3:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ForPnC (anonymous) says...

Okay... wasn't this a white guy yesterday? LOL!!

March 28, 2008 at 4:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

Thank you NCPD. Keep up the good work.

March 28, 2008 at 5:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

I repeat the following before anyone gets their panties in a wad over my thanking NCPD for their work:

Pro-drug use paladins armed with calculators are quick to provide a selectively narrow view on the cost of drug enforcement and incarceration. Joe-blow was caught with X amount of drugs and it cost the public X amount of tax dollars to prosecute and incarcerate him.

They do not address the depreciation of property values (tax base) when the drug crowd takes over a neighborhood. The cost of neighborhood blight is never on their spreadsheets-let alone the cost in human life.

They ignore all financial and human costs of drug related crime in the face of statistics to the contrary and offer antidotal stories of financially productive citizens-without any verification.

I do not find drug hucksters any more impressive than any other criminal element.

March 28, 2008 at 6:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ForPnC (anonymous) says...

Lillycollette - No need to explain yourself to a bunch of inconsiderate, complaining people every time you thank the NCPD for their work. The NCPD does a great job which deserves and needs all the thanks they can get!

Keep it up NCPD - YOU ARE APPRECIATED!

March 28, 2008 at 6:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

wonderdog (anonymous) says...

Lillycollette......DITTO

Thanks, officers!

March 28, 2008 at 7:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

teeitup (anonymous) says...

It was just a little pot. Stop picking on the blacks.

March 28, 2008 at 7:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ChrisPia (anonymous) says...

Great job. NCPD.. Thank You! Be safe!

March 28, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

There has never been a 'drug free' society...

The "war on drugs" is full of so many agendas--the least of them is "protecting society' from the druggies.

The narrow view is the one that the "war on drugs" is doing anything but putting a tremendous amount of small time users in jail. Occasionally they get someone like the guy in this article, but he is 'small time' compared to the really big fish in the drug operations. How come we rarely see any of them caught? Think about it.

Do some research on the prison industry in this country. Yes, the prison INDUSTRY...it is a HUGE money maker. The drug laws and push for longer and tougher prison sentences are lobbied for by corporations with a lot to gain from these laws. And no, I do not know anyone personally that has been arrested or put in jail for drug use, nor do I use any illegal drugs.

lillycollete-Decriminalization of pot would have little to no effect on property values, which are affected by the crime not the pot itself.

March 28, 2008 at 7:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weeeee (anonymous) says...

NCPD K9s are trained to "alert" cops whenever they're at the door of a car so the cop will have "probable cause" to search your car. All of you drug opponents are fools to think the "war on drugs" is more profitable than legalization. So please...do your research before eating NCPD's ass.

March 28, 2008 at 8:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lexylady (anonymous) says...

lilly, Lighten up, good grief!!

March 28, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lucky (anonymous) says...

I guess I don't understand how our government can outlaw a plant. Next the government will declare war on basil. Smoking pot to relax is no different than having a drink after work. I don't know of any pot-heads that have stolen their parents DVD player to buy a sack of weed. There are other problems in this country that we should be dealing with rather than worrying about people smoking a plant and getting the giggles.

March 28, 2008 at 9:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weeeee (anonymous) says...

Timmy? There was another article about pot?

March 28, 2008 at 9:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

newto843 (anonymous) says...

I agree lucky, this is a complete waste of time.

March 28, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MinoritySouth (anonymous) says...

Great observation Citizen Allwoman! hum??? wonder what can be inferred from this fact. Of course, you should have waited to make that comment as to not to affect additional comment outcome spawned by this individual being "caught" with illegal drugs.

As for the correlation of cannibis sativa and economics/property values... There are just as many pot smokers/Dealers who have empty 40 ounce cans in the front yard as there are those with recycle bins full of Stella Artois or rare Italian Gewurztraminer (though it is known as a German wine, the straminer grape originated in Italy).

March 28, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lisagary (anonymous) says...

What. A. Moron. A true Darwin Award candidate.

Oh, and a note to lucky the pot smoker -- You want to smoke that garbage, do it in your own home and take your chances with the law. Since you clearly don't understand why such a "harmless plant" is illegal, let me give you an example. Let's say you stop in a bar and have a drink or two or ten after work, and you drive home impaired and kill someone. If I was sitting next to you in that bar and I had a soda to drink, what you did had no effect on me. But if you're getting high next to me and I'm forced to inhale your secondhand smoke, I could quite possibly get in my car to drive home and be impaired enough to cause harm to someone else. Now YOU have affected ME by YOUR actions. Get it?

March 28, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MinoritySouth (anonymous) says...

In my opinion, Dealers are also defined as those who "share" with or "procure" drugs for there friends as seen recently with a HIGH (pun intended) profile drug case.

March 28, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MinoritySouth (anonymous) says...

Yep, you are right Citizen lisagary. Every pot smoker I have met likes to burn one and then go driving around town bar hopping:

March 28, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Edwin435 (anonymous) says...

Just a note to all who say smoking pot is just a harmless event. The jails are full of people who stole to get the next bag of weed just like there are people who stole to get the crack fix. I know this to be a FACT ! I don't want it to be legal...I don't want you to drive while stoned...I don't want drunks driving the road either. While you will inevitably say that alcohol is more destructive ( and it can be ) and that people are not violent after smoking pot ( they can be ) it is still illegal. I don't want it near me or around my family. Dont pretend that it is harmless....thats ridiculous.

March 28, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

newto843 (anonymous) says...

lisagary, why would you not send the pot smokers outside to smoke with the cigarette smokers? Clearly you have no clue as to the differences between pot and liquor either. I would share the road with a pot head 10x over that of someone who is drunk.

March 28, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MinoritySouth (anonymous) says...

Genius.... NO DRUG IS HARMLESS.... alcohol is a drug that is included in this category and statistically is directly correlated with more damage than probably any other drug from a cumulative perspective...

March 28, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

crankyyankee (anonymous) says...

"Beam me up Scotty, no visible signs of intelligence here!"

March 28, 2008 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weeeee (anonymous) says...

lisagary, hang yourself. Because pot smokers smoke in bars and that "secondhand smoke" is SURE to get you "impaired". BTW, I'm sure you wouldn't be having a "soda" and more than likely would be driving impaired from ALCOHOL and be the cause of said accident.

Your mindless post is pathetic. Before I forget, you're probably more apt to getting lung cancer from the secondhand cigarette smoke in said bar than the bs you spewed about "driving impaired from secondhand pot smoke".

Also, let me say, I don't do drugs, but I think laws against marijuana are stupid. I can understand laws against a drug like cocaine...considering too much of it can cause a heart attack/death. How many people get heart attacks from marijuana? Let me start smoking and find out.

March 28, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MinoritySouth (anonymous) says...

Of course, alcohol is also a big money maker for the established wealthy who make the laws by paying lobbyists and generate enormous tax revenue which facilitates a blind eye by the government to alcohol's destructive effects.

March 28, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lucky (anonymous) says...

People love to use the 'second-hand smoke' issue to take rights away from others. I'm sure that I'd be more than happy to step outside and smoke my joint if it weren't for fear of being busted. And, I'm sure I'd get home just fine, thank you.
Marijuana was outlawed in the early 1900' because it was mainly Mexican immigrants who smoked it. All it was was a ruse to hassle and arrest Mexicans.
Marijuana has been proven to help those with anxiety, not to mention chemo patients, among others. It is time for the government to give up this ridiculous 'war' on pot and focus on meth, coke, and crack~those are the drugs that really ruin people's lives.

March 28, 2008 at 10:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ChrisRobin (anonymous) says...

"Oooooh, I get by with a little help from my friends"
"Oooooh, I get high with a little help from my friends"

Sound familiar? This battle's been raging for 60 years and it's still going on about "Reefer Madness". Hell, alcohol has caused a heck of lot more damage to society than a MJ joint. I'll willing to bet that most of us who survived the 60s tried it, used it and are no worse for the wear. Either legalize it or put it on par with "hard" drugs and get serious about it rather than giving out a ticket for "personal possession" like a number of cities and States.

March 28, 2008 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Edwin435 (anonymous) says...

TP emmmm no...these guys wanted to get some weed...had no money...and stole to get the money for weed.....they weren't coming down from a crack high, they weren't coming down from a coke binge...they were 20 something year olds that would not work a minute but will rip off hard working people to support the habit. That is what happened.

March 28, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Larz13 (anonymous) says...

Perhaps there are more incidents involving alcohol that pot b/c alcohol is easier to obtain (legally).

Kudos to the men & women in blue. There will be a large segment of losers without their stash this weekend.

March 28, 2008 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lexylady (anonymous) says...

Y'all who indulge in smoke and drink could save a fortune...All you have to do is drink the water out of your faucets. It has a myriad of drugs in it, and I am sure it has at least one drug of choice for each and everyone. lolol
Save money, take a swig!! or two!

March 28, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lilpenny0 (anonymous) says...

I agree with TP. Doing either "in moderation" is very much harmless. But done in excess, alcohol has way more consequences than weed. If you drink too much, you could kill yourself or someone else. But you smoke too much weed, more than likely, you'll just pass out and go to sleep. Granted, you can pass out from drinking, but, again, the consequences would be much more severe.

JMO

March 28, 2008 at 12:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

KidYendor (anonymous) says...

We need to legalize the purchase of marijuana and cocaine on Fridays at designated places to allow residents to not have to seek out dealers. We can have a $5 to $10 tax on it to provide tax relief to everyone. The legalization movement is on!

March 28, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

walleyedwoman1215 (anonymous) says...

Let's see... pot is a drug. Alcohol is a drug. So is nicotine, caffeine, Ambien, Ativan, Zoloft and peyote. Each and every one has the potential for addiction. (Especially alcohol and Valium. Peyote I just threw in there for the William Burroughs/Carlos Castaneda baby boomers amongst us.)

March 28, 2008 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lilpenny0 (anonymous) says...

It's not just about the drug. It's more about how they can regulate and make money off of said drug. They "finally" made marijuana illegal for the 2nd time in the 70s because too many teenagers were getting "addicted" to it. Why can't they do the same for alcohol. Underage drinking is everywhere. But all they do is have AA meetings for people to cope with the "illness". My point is, why is alcohol still legal in this country?

March 28, 2008 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sumDJiam (anonymous) says...

TP your a trip man, LOL

March 28, 2008 at 1:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lisagary (anonymous) says...

To Weeeee:

Wow, you're just a "wee" bit defensive with that post. What on earth has you so upset? In the first place, I drink about one glass of wine every three or four months, and it's always at home when entertaining friends for dinner, so if I am in a bar with friends who drink, I do indeed have a soda or some othe non-alcoholic beverage. My point, which you so unfortunately missed, is that putting a pot smoker in any public setting, whether it's a bar or a workplace or a church or whatever, has the potential to expose me, as an unwilling participant, to the same mind-altering substances as the smoker is ingesting. I'm sure, even though you don't do drugs, that you are familiar with the term "contact high." Regarding your comments about smoking, I don't patronize any establishment where smoking is permitted indoors; I don't care if people smoke cigarettes, but I care very much when I am forced to smoke them secondhand. Choosing to stoop to personal attacks on me, regarding an issue you claim to care nothing about, belies your statement "let me say, I don't do drugs." Why are you calling me mindless and pathetic (oh, and by the way, telling me to "hang" myself - did the moderator catch that?) if my opinion has no personal relevance to you?

March 28, 2008 at 2:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Corder2007 (anonymous) says...

Wow I was going to stay out of this but after that BS weeee just posted I can't. Smoking in a bar is basically no longer an option so can your theory on the second hand smoke s**t. But if one does patron a bar that smoking is allowed then it is by choice therefore choosing to be in the midst of the 2nd hand smoke if one does not want to be aroung the 2nd hand smoke go somewhere else. And whether or not lisagary has a drink or ten is none of your damn business whether in a bar or not so lay off of her! and for you to tell another post person to go hang them selves, let me say this you punk a** little b**ch take your own advise and GO HANG YOURSELF
FYI weeee you dumb a** if there was any 2nd hand pot smoke in a bar it is possible to b/c impaired. You are attacking lisagary's right to freedom of speech and you need to STF UP

March 28, 2008 at 3:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

bagballa (anonymous) says...

Yesterday they had a white man's picture up there who got busted with 7 pounds of weed, now its a black guy with 7 pounds of weed. I'm Mexican, can I have 7 pounds of weed?

March 28, 2008 at 4:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

Arguing over whether pot is harmless vs harmful, or how harmless vs how harmful blah blah blah as a criterion in whether it should be legalized isn't logical or consistent with the criteria used in legalization & regulation of other substances such as, for example, everything over which the pharmaceutical industry has control.

Pot is illegal for one reason: it provides a vast source of 'criminals' to fill the prisons.

March 28, 2008 at 4:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

yeahright (anonymous) says...

Minoritysouth: enjoyed the gewurztraminer reference. Alsace also produces some great ones.

March 28, 2008 at 4:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weeeee (anonymous) says...

Corder2007 said, "Smoking in a bar is basically no longer an option so can your theory on the second hand smoke s**t."

1. This isn't English. It began properly while almost making a complete thought then faulterd badly.
2. Smoking is allowed in PLENTY of bars, dunce cap.
3. Cease your hypocritical rant. "You are attacking lisagary's right to freedom of speech and you need to STF UP." Aren't you "attacking my right to freedom of speech" by telling me to stfu? Meh. Cry about it.

lisagary,

Perhaps my comment was a bit rash. Maybe you can accept that as an apology and understand that there are certain things I'm passionate about...laws making something with SO many proven uses for several people illegal being one of those things. I do think you should be more open-minded and consider someone elses opinion instead of taking an immediate stance against what they have to say.

allwoman,

Thank you for the link. I truly did not see it before. Quite strange that both articles are so similar.

bagballa,

Hilarious.

....and I'm spent.

March 28, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

"lillycollete-Decriminalization of pot would have little to no effect on property values, which are affected by the crime not the pot itself."

Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah -- Guns don't kill people, people kill people. How original.

I am already familiar with the prison industry. If the little drug whiz kids don't want to end up working for pennies on the dollar all they have to do is quit their involvement with drugs. DUH.

You know, sort of like 'people who are jailed for contempt of court hold the keys to their cell'.

March 28, 2008 at 6:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

"Hey Lilly- a couple of tokes off a marijuana cigarette might help you relax a little bit. You're wound too tight, girlfriend!"

I'm not interested in accepting illegal prescriptions for illegal drugs from someone who isn't intelligent enough to realize that we are not friends.

Druggies always seem so free to practice medicine without a license.

March 28, 2008 at 6:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

"lilly, Lighten up, good grief!!"

If I were any lighter cranius maximus, I would be an albino.

March 28, 2008 at 6:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

"Pot is illegal for one reason: it provides a vast source of 'criminals' to fill the prisons."

I can multi-task and figure out that all illicit drugs are illegal. I am not limited to focusing on pot.

Now if the pot whiz-kids could figure out it is illegal we wouldn't have so many in jail.
Keep doing what you did keep getting what you got.

March 28, 2008 at 7:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

Wasn't trying to be original. A point doesn't have to be original to be truthful, reasonable,logical.

I didn't realize there was a contest for originality going on here.

Hate to tell you but there are 'druggies' in all kinds of neighborhoods. It 'ain't' the use of the drugs that brings a neighborhood down...if that was the case all of that South of Broad real estate would be decreasing in value instead of hitting record prices.

March 28, 2008 at 7:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

THANK YOU NCPD FOR ALL YOUR GOOD WORK.

PS:// However, it appears you may have overlooked some people of interest.

March 28, 2008 at 7:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

"I can multi-task and figure out that all illicit drugs are illegal."

Do you really have to multi-task to figure out that illegal(illicit) drugs are illegal?

March 28, 2008 at 11:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

The pro-drug use crowd seems intent on discrediting their stand by blaming law enforcement for the public cost involved in enforcing drug laws. Prosecution and incarceration of minor drug offenders is a popular mantra of justification for this untenable stand.

Overwhelming the cost of enforcement is an old game of gang warfare. If minor offenders chose to be a pawn in that game they have implicitly accepted responsibility for reimbursing the costs of prosecution and incarceration. If they do not have the means to make restitution then prison industries may be available to them.

If one really believes that these laws need to be changed you are free to organize and work for that change. Employing gang warfare tactics bring other results. How simple does it have to be-hardly a question.

March 29, 2008 at 5:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

lillycollete-1st of all, believing that some substances should be decriminalized is not the same as being "pro-drug use". That is a ridiculous extrapolation & demonstrates that you cannot discuss things on point without taking things out of context while using exaggeration & inflammatory interpretations of other's statements.

2ndly-I think most people understand that local law enforcement is not responsible for the cost of the "war on drugs"...they are merely pawns in that whole agenda. They are doing their jobs by enforcing existing laws.

However, what you do not seem to understand is that there is an agenda that trickles down from the corporations that 1st started pushing the war on drugs & ridiculous sentences for violations of the drug laws.(sentences for simple possession of a controlled substance which often exceed the sentences for violent crimes) Also, they have continuously expanded what parameters constitute a 'violation'..& there are untold people sitting in jail on drug charges which were brought without one iota of physical evidence.

March 29, 2008 at 3:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

Madame I have done you the unwarranted courtesy of reading your seven pages of prior comments. You have voiced an overriding concern with "corporations" and "steroid-abusing bully cops" multiple times as though this was the answer to every issue.

I find my best response to you in your own words: ""Your opinions would have more credibility if you provided reasonable discussion rather than sarcastic comments & inaccurate sweeping statements about the opinions of others :"

March 29, 2008 at 6:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lillycollette (anonymous) says...

THANK YOU CHIEF ZUMALT!
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND STAY SAFE!

March 29, 2008 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

abitskeptical (anonymous) says...

7 pages of prior comments? What are you talking about?

Yes, I have voiced concern about corporations & the influence they have over many things such as our laws(drug & immigration laws,for example),how long one can stay in a hospital after surgery(the attending physician really has little say in this),what medications(OTC & Rx)are available to the public, what doctor you can see, & on & on.

Everyone should have an overriding concern about the power & influence they have. It is a very complicated issue. Most folks have no idea how much influence corporations have over the running of this country as well as many other aspects of our day to day living. I surely didn't until about the last year or so.

I recall ONE time, a good while back, when I described the behavior of one No. Charleston officer & wondered if he was taking steroids because he had inappropriate, & outrageous anger. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else.

It is difficult to have a reasonable & respectful discussion with someone like you who responds to bits & pieces of another's comments (usually pulled out of context),in a derisive & condescending way. It surely appears that you have little respect for those with opinions, observations, suggestions that do not line up with your own. I suppose you & I have a different understanding of "reasonable".

March 29, 2008 at 9:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )