|
Grylls



Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 394
Loc: East of the Continental D...
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
|
A hypothetical situation
#7946294 - 01/28/08 05:12 PM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
Let's suppose that person A sent person B a very small amount of a mdma through the USPS--an amount small enough to put in the smallest padded envelope.
I know that central postal processing facilities are subject to visitations by narcotics detector dogs.
Is it possible for one of the K9 units to detect mdma, or are their capabilities limited to only pungent drugs like pot?
Say if the envelope were ever to be intercepted, how would action be taken against person B (assuming that person A used a false address)?
-------------------- Alone in the clouds all blue. Lying on an eiderdown. You can't see me, but I can you.
|
im_on_a_boat
Stranger

Registered: 04/06/06
Posts: 3,950
|
Re: A hypothetical situation [Re: Grylls]
#7946314 - 01/28/08 05:16 PM (16 years, 4 days ago) |
|
|
anything is possible but they probably aren't going to sniff it unless it looks sketchy or it's obvious that there are pills in there.. i think they have a scanner thing that they can look into the mail anyways.. an x-ray machine..
i'm sure mdma isn't one of their big look-outs and just one letter probably wouldn't be too fishy, but the consequences could be dire. it might resemble meth in the smell area to a dog, so that might be a definite thing to look out for.
someone more experienced with drugs via mail should pm you and let you know how to do this.
i always ask 'is this worth going to prison' and then i dont do things like that.
they would show up at person b's house and probably search/arrest him i would think.. and they might rat you out to save themselves.
|
Grylls



Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 394
Loc: East of the Continental D...
Last seen: 1 year, 5 months
|
|
We're assuming that person A has experience in sending scheduled substances through the postal system...
-------------------- Alone in the clouds all blue. Lying on an eiderdown. You can't see me, but I can you.
|
Ojom
member




Registered: 10/27/99
Posts: 2,148
Last seen: 3 years, 5 months
|
Re: A hypothetical situation [Re: Grylls]
#7948701 - 01/29/08 12:13 AM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
according to previous research I have done on the subject drug dogs can be trained to detect MDMA though I don't believe it is common for them to be trained to do so.
It may be more common than I previously thought. See the following link: http://www. fhp.state.fl.us/html/druginter/PhotoGallery/mdma_course.html
you'll need to edit out the space between www. and fhp for the link to work.
Edited by Ojom (01/29/08 12:17 AM)
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,276
Last seen: 3 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: A hypothetical situation [Re: Ojom]
#7952259 - 01/29/08 07:44 PM (16 years, 3 days ago) |
|
|
I don't think they sniff normal mail, that would be a lot of sniffing.
Maybe packages.
If I was in that situation I would use a normal envelope.
|
patsfan1430
drinken' buddie



Registered: 01/06/08
Posts: 39
Loc: drinka'lot, Ky.
Last seen: 13 years, 4 months
|
|
ya' the 'regular mail' with just a stamped envelope I think is fairly safe. I know a guy who sends just a few joints at a time in an envelope all the time and never gets busted. I'm not saying they don't check the small 'regular mail' envelopes, but I think there are just too many to check on a daily basis and there more focused on bigger packages and your chances of getting caught that way are astronomical. The big packages are where the real risk is. (only my opinion)
-------------------- GO PATS !!!
|
|