# Police Raid house meth lab? no worse, a fish tank!



## Osiris

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=509182


OMG, we knew someday it would happen, just matter of time lol.

At night while finding fellow reefers, do you look for address? no you look for the 20k light peering from the house windows :lol:


----------



## sneasle

omg. I smell a lawsuit coming...


----------



## sneasle

yupyup... Sadly.. natural selection doesn't work as fast as it should... not enough meth labs blow up to keep the problem in check..


----------



## lohachata

i have been visited by the cleveland police and the DEA.
i came home from work one day and as i went up the porch steps 2 men in suits came up to me and asked if i lived there.i said yes.they then asked me to let them in to search the house.when i asked them why they were there they said that the electric company had informed them that i may be growing reefer because my bill was so high.the one guy got upset when i laughed..but i took them up and showed them why..then the angry one asked me about the plants."what kind of plants are those and where do they come from"sword plants from south america and crypts and aponogeton from asia..then he said that they needed to be tested to make sure they weren't reefer...
sometimes law enforcement people aren't very bright..
whenh the cleveland cops came and i showed them the tanks,they just laughed and left..


----------



## s13

I'm suprised no one has called the cops on me for seeing "grow lights" in my windows! haha. yes, I am a reefer... the legal kind!


----------



## direlime

HA! What was that water heater guy thinking? That chemical smell could have been from anything including a meth lab but really. You cannot assume things to quickly without evidence to support it. A smell is a small piece of evcidence but if you saw the things needed for a meth lab then maybe I'de report it! Isn't it funny how alot of real meth labs don't get caught while alot of innocent people get affected by things like this. Sad really! 
:fish:


----------



## Ricker

LOL I find it funny if they take them to court they aren't good guys lol. A mistake it happens. I would think it is funny after it happen of course.


----------



## COM

Note to self: short-sell Centerpoint stock Monday. Lawsuit pending; Wall Street will not like the news.


----------



## Guest

Baby_Baby said:


> It was just the detectives or whoever the freak didn't find any solid evidence. You can't always have, by itself, "probable cause" or a "good tip" in meth lab cases.
> Oklahoma has more meth houses than most other states, and even here we havent had anything this dumb happen.
> 
> I understand them investigating it, but smashing the door?
> Really?
> 
> I think I smell that lawsuit too, sneasle.





Hm..... ok well in your typical meth lab case, who do you think is behind that door? Are the people going to just open up and let you in with no problems? no. the police did NOTHING wrong in this case from the facts we have. Hell, they had a warrant, which is a document signed by a judge, so there was enough information to convince a judge to give them the right to go in there in the first place. Believe it or not, things like this happen alot, so many of the same warning signs for drugs are seen with people who have fish tanks. High electric bills, glowing lights, chemicals and chemical smells, boxes/bags of stuff being delivered or brought in. 

probable cause, unlike many people think, is not a hard thing to obtain... it can be based on personal observations of an officer, or any form of hearsay evidence from another party... probable cause is just enough information to get passed the "reasonable suspicion" level. Sometimes you act on the only information you have, and 90% of the time you end up busting a meth house, or something of the sort. I dont see anyone posting on the good job busts, just the one incident where everyone can stand back and say how dumb or stupid it was. The real world isnt perfect, law isnt perfect, the water heater guy isnt perfect... I commend them on trying to do a very dangerous job. A meth lab is not a safe place to be, and those men and women who bring them down are being put at a very high risk of injury or death...


----------



## emc7

I don't like "no knock" warrants. They are still talking about the old woman who got shot dead by cops when a "confidential informant" lied about buying drugs at her house. I assume he did it because he got paid for every tip and was out of good info. In some neighborhoods, if someone breaks down your door, you assume "home invasion" and go for your gun. Is it really safer for the cops (to bust down the door) than ringing the doorbell with a 10 ft. pole?


----------



## Guest

you are joking...right? yes, lets ring the door bell of a suspected meth house, and announce that we are cops ready to raid the place and arrest everyone. sounds like a great idea, people who have meth labs are stand up citizens right, they will just open the door and let you in, no problem....*rolls eyes*

there is a time and a place for a knock and announce...not always though, and the courts seem to agree with me on that one.


----------



## TheOldSalt

Well, Mike already beat me to it, but yeah, this sort of thing happens fairly regularly, because, as Loha found out, the electric companies are required to report unusually high power usage to the cops.
I do have to wonder, however, just why the guys in Cleveland don't recognize weed when they see it and think it grows underwater.


----------



## COM

The police did everything wrong as far as I'm convinced.

1- We shouldn't have laws that restrict drug usage. This is a personal freedom issue. I don't use illegal drugs, I don't care for them. But there is no reason to condemn drugs or drug users. We could legalize them and create a corporate structure to sell them, possibly taxed, and that would solve a lot of our financial issues.

2- I don't believe in police. I'm a libertarian / anarchist. I believe in self defense. I don't believe that it is the role of the government to manage our behavior.

3- In this case, as in many meth-lab raid cases, the police got a warrant from a judge, so, no, they didn't do anything wrong themselves according to the law. However, this case demonstrates that the government doesn't need a substantial amount of evidence to have 'probable cause' to harass a citizen. 

4- Electric companies are not required to provide customer information to the government. They are asked for it and they usually cooperate because they are almost always in bed with politicians. As for the service technician, shame on him. Mom always told me it isn't nice to be a tattle-tale. If he had encountered a meth lab, a brothel, or something else while he was an invited guest in someone's home, he needs to be a respectful person and keep it to himself. In this case, he was a big yenta and parlayed a funny smell into a meth lab for no reason.


----------



## Guest

Baby_Baby said:


> Re-read my post :]


I think you need to re-read my post....


and Com...
1) Drugs are at the soul of crime. Drugs cause harm not only to those who use them, but to innocent people. This is one of the more ignorant comments i've read lately. There is a reason we have the structure we do.

2) It is the role of the government to protect, create laws, and uphold laws...among many other things. Dont believe me? read the constitution.

3) We all give up freedoms for our protection. Does it sometimes work out badly? yes, but at the same time it works great many other times. We arent perfect.. no one is.

4) Again, ignorant. There is nothing wrong with trying to ensure the safety of others. It is a FACT that meth kills, meth labs kill.... Was he required to say anything? Are you required to report any crime? no... but some people (obviously not everyone) feels like they should if they can....

If you have a problem with how the government runs, and if you truely believe that they have no right in doing their job to protect, then i will buy you the plane ticket out of here, with a smile on my face


----------



## Guest

Anything made illegal is going to cause crime. If iced tea was outlawed tomorrow, it would become a "drug" and crime would result from it. I don't think its the substance that makes the crimes, its just the legality of it.
Look at underage drinking....where the minimum drinking age is 18 or even 16, there are much less crimes with alcohol and minors...less DUIs for example. Why? Because everybody wants to be a rebel. Because drinking at the age of 16 or even 18 is not a "norm" in the US, it just makes kids want to do it more, whereas in other countries where they don't have this problem, you don't see as much overuse and stupid decisions revolving around alcohol.

And not all drugs are illegal for health reasons.

But otherwise, I agree.


----------



## Guest

katie, there is so much more to it than the legality. you have to look at the who, the what, the how. manufacturing meth is a very dangerous process, that alone causes problems. another issue is the addictability of certain drugs, causing a need to stay on them, which causes people to get the drug at any cost. where i am at meth is a pretty big problem, in no way should it be legal, and in no way would that solve any of the problems. same goes for many other drugs. Many drugs cause people to react much differently than they would if they were not under the influence.... there wont be less crime if you just make the drugs legal (except for actually getting the drugs wont be a crime anymore). 

there are factors that people just dont see. read through case law, the thousand upon thousand of cases that the supreme courts as well as the appellate courts have reviewed, it will change you perspective on the issue.


----------



## Guest

I'm not saying we should make the drugs legal, I'm just pointing out that when things are illegal, it makes the actions needed to do whatever the law prohibits much more dangerous, and sometimes unnecessarilly. If you could buy meth at the pharmacy, would you need to surround yourself with the dangerous chemicals needed to make it in order to obtain that product? No. If you could purchase any illegal drug as easily as a prescription drug, would people be shot over obtaining them? Probably not. I do believe there would be somewhat less crime if they were legal, but obviously meth, heroin, crack, etc should not be legalized for health reasons. Not the case with marijuana though, which isn't harmful (to the vast majority of people), like most people believe, and even has health benefits. No one has ever died from it and really its only illegal because the government can't tax it. Alcohol is much worse of a "drug," yet its legal. IMO, some things in our government are a little backwards (as I think we can all agree on...at least about one law or another) but in no way am I saying it should be legal for everyone to have a meth lab in their garage.


----------



## TheOldSalt

There is NOTHING good or safe about meth in any way. It is pure distilled evil, plain and simple, and even libertarians need to be kept away from it for their own good.

Weed? It's perfectly taxable, and taxed a lot more than most folks realize. The reason it's outlawed isn't because it's hard to tax. The reason is that it makes better paper than wood pulp makes. True. Look it up and see your tax dollars at work.

As fishkeepers we have bigger problems ahead than drugs, though. There is a bill in congress called HR 6311 which will likely make criminals out of all of us very soon. The PETA scum finally figured out a way to really sock it to us, and they went for it, and we're as good as finished. When all interstate transport of fishes effectively becomes impossible, then that's it for the whole industry.
No, that's not what the bill calls for specifically, but it's easy to see the insidious true intent of this bill and how it relies on the inability of the mail services to tell one fish from another to get it to stop all shipments.


----------



## Guest

Well it was actually originally outlawed for a few reasons, mainly because of racial discrimination of Mexicans and the Mormon church being against it. It remains outlawed because its so beneficial, it would hurt many other corporations that make the same products that can be made from hemp, not just paper. I'm not really sure what you say we're being taxed for it though. I believe that is indeed one of the reasons it remains outlawed, because weed is so easily grown and distributed that it would be hard for the government to make much profit from it. 

I really don't have much faith in any of PETAs attempts to ruin this industry though. What exactly does the bill propose? I don't see the whole fish industry collapsing any time soon.


----------



## Guest

katie...you know way to much about marijuana.....from strange sources


----------



## Guest

I didn't even state my sources! :razz:


----------



## Guest

i know your sources


----------



## mrmoby

No easy answers for the drug trade or drug problem in this country. People are making some good points.

I think in this day and age, the fact that marijuana is still illegal is laughable. First off, there is no stopping it. What doesn't make it across the border is produced domestically, growing in basements and secluded rural areas. There are a lot of farmers out there willing to take the risk, because their "legit" crops just don't have the profit potential. Pot was demonized in the earlier portion of the 1900's, with wildly lopsided propoganda, from people like William Randolph Hurst, who had huge timber fortunes, whose value was significantly decreased by the availability of cheap, and durable hemp, as well as companies like Dupont, who stood to make a fortune on synthetics like nylon. And as Scuba said, Mexican workers, who were know to use, were held as examples(scapegoats), wild savages driven to madness and lawlessness by the demon weed.

The fact is, people in this country want pot, it's medicinal use has been approved by voters in a number of states, yet the federal government insists on standing in the way. I'm not saying it is a cure all, but certainly, folks who are gravely ill should have access to whatever helps them get through whatever treatments, or time, they have left. I think we can all agree that pot is not generally good for the health, with chronic use as bad, if not worse than tobacco. It is my belief however, that whatever one's reason for using, "valid" or not, it is really no business of the government as to wether or not people choose to partake. It really angers me to think of the money spent to "eradicate" this drug. I guess if the government were to back off, there would be a few in law enforcement looking for work.

As for the rest of controlled substances, I reallly favor some sort of legalization. Prohibiton has been demonstrated to not work. I agree to an extent that making things taboo gives them an edge for some people, but the larger picture is that there are people who want these drugs, so there are others that are willing to supply them, and because of the tight supply, can charge an exorbanant fee to do so. 

Let's say, for the sake of the argument, you lift most of the penalties associated with these drugs, namely use and possesion, while maintaining criminal status for "unauthorized" manufacture or cultivation. If you could have a licensed manufacturer produce these substances in a controlled environment, you could perhaps have a cleaner product, consistant dosing, but also a cheap product. That would cut the bottom out of the drug market. Think of it this way, alcohol has been legal for years, and I have to believe that there aren't too many alcoholics that have to resort to housebreaks and holdups to support thier liquor habits.

I'm not going to argue that this would solve all problems, particularly mental issues fueled by drug use. Undoubtedly there would be casulties, but there are casulties now. I firmly believe that over time, and granted, could be quite some time, people would see enough of the damage from these substances, particulary, the opiates and methamphetamines, which are so debilitatiing, that use would naturally decline, much in the way tobacco use has.

As I said earlier, there are no easy answers. We even have problems with drugs that are allready legal, but controlled. It is very difficult to say what is regulated, what isn't, because there are some valid reason for these controls. However, a change in policy and procedure needs to happen, because things just don't work now the way they are.


----------



## COM

Good Mike - my opinions are formed from serious study. I don't appreciate you labeling me as "ignorant" because you don't agree with me. I don't hide that I'm a libertarian bordering on anarchist. I don't like police and laws that govern civil behavior. That's my opinion, formed from my experiences and observations, and your beloved constitution says multiple times that I have a right to it.


----------



## Guest

Yes you do have a right to say whatever you want, thats the wonderful part of this country isnt it? there are a lot of countries where you dont have that right, i just find it funny how you love that right so much, which is protected by the very government you bash


----------



## trashion

I think he feels that it's a human right, GoodMike, and he's satirizing patriotism; as is especially implied by his reference to "your beloved constitution."

Well said, COM


----------



## akangelfood

TheOldSalt said:


> As fishkeepers we have bigger problems ahead than drugs, though. There is a bill in congress called HR 6311 which will likely make criminals out of all of us very soon. The PETA scum finally figured out a way to really sock it to us, and they went for it, and we're as good as finished. When all interstate transport of fishes effectively becomes impossible, then that's it for the whole industry.
> No, that's not what the bill calls for specifically, but it's easy to see the insidious true intent of this bill and how it relies on the inability of the mail services to tell one fish from another to get it to stop all shipments.


Prompted by your comments, I decided to read up on this proposed bill. I agree it should be of concern to any aquarium hobbyist. Particularly interesting is that the bill not only bans the import of many non-native species, but also prohibits knowingly keeping, selling, or trading any non-approved species. As you said, it could potentially "make criminals out of all of us". What would the government have us do with the fish we're keeping that are suddenly "unapproved"?

Some states already have a "banned" list, however, those species are rarely kept in the hobby and are generally justifiable on a case by case basis. This particular bill widens the spectrum considerably. It sounds like there will be a long process in getting a species placed on the approved list, and based on the parameters set forth, it will be a difficult process as well. 

It may be that I'm over-reacting, however, this bill does have the potential of destroying the legality of most home aquaria. It is, of course, dependent on the way this topic is treated, but the possibility remains that this could be devastating. 

They do, I see, allow for the possibility of obtaining permits to keep unapproved species, but one must wonder how realistic it will be for the average person to obtain such a permit.

I believe this topic IS important, and deserves its own thread. Care to do the honors, Old Salt?


----------



## Guest

and as i said before, your lucky to have those rights protected 

dont take it for granted. there is no such thing as a perfect country, or a perfect government. a hands off government is no better than one that is hands on, look at history. it just makes me laugh because people think that they have the answer to a perfect world, or a better world, the answer is...there is no answer. What is perfect to one, is imperfect to another. Our government is how it is, you have the right to object, you have the right to petition your rep/congress person. You have the right to come and go as you please. You have to look at the bigger picture, not just what you want, there is so much more than that. Do i think everything is perfect? hell no, do i understand why some things are they way they are, even if i dont like it? Yup, i do. but its much easier to just say "i dont like that", or "i dont think it should be this way", than to try and understand a bigger picture.

Again, you have many many many options, including sitting on the internet and ********************ing about how things are, and how they should be. But i honestly suggest that if you dont really understand your rights, that you take a look into it, its pretty interesting stuff, whether you decide to look into "God given rights", rights protected by the constitution, or some other form of rights, most all forms discuss the greater good.


just as a thought provoking comment, do you really think you would have all the rights you want to have in a world where no one protects them? in that kind of world, what would stop me from taking those said rights from you?


----------



## COM

GoodMike said:


> just as a thought provoking comment, do you really think you would have all the rights you want to have in a world where no one protects them? in that kind of world, what would stop me from taking those said rights from you?


Guns. That's what would stop you.


----------



## Guest

my point exactly


----------



## Guest

COM said:


> Guns. That's what would stop you.


I'm thinking guns would keep you from your rights, as well.


----------



## Guest

precisely! go read Hobbes "Leviathan", its a good read about this very topic


----------



## Osiris

In today's world people can sue over anything and everything. It's what we've done to each other to give people that right. It's not like back in the old days of the west where could forgive, or just shrug shoulders when something bad happened... But like this, given todays world, with them just showing up and doing what they did, will start rumors all around town for this couple to have to deal with, even if it was nothing. 

But getting away from what i really meant for this thread, which was funny as heck and was due time til someone of our hobbyiest nature got busted for inhouse reefing!


----------



## lohachata

absolutely com..the best way to stop the bull is a bullet.taking something from me will cost one more than they would like to pay..
and the constittution gives and protects that right.while i may not agree with all of your views com..i firmly believe that you have the right to have those views and to express them without being persecuted for them.

marty..there was a fellow here in clevland that was into the hobby pretty big.even got himself a license to import fish.was doing very nicely until he got busted for selling the cocaine that he was importing along with his fish..if i am not mistaken,he is still in jail..and i just know that there are folks out there that are keeping fish and growing reefer too..even a friend of mine tried to get me to do it.i already have enough problems;i don't need to go to jail...lol


----------



## COM

GoodMike said:


> precisely! go read Hobbes "Leviathan", its a good read about this very topic


Great reading. You must have gone to a good high school.

I remember my high school European History teacher's lessons on Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. She related it to ice cream.

Hobbes would say that if the king liked chocolate, everyone would get chocolate. Locke, if half liked chocolate and half vanilla, we'd get a swirl. And Rousseau would point out that ice cream isn't healthy and we all would get some sort of frozen yogurt.


----------



## trashion

My teacher compared Hobbesian and Lockeian theories on humanity to "Lord of the Flies" versus "Gilligan's Island," respectively. Lawl.


----------

