BillyVance 34 #1 December 30, 2005 I saw this short article in today's newspaper. What unmitigated gall! Rest assured, she has no sympathy coming from me and deserved the reaction she got. Stupid bitch! I did a search for the story online and found a link: http://www.latam.msnbc.com/id/10641052/ Saves me the trouble of typing out the story from the newspaper, which is much shorter... "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #2 December 30, 2005 Not that I feel sorry for her because it was a really stupid thing to do, but how the hell could the police not know that was flour? I don't get it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 3 #3 December 30, 2005 QuoteI saw this short article in today's newspaper. What unmitigated gall! Rest assured, she has no sympathy coming from me and deserved the reaction she got. Stupid bitch! I did a search for the story online and found a link: http://www.latam.msnbc.com/id/10641052/ Saves me the trouble of typing out the story from the newspaper, which is much shorter... I don't understand why you're mad at her. She didn't do anything wrong, and it is kind of frightening to me that flour could be "confused" with cocaine and opium. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #4 December 30, 2005 QuoteStupid bitch! Unimpressed That's pretty harsh. I'm very curious why the cops couldn't tell the difference between flour and cocaine. I mean, really! The lawsuit said that cops tested the flour and detected cocaine. If true, that's very disturbing to anyone who ever has to undergo drug testing. Either the cops are incapable of doing a simple drugtest, or they're lieing and they held her for 3 weeks without bothering to do any test. Not sure which is scarrier. In a situation like this, I think it's reasonable for someone to be detained while the tests are done. I do not think its reasonable to hold someone for 3 weeks when a simple test would completely exhonerate her. It is not against the law to be stupid. It is against the law to frame people, or hold them without evidence. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sen.Blutarsky 0 #5 December 30, 2005 QuoteShe didn't do anything wrong I disagree. The facts indicate that she deliberately presented airport security personnel with a false security concern. Her actions resulted in a reasonably anticipated expenditure of scarce resources to disprove probable contraband. She deserves to be punished and if I was her parent I would throw her ass out onto the street. WTF has common sense disappeared to these days? Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #6 December 30, 2005 Of course, the security guards should have sniffed some to check. Maybe they list that job on monster.com. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
darnknit 0 #7 December 30, 2005 Quote and it is kind of frightening to me that flour could be "confused" with cocaine and opium. How many of us would assume that a white powder stored in a condom, discovered in an airport, was a controlled substance and not a baking ingredient? Pay attention Betty Crocker candidates, be dilligent in your travels. Do not store any of your prize winning ingredients in anything but FOOD CONTAINMENT DEVICES. IF YOU USE CONDOMS, THE TERRORISTS WIN. Jebidiah pulling is cool. keep it in the skin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Samurai136 0 #8 December 30, 2005 Yeah, what about the 'ole pinky test where you taste a small dose of the substance? "Would you care to explain why your cocaine tastes like... Flour?""Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian Ken Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #9 December 30, 2005 I agree. And not with myself either. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #10 December 30, 2005 It happened 2 years ago and she did spend 3 weeks in jail, so I'd say she was punished. In fact, I'd call the punishment excessive for an act that was more stupid than malicious. (I'm thinking a fine and community service would have been more appropriate, plus whatever punishment her parents felt like dishing out.) Like some other posters, I'm more bothered by the fact that the Philadelphia police department could not tell cocaine from flour. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,625 #11 December 30, 2005 Quote QuoteShe didn't do anything wrong I disagree. The facts indicate that she deliberately presented airport security personnel with a false security concern. Her actions resulted in a reasonably anticipated expenditure of scarce resources to disprove probable contraband. She deserves to be punished and if I was her parent I would throw her ass out onto the street. WTF has common sense disappeared to these days? Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! And I disagree with you. There's no law against transporting flour in a condom. Whatever will you want to restrict next? It perfectly illustrates the poverty of the drug laws and their enforcement.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #12 December 30, 2005 I have a friend who's 2 ft 6" tall. He's in a motorized wheelchair. Due to certain unrelated things he was being flown to DC to meet the Prez. My friend wrapped tshirt around his head and started doing what I can now describe as 'Team America' Arabic. It's amazing how many pieces those motorized chairs will break down into by a motivated security crew. Due to the situation he wasnt arrested, but the full disassembly of his 'legs' was enough of a warning. Of course, this is a guy who - to illustrate how fucked up "normal" people's attitudes are about the disabled - regularly goes out shopping naked to see if people notice. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #13 December 30, 2005 I agree. I would hammer a 4ft dildo into her rectum until she promised to never do it again. And if she was Christian I'd burn her at the stake. There can never be enough discipline when it comes to inappropriate practical jokes. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #14 December 30, 2005 To a certain extent, I agree with the senator. It really depends on the girl's intent- funny looking "stressballs"? Did she really not know what airport security would think? I think its similar to pulling a false fire alarm, and similar penalties should apply. She did divert the security staff, whether it was intentional or not. That said, if there was no adequate "field test", the material should have been tested in a lab before 3 weeks were allowed to pass with this girl incarcerated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #15 December 30, 2005 My ridicule for this woman is along the lines of "how stupid can you be", like nonchalantly saying "I have a bomb" in the airport... I agree that the police went overboard, but she should not have taken the chance..."Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sen.Blutarsky 0 #16 December 30, 2005 Thank you for the epiphany. Now I hold convincing justification for why top 1%-ers keep driving tax schemes which enable us to avoid paying in. Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #17 December 30, 2005 she was an idiot, but how difficult is it to tell the difference between coke and flour. i know federal agents are taught to be able to lick a little bit and be tell. yeah, she was stupid. however, whoever did the field test should be fired.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #18 December 30, 2005 She was stupid, sure, but to prosecute her on the basis that some test found drugs when there WERE NO DRUGS is bogus and an abuse by the authorities. The fact that she is vindicated by tests on the flour show that she should never have been charged in the first place. She did set in motion the problems she had, but she was not the cause of the actual problem that arose. Does that make any sense? -Jeffrey-Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 3 #19 December 30, 2005 QuoteDoes that make any sense? Almost, except for one thing. When did it become the law that one may not carry condoms and flour in one's suitcase? rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scoop 0 #20 December 30, 2005 Hahahahaha, what an idiot! She deserved that. Short of sniffing or tasting it how would you know on the spot? I for one wouldnt want to see time wasted at an airport with an officer making enquiries. I would imagine its the same in the US as it is in the UK that you arrest for suspicion. She was lucky. I believe drug testing results from the lab over here take 10 weeks! She should be sued for wasting police time and tax payers money. Edited to add in some countries she would have been facing execution. Oh that would have been a chuckle then wouldnt it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yamtx73 0 #21 December 30, 2005 QuoteQuoteDoes that make any sense? Almost, except for one thing. When did it become the law that one may not carry condoms and flour in one's suitcase? rl It's not illegal to carry condoms and flour in one's suitcase, however common sense says "don't do that". A simple taste test would have proven it was flour, I don't know how they tested it at the airport but obviously someone really screwed the pooch on that on. The 3 weeks she spent in jail (parents wouldn't/couldn't post bail?) more than makes up for the foolishness of her prank. Just because it's legal to do something doesn't mean it's wise to do it....The only naturals in this sport shit thru feathers... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #22 December 30, 2005 But I guess the way I see it is there is no legitimate reason for her to be carrying flour in condoms in her suitcase, except to incite/divert/attempt to screw with the security staff. Your argument is that no wrong was done, since it wasn't really drugs? What if I carried a plastic toy gun through security and onto the plane? If I got away with that, what if I then decided to wave it around the cabin of the aircraft, just for grins? I could say "hey, it's not a real gun, no harm was done." No? Elvisio "give me all the snacks in business class and nobody gets hurt" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #23 December 30, 2005 Here's the difference: Carrying drugs on a plane does not endanger the lives of others. Carrying a gun does. Furthermore, how hard is it to tell the difference between coke and flour? (Not hard, in case you don't know) More than likely, a guard got a bit too trigger-happy with the handcuffs.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #24 December 30, 2005 QuoteCarrying drugs on a plane does not endanger the lives of others. Drugs aren't dangerous? But then why did Crockett and Tubbs waste all that ammo bringing Colombian drug lord after Colombian drug lord to bloody justice every Friday night during my adolescence? Elvisio "season one is out on DVD" rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sen.Blutarsky 0 #25 December 30, 2005 QuoteFurthermore, how hard is it to tell the difference between coke and flour? (Not hard, in case you don't know) Not so fast. Chemical engineers retained by the cocaine barons have successfully transformed cocaine per se into seemingly benign alkaloid compounds which aren’t readily detectable as a drug but can be chemically reprocessed into saleable coke post screening. Ascertaining the true nature of these compounds when they are mixed with other substances like common baking ingredients may very well occupy a reasonable interval of several weeks time given the busy schedules of the drugs labs. I would argue that the college darling in this case wasn’t uniquely entitled to fast, friendly service given her responses to the field agents’ questioning and the other facts apparent in this case. Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites