[Noisebridge-discuss] Points of information re: Nitrous Oxide

Tony Longshanks LeTigre anthonyletigre at gmail.com
Wed Oct 24 20:15:59 UTC 2012


File under "anecdotal evidence": As a frequent user of many drugs over the
years, I choose not to do nitrous because in my experience it's a super
short, disorientingly weird, lame-as-hell high. Reminds me of that thing we
used to do as kids where you would take a big breath & hold it & then one
of your friends would stand behind you & clasp their arms around your
stomatch & squeeze so that you'd pass out & wake up feeling indescribably
weird & otherworldly for a few seconds. I enjoyed that as a kid, I guess,
but then I enjoyed eating my boogers as a kid, too.

my 2¢

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Robert "Finny" Merrill <
rfmerrill at berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Dear NB
>
> I joined the list just to post this. Sorry it's not in reply to the
> thread in question but I joined the list just now so I don't have a
> message to reply to.
>
> For people who are concerned about Noisebridge getting in trouble for
> nitrous use in the space, I would like to point out the following
> facts and personal observations (note: IANAL, but this stuff is pretty
> simple to understand):
>
> Nitrous use is incredibly common in the bay area, the chargers are
> sold openly in headshops with no illusions about what they're for.
> These headshops are arguably committing a misdemeanor by selling N2O
> for the purpose of consumption and it's obvious that the cops don't
> care.
>
> Recreational consumption of Nitrous does not violate any federal law,
> unlike nearly every other illegal drug. Therefore, a lot of the side
> effects of being caught with a drug do not apply, for example:
> - You do not lose eligibility for financial aid if you are caught with
> nitrous.
> - Noisebridge (or any other space) cannot be prosecuted under federal
> laws such as the RAVE act or "crackhouse laws" which punish owners or
> lessees of spaces where drug use occurs.
> - Basically, the federal government doesn't care if you do N2O. The
> FDA does care if you sell it for recreational purposes but you have to
> fuck up pretty bad to get on their radar.
>
> Use or possession with intent to use in California is a misdemeanor,
> however, it is regulated under a separate law from other drugs and
> therefore not subject to any of California's auxilliary drug laws. In
> particular:
> - No extra penalties for possession/use near a school or park
> - No asset forfeiture of any kind
> - Penalties for distribution are the same as simple possession or use
> - Nitrous crackers are not drug paraphernalia
> - "Loitering for drug activity" law is not applicable
> - "Crackhouse laws" are not applicable at the state or local level
>
> Etc. Basically, although nitrous use is illegal, nitrous is not an
> "illegal drug" as far as the law is concerned.
>
> legal facts aside, here are some pragmatic ones:
>
> Mere possession of nitrous is not illegal, so in order for cops to
> fuck with you they have to have proof that you consumed it or intend
> to consume it. Since it's only a misdemeanor and busting nitrous users
> doesn't score them any points, the cops never bother. However the
> police ARE aware that Nitrous is often used in combination with LSD
> and Ecstasy and will use it as a reason to search you.
>
> Anecdotal evidence, but I have *never* heard of *anyone* *ever*
> getting in trouble with the law for using Nitrous in san francisco.
> I've even seen tanks out and balloons being passed around at street
> fairs, rather openly.
>
> California has a department of alcoholic beverage control, which
> spends a LOT of its time busting people for serving without IDs,
> selling alcohol without a liquor license, etc. There is no
> corresponding organization for N2O (or any other illegal drug for that
> matter). So YES, it IS much easier to get busted for Alcohol than
> other drugs!
>
> Nitrous is a huge part of both the rave and jam band scenes, to which
> a large section of SF's adult population belonged at one point or
> another.
>
>
> ** Essentially, N2O is de facto legal in San Francisco, because the
> SFPD never busts people for it, there is no effort to enforce on the
> state level, and it is not federally illegal. It is also very popular
> and socially acceptable **
>
>
> On the harm tip: N2O is one of the least harmful drugs out there.
> Significantly less harmful than Alcohol. Almost as harmless as weed.
> The biggest worries are falling down and asphyxiating (neither of
> which are direct consequences of the drug itself).
>
> I cannot think of a single reason to object to N2O use and not also
> object to Alcohol use besides N2O's technical illegality.
>
> So is something being technically illegal enough of a reason to ban it
> from the space, even if the law is rarely if ever enforced? I'm sure
> many activities at NB fall into this category.
>
> Love,
> Finny
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>



-- 
*You should read my diaries after I die—I talk about you a lot in there.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20121024/f113c28e/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list